This article reports and provides an explanation for a discrepancy between two theoretically equivalent, frequently used, and incentive‐compatible methods of measuring premia for improved novel products: the full‐bidding and endow‐and‐upgrade methods. We found the following reverse endowment effect in a willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) elicitation Becker‐DeGroot‐Marschak (BDM) experiment for the newly developed biofortified high iron pearl millet (HIPM) conducted in rural India. The WTP for exchanging local pearl millet (LPM) for HIPM (the endow‐and‐upgrade measure of premium for HIPM over LPM), was significantly greater than the difference between the WTPs for HIPM and LPM (the theoretically equivalent full‐bidding measure). Our explanation is that subjects who possess an existing version of a product experience a reversal of loss aversion with respect to the novel and improved version of the product. We identify and structurally estimate the reverse loss aversion parameter. Our findings caution against using endow‐and‐upgrade and full‐bidding methods interchangeably for measuring premia for new products, even if the experimental design accounts for reciprocity and experimental‐income effect.

中文翻译：

---

新产品的逆禀赋效应

本文报告并解释了两种理论上等效、常用且激励兼容的衡量改进的新产品溢价的方法之间的差异：完全投标和赠与升级方法。我们在印度农村新开发的生物强化高铁珍珠粟 (HIPM) 的支付意愿 (WTP) 诱导 Becker-DeGroot-Marschak (BDM) 实验中发现了以下逆禀赋效应。用当地珍珠粟 (LPM) 交换 HIPM（HIPM 对 LPM 溢价的赋存和升级措施）的支付意愿显着大于 HIPM 和 LPM（理论上等效的完全投标措施）的支付意愿之间的差异. 我们的解释是，拥有产品现有版本的受试者会体验到相对于产品的新颖和改进版本的损失厌恶的逆转。我们识别并在结构上估计反向损失厌恶参数。我们的研究结果告诫不要交替使用捐赠和升级和完全投标方法来衡量新产品的溢价，即使实验设计考虑了互惠和实验收入效应。