diff --git a/project_start.qmd b/project_start.qmd
index 70680b49063d78a71973ce5d8e36866b01c5ffd3..7b38247a81c7e2d40848789c34c44ddcc48294de 100644
--- a/project_start.qmd
+++ b/project_start.qmd
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
---
-title: "Hot Topic, Cool Choices?"
-subtitle: "The Impact of Mandatory vs. Voluntary Treatments on Green Space Valuation"
+title: "Hot Cities, Cool Choices?"
+subtitle: "The Effect of Voluntary and Obligatory Information on Preferences for Urban Green Spaces"
title-slide-attributes:
data-background-image: Grafics/iDiv_logo_item.png
data-background-size: contain
@@ -33,67 +33,121 @@ list_ols <- list("(Intercept)" = "Intercept", "as.factor(Treatment_A)Treated" =
"Age_mean" = "Age", "QFIncome" = "Income", "Uni_degree" = "University Degree")
```
-## Motivation
+## Motivation (1)
+::: {.incremental}
+- **Stated preference** methods are frequently applied in **environmental valuation** to estimate economic values of policies, goods, and services that cannot be valued otherwise.
+- Stated preference methods face **validity challenges**.
+- Valid value estimation requires **sufficient information** provision about the good being valued.
+- Still unclear **what formats of information** and **how much information** are optimal for valid preference elicitation.
+:::
-- Discrete choice experiments are increasingly used in environmental valuation
+## Motivation (2)
+::: {.incremental}
+- Too **much information** may increase survey **complexity**, leading to respondents being overburdened with it and producing less consistent choices.
+- Too **little information** may lead respondents to **not** being able to make an **informed choice**.
+- Valid preference elicitation depends not only on the provision of information, but also on the **appropriate processing and recall** of the information by the respondent.
+- **Voluntary information** allows the respondents to gather required information if needed.
+:::
-- Validity is debated due to potential influence of information provision on welfare estimates
+## Literature
+::: {.incremental}
+- There is **little research** on the effects of **voluntary information provision** on choice behavior and information recall.
+- In their study, **Tienhaara et al. (2022)** surveyed preferences for agricultural genetic resources, allowing respondents the option to access detailed information on the valued goods prior to preference elicitation.
+- Similarly, **Hu et al. (2009)** offered respondents the opportunity to access voluntary information about genetic modified food before participating in a choice experiment.
+- Both studies conclude that, on average, respondents who retrieve voluntary information
+have **larger willingness to pay** for the good to be valued.
+- Their study design, however, does not allow comparing the voluntary information retrieval to a version where the additional information was shown obligatory.
+:::
+## Research Contribution
+::: {.incremental}
+- Our study explores the impact of additional obligatory and voluntary information on stated preferences using an exogenous split sample approach with three treatments.
+- We investigate the effects of information treatments on survey engagement, information recall, consequentiality, and stated preferences, similar to Welling et al. (2023), expanding our understanding of treatment effects.
+- We test who choose additional information and to what extent they have different preferences than respondents who do not choose aditional information.
-- We employ DCE to test influence of additional information on urban heat island on the valuation of UGS
+:::
+## Research Questions
+::: {.incremental}
+1. How do obligatory and voluntary information treatments affect **survey engagement**, **information recall**, **consequentiality**, and **stated preferences**?
+2. Do **socio-demographic** variables or natural **connectedness** influence the decision to **access voluntary information**?
+3. Do **survey engagement**, **information recall**, **consequentiality**, and **stated preferences** differ between respondents who **access voluntary information** and those who do not?
+:::
+## Discrete Choice Experiment
+::: {.incremental}
+- To investigate the research questions, we use data from a **discrete choice experiment (DCE)** on naturalness of urban green spaces.
+- The survey is an exact **replication** of the choice experiment of **Bronnmann et al., (2023)** and differs only in the information provided to the respondents.
