Search alternatives:
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search)
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search)
-
7541
-
7542
-
7543
-
7544
-
7545
-
7546
-
7547
-
7548
-
7549
-
7550
Preference for the EIA – conjoint results.
Published 2025“…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
7551
Marginal means – Pooled across scenarios.
Published 2025“…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
7552
Sample attribute table.
Published 2025“…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
7553
-
7554
Subgroup analysis – Political affiliation.
Published 2025“…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
7555
Sample scenario description.
Published 2025“…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
7556
AMCEs – Pooled across scenarios.
Published 2025“…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
7557
Methodological flowchart.
Published 2025“…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
7558
Preference for the EIA vs. ETA across scenarios.
Published 2025“…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
7559
-
7560