In Simple Words
Think of testing whether people's food preferences on a written questionnaire match what they actually order at a restaurant menu; if both methods lead to identical ordering patterns, researchers can trust quick survey questionnaires for future menu planning.
Two separate US job-choice samples
- Real job applications
- Time-value ratio: 0.58
- Hypothetical survey choices
- Time-value ratio: 0.61
Separate samples: real applicants and UAS respondents making hypothetical choices. Ratios to predicted pretax wages; standard errors 0.04 and 0.03. Similarity is not equivalence.
See source →Research question
Economists often question whether hypothetical survey-based stated preference choices reflect actual real-world labor decisions, creating doubt regarding the empirical validity of survey data in structural model calibrations.
Participants
N = 1,152 applicants in a real-stakes field experiment compared against N = 2,354 hypothetical job choices made by 785 hourly workers in the Understanding America Study (UAS) web panel.
Study Design
Methodological comparison of real job selection choices in field applications against hypothetical vignette choices with randomized wage multipliers in a nationally representative panel.
Results
Implied flow value of non-work time $\tilde{z}$ estimated from real field choices ($0.58$, $s.e. = 0.04$) matches hypothetical choice estimates from the UAS panel ($0.61$, $s.e. = 0.03$) within statistical confidence intervals.
Takeaway
Validate hypothetical choice experiment designs by benchmarking stated preference estimates against field-experimental revealed preference parameters.