Exploring Divergence Between Respondent and Researcher Definitions of the Good in Contingent Valuation Studies
通过内容分析焦点小组讨论，制定规则处理群体数据非独立性，检验研究者与受访者对环境物品的预先定义是否相似，并据此指导后续问卷的信息提供。
In Contingent Valuation studies, researchers often base their definition of the environmental good on scientific/expert consensus. However, respondents may not hold this same commodity definition prior to the transaction. This raises questions as to the potential for staging a satisfactory transaction, based on Fischoff and Furby's (1988) criteria. Some unresolved issues regarding the provision of information to respondents to facilitate such a transaction are highlighted. In this paper, we apply content analysis to focus group discussions and develop a set of rules which take account of the non‐independence of group data to explore whether researcher and respondents' prior definitions are in any way similar. We use the results to guide information provision in a subsequent questionnaire.