Perceived Control and Motivated Cognition about Air Pollution.

Last registered on April 12, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Perceived Control and Motivated Cognition about Air Pollution.
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0010083
Initial registration date
October 06, 2022

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
October 17, 2022, 5:36 PM EDT

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

Last updated
April 12, 2024, 4:22 AM EDT

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

Locations

Country
Belgium
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Alice Soldà
Affiliation
Ghent University
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Anca Balietti
PI Affiliation
Heidelberg University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Tillmann Eymess
PI Affiliation
Heidelberg University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Angelika Budjan
PI Affiliation
University of Stuttgart
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2022-10-01
End date
2022-12-01
Keywords
Behavior, Environment & Energy
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Despite easily accessible information about the negative health externalities of environmental pollution, households' marginal willingness to pay for environmental quality is surprisingly low. In light of this puzzle, we design a large-scale online experiment to better understand individuals' attitudes towards air pollution-related information. We focus on two mechanisms: information avoidance and memory retention. In addition, we test whether an increase in perceived control over one's own health outcomes reduces failures to attend to information. To do so, participants in the experiment are asked whether they would like to acquire information about the number of life-years lost in their home region due to air pollution. Before participants make their decision, we exogenously increase participants' perceived control over the negative effect of air pollution on their own health, in half of the sample. After indicating their choice, participants either receive information about the number of life-years lost in their county or no information at all, based on a random draw. Participants who do receive information are then asked to recall the number of life-years lost in their county (i) shortly after receiving it and (ii) after two weeks.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Balietti, Anca et al. 2024. "Perceived Control and Motivated Cognition about Air Pollution. ." AEA RCT Registry. April 12. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.10083-2.1
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2022-10-01
Intervention End Date
2022-12-01

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
a) Information Acquisition
- A dummy variable indicating whether participants choose to receive information on the number of life years lost from air pollution in their home region or not.

b) Information Recall
- A dummy variable indicating whether participants remember the exact number of life years lost immediately after receiving the information.
- A dummy variable indicating whether participants remember the number of life years lost from air pollution in their home region within half a year of the correct answer, immediately after receiving the information.
- A dummy variable indicating whether participants remembered the exact number of life years lost from air pollution in their home region two weeks after receiving the information.
- A dummy variable indicating whether participants remembered the number of life years lost from air pollution in their home region within half a year of the correct answer, two weeks after receiving the information.
- The accuracy of participants' recall shortly after receiving the information measured as the difference between participants' recall of the number of life years lost in their home region and the actual number of life years lost in their home region.
- The accuracy of participants' recall two weeks after receiving the information measured as the difference between participants' recall of the number of life years lost in their home region and the actual number of life years lost in their home region.

c) Self-reported perceived control
- Participants' reported perceived control measured both as (i) their score on the 6 general perceived control items and (ii) their answer to the single perceived control item from Tropes et al. (2003).
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
See Experiment design document.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
To investigate how perceived control affects (i) information avoidance and (ii) memory retention, we design an experiment in which we manipulate the level of perceived control (Baseline vs. High Perceived Control).
Experimental Design Details
See pre-analysis plan and research design documents.
Randomization Method
The randomization of the allocation of participants to treatments will be done by the experimental program. We use the Latin square method.
Randomization Unit
The treatments are randomized at the individual level.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
2000 individuals from California (USA) + 1000 individuals from across India.
Sample size: planned number of observations
2000 individuals from California (USA) + 1000 individuals from across India.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Part 1 USA: 1000 individuals in the control group, 1000 individuals in the high perceived control treatment. All 2000 individuals will be asked to choose whether or not to receive information about the number of life years lost in their home district. Their choice will be implemented with 60% probability.

Part 1 India: 750 individuals in the control group, 750 individuals in the high perceived control treatment. All 1500 individuals will be asked to choose whether or not to receive information about the number of life years lost in their home district. Their choice will be implemented with 60% probability.

In Part 2 (the follow up after 2 weeks), all participants that received information about the number of life years lost in their county/district will be invited.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Information avoidance With a sample size of 1000 clusters by treatment arm, the minimum detectable between-groups proportion comparison effect size is 6.25 percentage points with statistical power at the recommended .80 level (Cohen, 1988). With a sample size of 750 clusters by treatment arm, the minimum detectable between-groups proportion comparison effect size is 7.21 percentage points. Memory retention (immediate) Because of our experimental implementation, at least 40\% of the full sample will see the number of life-years lost in their home region. With a sample size of 400 clusters by treatment arm, the minimum detectable between-groups proportion comparison effect size is 9.04 percentage points. With a sample size of 300 clusters by treatment arm, the minimum detectable between-groups proportion comparison effect size is 12.2 percentage points. Memory retention (after 2 weeks) Due to our experimental implementation, at least 40\% of the full sample will be invited to take part in Part 2 of the study. Due to attrition, we expect a (conservative) re-sampling rate of 40\%. With a sample size of 80 clusters by treatment arm, the minimum detectable between-groups proportion comparison effect size is 21.47 percentage points. With a sample size of 60 clusters by treatment arm, the minimum detectable between-groups proportion comparison effect size is 24.55 percentage points. Our sample size allows us to detect small effects in information avoidance and immediate memory retention (Cohen's h < 0.2), as well as medium effect in memory retention after two weeks (Cohen's h < 0.5). Reference: Cohen, M. A. (1988). Some new evidence on the seriousness of crime. Criminology, 26(2), 343-353.
Supporting Documents and Materials

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

Request Information
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration
IRB Approval Date
2022-09-20
IRB Approval Number
UG-EB 2022 M
Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan Documents

Motivated_cognition_pap.pdf

MD5: c2cd6dc7e879134b7b6a584122a3c943

SHA1: e768eb835ec4b9749a71d7198ce41a2484f36506

Uploaded At: October 06, 2022

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?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
December 01, 2022, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
December 01, 2022, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials