The current paper aims to contribute to the explanation of the so‐called hypothetical bias, that is, the different behavior shown by individuals in hypothetical and real scenarios, in stated preference techniques. The factors determining this difference have not been fully investigated, and the lack of clarity about this phenomenon has been widely noted. Therefore, we investigated the extent to which implicit associations—which have not been studied in relation to the hypothetical bias—account for the gap between individuals' willingness to pay (WTP) in hypothetical and real auctions. From a theoretical point of view, implicit associations could be a crucial factor in differentiating the hypothetical and the real setting, because they should exert their effect only (or almost) in the latter. As expected, results show that implicit associations affect participants' WTP only in the real auction. Theoretical and practical implications of results are discussed.