This article is the first to investigate respondents’ ease of understanding and answering valuation questions related to the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak (BDM) and multiple price list (MPL) mechanisms. Using a between-subjects design, we elicit willingness to pay (WTP) for healthy snack bars using two mechanisms, ask questions about ease of understanding and answering the valuation questions, and record the response times to the valuation questions. We do not find significant differences in estimated WTP and response times between the two methods. However, the respondents in the MPL sessions found it easier to understand this mechanism and decide on a response than those in the BDM sessions. As a result of our findings, we recommend that MPL is adopted over BDM when there is limited opportunity to explain or learn the method prior to the valuation or when one is concerned that a complicated design can affect the willingness to participate and thereby create selection bias. Both concerns will often apply when small and medium size agribusinesses conduct market testing of their products in stores or field markets.

中文翻译：

---

快捷方便？受访者对 Becker-DeGroot-Marschak 和多种价目表估值机制的评价

本文首次调查受访者对与 Becker-DeGroot-Marschak (BDM) 和多重价格表 (MPL) 机制相关的估值问题的理解和回答的难易程度。使用受试者间设计，我们使用两种机制得出健康小吃店的支付意愿（WTP），询问有关易于理解的问题并回答评估问题，并记录对评估问题的响应时间。我们没有发现两种方法在估计的 WTP 和响应时间方面存在显着差异。然而，MPL 会话中的受访者发现比 BDM 会话中的受访者更容易理解这种机制并决定响应。根据我们的调查结果，当在估值之前解释或学习方法的机会有限，或者当人们担心复杂的设计会影响参与意愿从而产生选择偏差时，我们建议采用 MPL 而不是 BDM。当中小型农业企业在商店或现场市场对其产品进行市场测试时，这两个问题通常都适用。