Is there a hypothetical gap in experiments on the willingness to pay for sustainable funds?

We analyze the determinants of hypothetical bias in choice experiments for sustainable investments (SRI). To this end, we compare participants’ willingness to pay derived from incentivized and stated decisions in discrete choice experiments conducted among households’ financial decision makers in Germany. We further extend the set of potential determinants of differences between incentivized and hypothetical choices with the Big Five personality traits. In particular, we analyze the role of extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness to experience, as those traits have been shown to be related to how people react to (monetary) incentives. Our results allow us to shed light on the reliability of previous stated choice analyses in this field and to provide guidance for future experiments.