Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 281

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Identification and management of nonsystematic purchase task data: Toward best practice.

Open access
Stein, Jeffrey S., Koffarnus, Mikhail N., Snider, Sarah E., Quisenberry, Amanda J., Bickel, Warren K.·2015·Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
DOI 10.1037/pha0000020
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Experimental assessments of demand allow the examination of economic phenomena relevant to the etiology, maintenance, and treatment of addiction and other pathologies (e.g., obesity). Although such assessments have historically been resource intensive, development and use of purchase tasks-in which participants purchase 1 or more hypothetical or real commodities across a range of prices-have made data collection more practical and have increased the rate of scientific discovery. However, extraneous sources of variability occasionally produce nonsystematic demand data, in which price exerts either no or inconsistent effects on the purchases of individual participants. Such data increase measurement error, can often not be interpreted in light of research aims, and likely obscure effects of the variable(s) under investigation. Using data from 494 participants, we introduce and evaluate an algorithm (derived from prior methods) for identifying nonsystematic demand data, wherein individual participants' demand functions are judged against 2 general, empirically based assumptions: (a) global, price-dependent reduction in consumption and (b) consistency in purchasing across prices. We also introduce guidelines for handling nonsystematic data, noting some conditions in which excluding such data from primary analyses may be appropriate and others in which doing so may bias conclusions. Adoption of the methods presented here may serve to unify the research literature and facilitate discovery.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pha0000020

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 281

Metadata

Authors
Stein, J. S., Koffarnus, M. N., Snider, S. E., Quisenberry, A. J., & Bickel, W. K.
Venue
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2015-10
Volume
23
Issue
5
Pages
377-386
ISSN
  • 1064-1297 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-2293
DOI
10.1037/pha0000020
OpenAlex
W843005658
Cited by
281
References
34
FWCI
11.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.