The willingness to pay (WTP)/willingness to accept (WTA) disparity raises serious questions about preference elicitation techniques based on the Hicksian model of decision-making. In this paper we investigate the possibility of incorporating the strategies suggested by Plott and Zeiler (2005) in a Pivot Process mechanism and in a Choice Modelling experiment to eliminate the WTP/WTA disparity. The goal is to improve the reliability of the benefit estimates by comparing and contrasting these two methodologies. No methodological and analytical obstacles prevent the use the Pivot Process to calibrate the Choice Modelling estimates. By combining the two methods, a calibration procedure can be usefully developed to validate good hypothetical surveys and correct bad ones.