+- In the DCE, respondents were asked to imagine possible **changes** to their **most frequently used UGS**.
+- This **restructuring** involved adjustments to the UGS’s **naturalness** and changes to the **walking distance**.
+- The associated **costs** of this restructuring were intended to be integrated into monthly **rental payments**.
+- Participants in the DCE were presented **ten** randomly assigned **choice cards** with a choice between **two alternative programs** for the renovation of the UGS and the **current status quo**.
+:::
+## Choice Card
-## Research questions
+{width="300"}
-1. Who chooses optional information?
-2a. How does an information treatment about urban heat islands affect survey engagement (interview time, cc time), quiz questions, and consequentially?
-2b. How are these factors influenced by voluntary information access?
+## Treatment (Information provision)
+- Short info text about the effect of **natural urban green spaces** on urban **heat islands**.
+- **Optional video** with the almost the same information.
-3. How do the different treatments affect the WTP for urban green spaces in the choice experiment?
+{width="200"}
-4. Do people who choose **voluntary** information have a different WTP/preferences?
+## Treatment (Quiz)
+::: {.incremental}
+**Seven quiz questions** with strict reference to the previously provided information.
-## Discrete Choice Experiment
+Example Questions:
-- Setting: Restructuring of individually most visited UGS in terms of proximity and naturalness financed via incidental costs
-- Main attribute of interest here: naturalness defined by five-level graphical scale ▶ Range: hardly natural to very natural
-- Three survey rounds; paper by Bronnmann et al. (2023) based on round 1 & 2, our paper is based on last survey round from February 2023
+1. Which of the following statements are correct?
-## Choice Card
+- The temperature difference between the city and the surrounding area can be up to 10
+degrees Celsius. (true/false)
-{width="300"}
-## Treatment Groups
+2. According to the information provided, which of the following properties influences
+the temperature in the city?
-{width="300"}
+- The proximity of green spaces to nature (yes/no)
+- Light pollution in the city (yes/no)
+:::
-## Case A
+## Treatment (Self reference)
+::: {.incremental}
+To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
-{width="300"}
+1. I am limited by high temperatures in the city during the summer. (Strongly agree - Strongly disagree)
-<!-- ## Scenario B -->
+2. The city should do more to avoid heat islands. (Strongly agree - Strongly disagree)
+:::
-<!-- {width="300"} -->
-## Case B
+## Experimental Setting
-{width="300"}
+{width="300"}
-## Treatment
+## Case A
-- Information text about urban heat islands with figure
+{width="300"}
-- Quiz questions
+## Case B
-- Self-reference questions
+{width="300"}
-- OPTIONAL: Video about urban heat islands
+## Data
+::: {.incremental}
+- **Socio-demographics**: Age, Gender, Income, Education.
+- Natural Relatedness Index: Measure derived from 21 items on **connectedness to nature**.
+- Quiz: Evaluation of the quiz we gave to everyone after the DCE.**->Information recall**
+- Timings: We saved the net interview time and the mean Choice Card time.-> **Survey engagement**
+- **Consequentiality**:
-{width="200"}
+-- To what extent do you believe that the decisions you make will have an impact on how the green spaces in your neighbourhood are designed in the future?
+-- To what extent do you believe that the decisions you make will affect whether you have to pay a contribution for urban greening in the future?
+:::
## Methods
- Logit regression (voluntary information access):
@@ -395,6 +449,18 @@ htmlreg(c(case_C_cols_NR[1], remGOF(case_C_cols_NR[2:8])),
<!-- ``` -->
## Takeaways
+
+## Appendix
+Information provision (Video)
+Link to the video: https://idiv.limequery.com/upload/surveys/682191/files/urban-heat-island-effekt.mp4
+
+## Summary Statistics A
+
+{width="300"}
+
+## Summary Statistics B
+
+{width="300"}
<!-- ## MXL: WTP space -->
<!-- ::: panel-tabset -->