Stated preference studies are often based on the assumptions that proposed outcomes would be realized with certainty and respondents believe their survey responses are consequential. This paper uses split sample treatments to test whether survey consequentiality and outcome uncertainty lead to differences in welfare measures, focusing on a discrete choice experiment on improving the quality of electricity supply among business enterprises in Tanzania. Our results show that while survey consequentiality and outcome uncertainty have some influence on preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) estimates for certain attributes, they do not significantly affect overall welfare estimates. The findings highlight that incorporating uncertainty and survey consequentiality into a stated preference study could improve its credibility but may not have substantial economic or statistical implications for overall welfare estimates.
Keywords: Stated preferences; Survey consequentiality; Outcome uncertainty; Discrete choice experiment; Power outages; Business enterprises; Tanzania