Cash transfer narratives and charitable giving

Last registered on September 08, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Cash transfer narratives and charitable giving
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0003679
Initial registration date
December 16, 2018

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
December 20, 2018, 9:55 PM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
September 08, 2020, 1:17 AM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of California, Berkeley

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2018-12-15
End date
2018-12-16
Secondary IDs
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore how recipient framings and narratives surrounding foreign aid effect charitable donation. We examine this through the online platform Amazon Mechanical Turk. We randomly assign participants to receive one of three different framings of a cash transfer intervention taking place in Kenya. We then measure revealed social preferences by having participants allocate a lottery payout to themselves or the aid organization.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Otis, Nicholas. 2020. "Cash transfer narratives and charitable giving." AEA RCT Registry. September 08. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.3679-4.0
Former Citation
Otis, Nicholas. 2020. "Cash transfer narratives and charitable giving." AEA RCT Registry. September 08. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/3679/history/75451
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Each respondent is asked to read about a nonprofit organization operating in Nairobi, Kenya, East Africa. We randomly assign the description of the nonprofit organization:

i) Poverty Alleviation Organization message: “The goal of the Poverty Alleviation Organization is to alleviate poverty and reduce financial hardship among the poor. This organization believes that people living in poverty should be given income support to help them meet their basic needs. This organization aims to help promote a decent standard of living among the poor and help them deal with emergencies. Thus, the Poverty Alleviation Organization gives financial assistance to people to help them make ends meet. For example, with the financial assistance, people might be able to struggle less to afford basic needs, like paying off debts, paying rent, and buying clothes and food. Towards that mission, this nonprofit gives one-time transfers of financial assistance to people in urban slums in Nairobi, Kenya, East Africa. They give each recipient $4 USD (about two days wages) in cash. These program recipients are people who live on less than $2 per day, and half of recipients have no savings.”

ii) Individual Empowerment Organization message: “The goal of the Individual Empowerment Organization is to promote individuals’ potential to create a better future for themselves. The organization believes that individuals are wise and know best how to help themselves become self-reliant if they have the financial resources to do so. This organization aims to empower individuals to pursue their personal interests and create their own path to independence. Thus, the Individual Empowerment Organization gives financial resources to individuals to enable them to invest in their personal goals. For example, people might use their unique talents to start a self-run business, invest in job training courses, or
create art. Towards that mission, this nonprofit gives one-time transfers of financial resources to people in urban slums in Nairobi, Kenya, East Africa. They give each recipient $4 USD (about two days wages) in cash. These program recipients are people who live on less than $2 per day, and half of recipients have no savings.”

iii) Community Empowerment Organization message: “The goal of the Community Empowerment Organization is to enable people to help promote better futures for those they care about and want to support most. The organization believes that people know best how to support each other and grow together if they have financial resources to do so. This organization aims to empower people to improve their own lives and those of the people and communities they care about most. Thus, the Community Empowerment Organization gives financial resources to community members to enable them to contribute positively to the lives of people important to them. For example, when people can invest in themselves, they are better able to expand employment opportunities for others, provide valuable services to their community, or teach others, including children, useful skills and knowledge. Towards that mission, this nonprofit gives one-time transfers of financial resources to people in urban slums in Nairobi, Kenya, East Africa. They give each recipient $4 USD (about two days wages) in cash. These program recipients are people who live on less than $2 per day, and half of recipients have no savings.”
Intervention Start Date
2018-12-15
Intervention End Date
2018-12-16

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Donation (Amount out of a $100 lottery payout)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We randomly assign people to receive one of the three messages described above in the "Intervention" section.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Computer
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
N/A
Sample size: planned number of observations
1,478 respondents
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
N/A
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
To achieve power of 80% for an estimated effect size of 0.20 SD on our primary analyses, the required sample size is 1,182 participants, with 394 in each of the treatment arms. Estimating that our comprehension checks will exclude 20% of participants, we will recruit 1, 478 = 1, 182/0.8 participants.
Supporting Documents and Materials

Documents

Document Name
Survey instrument
Document Type
survey_instrument
Document Description
Study survey instrument
File
Survey instrument

MD5: 781badd9cd656106bbee697df31506c7

SHA1: 0f2304cbd23d351e0201979e2dcad76bc036c8e3

Uploaded At: March 12, 2019

IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Stanford Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2018-05-15
IRB Approval Number
Protocol number 41430
Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan Documents

U1_PAP_Lodged.pdf

MD5: 573ddc1be3aa0520a5c78c93b31d56d6

SHA1: a9a5fe18fed708a829048764195b3371c6d209d1

Uploaded At: February 23, 2019

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Abstract
How can governments and nonprofits design aid programs that afford dignity and facilitate beneficial outcomes for recipients? We conceptualize dignity as a state that manifests when the stigma associated with receiving aid is countered and recipients are empowered, both in culturally resonant ways. Yet materials from the largest cash transfer programs in Africa predominantly characterize recipients as needy and vulnerable. Three studies examined the causal effects of alternative aid narratives on cash transfer recipients and donors. In study 1, residents of low-income settlements in Nairobi, Kenya (N = 565) received cash-based aid accompanied by a randomly assigned narrative: the default deficit-focused “Poverty Alleviation” narrative, an “Individual Empowerment” narrative, or a “Community Empowerment” narrative. They then chose whether to spend time building business skills or watching leisure videos. Both empowerment narratives improved self-efficacy and anticipated social mobility, but only the “Community Empowerment” narrative significantly motivated recipients’ choice to build skills and reduced stigma. Given the diverse settings in which aid is delivered, how can organizations quickly identify effective narratives in a context? We asked recipients to predict which narrative would best motivate skill-building in their community. In study 2, this “local forecasting” methodology outperformed participant evaluations and experimental pilots in accurately ranking treatments. Finally, study 3 confirmed that the narrative most effective for recipients did not undermine donors’ willingness to contribute to the program. Together these studies show that responding to recipients’ psychological and sociocultural realities in the design of aid can afford recipients dignity and help realize aid’s potential.
Citation
Thomas, C. C., Otis, N. G., Abraham, J. R., Markus, H. R., & Walton, G. M. (2020). Toward a science of delivering aid with dignity: Experimental evidence and local forecasts from Kenya. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(27), 15546-15553.

Reports & Other Materials