x

We are happy to announce that all trial registrations will now be issued DOIs (digital object identifiers). For more information, see here.
Light-Touch Social Psychology Interventions and Cognitive Control
Last registered on January 26, 2016

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Light-Touch Social Psychology Interventions and Cognitive Control
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0001008
Initial registration date
January 25, 2016
Last updated
January 26, 2016 2:15 PM EST
Location(s)
Region
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
Princeton Unviersity
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
University of Oxford
PI Affiliation
Duke University
PI Affiliation
Unievrsity of Oxford
Additional Trial Information
Status
Completed
Start date
2015-10-01
End date
2016-01-01
Secondary IDs
Abstract
This document outlines the analysis plan for the study of the effects of three psychological interventions on cognitive control and real effort as measured by Raven's progressive matrices, a Stroop task, and a clicker task. This evaluation took place as a pilot trial across 54 villages in Migori County, Kenya. Random assignment of these psychological interventions allows us to estimate the causal impacts on cognitive control and real effort. Results of this analysis will be used to inform the selection of outcome variables for later trials. Details and an analysis plan for the full study can be found here: https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/991
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Dercon, Stefan et al. 2016. "Light-Touch Social Psychology Interventions and Cognitive Control." AEA RCT Registry. January 26. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.1008-2.0.
Former Citation
Dercon, Stefan et al. 2016. "Light-Touch Social Psychology Interventions and Cognitive Control." AEA RCT Registry. January 26. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/1008/history/6627.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2015-11-01
Intervention End Date
2015-12-01
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
1. Raven's progressive matrices: Participants were shown a set of six patterns in a large image on the tablets. For each of the six images, participants will have to choose from a set of objects which object completes the pattern in the large image. This is a paid task where participants can earn KES 20 for each correct answer. There was no time limit for this task and participants could choose to skip questions.

2. Stroop task: In this task, respondents were presented with a list of 25 integers. Respondents had to count the number of times the integer appears on the list. This is a paid task and the payoff will depend on how fast the participant completes the task across all three rounds. KES 10 was deducted from the respondent's total earnings for each uncorrected mistake. Corrected mistakes were not penalized. Participants played three rounds of this task.

3. Clicker task: In this task, participants will have three minutes to click as many times as they can on a clicker device provided to each participant. This was a paid effort task that paid KES 10 per 100 clicks rounded up to the nearest KES 10. Participants must hold the clicker in one hand during the entire task and cannot switch hands to make clicks. Participants conducted a practice round before the paid round.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
This study sampled from rural households across 54 villages in Migori County, Kenya. We conducted a census of 12,707 households between August 2015 and Septemer 2015 to determine eligibility for the project. In order to be eligible, households must have met the GiveDirectly eligibility criteria for Kenya. After sampling, households were stratified by poverty level. Eligible households were cluster randomized by village and poverty level into the control group or one of three treatment arms: “Aspirations”, “Affirmations”, and “Placebo”. Data collection for baseline ocurred between October 2015 and December 2015. Project staff returned to surveyed households one week later for delivery of the intervention The second wave of data collection ocurred between November 2015 and January 2016. Respondents completed the endline survey approximately 5 weeks after receiving the intervention.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Computer
Randomization Unit
Village
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
142
Sample size: planned number of observations
3666
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
1200
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Social Science & Humanities Inter-Divisional Research Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2014-08-26
IRB Approval Number
SSD/CUREC1A/14-173
Analysis Plan
Analysis Plan Documents
Light-Touch Social Psychology Interventions and Cognitive Control: Pre-Analysis Plan

MD5: 3df1cbccf8fdefbc24786db0663a80b3

SHA1: 98e139011dafa66aa0c04a90fb596a0fd8d6926d

Uploaded At: January 25, 2016

Post-Trial
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Intervention
Is the intervention completed?
No
Is data collection complete?
Data Publication
Data Publication
Is public data available?
No
Program Files
Program Files
Reports and Papers
Preliminary Reports
Relevant Papers