Encouraging Women to Compete under Social Image Concerns

Last registered on November 18, 2022


Trial Information

General Information

Encouraging Women to Compete under Social Image Concerns
Initial registration date
November 13, 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
November 18, 2022, 12:33 PM EST

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



Primary Investigator

The University of Tokyo

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

In development
Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.
This study investigates how social image concerns affect women’s decisions to compete under two policy interventions (affirmative action and prosocial) and a baseline case of no intervention. We first construct a theoretical model to illustrate that women incur social image costs when participating in competition because this behavior is not aligned with traditional female gender norms, leading to a reluctance to participate in public competitions even under affirmative action policies favoring women. We hypothesize and theoretically demonstrate that introducing a prosocial option can encourage women to compete even when their decision is publicly observable. Second, we test our hypothesis by conducting a laboratory experiment that randomly manipulates the public observability of decisions under three interventions.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Yagasaki, Masayuki. 2022. "Encouraging Women to Compete under Social Image Concerns." AEA RCT Registry. November 18. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.10281-1.0
Experimental Details


Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The decision to participate in a competition
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We randomly assign experimental sessions into "private" and "public" conditions. In the private condition, subjects' choices are completely private as in the usual studies. In the public condition, on the other hand, subjects' choices are made public at the end of the experiment. We
evaluate the effect of this public observability on decisions to compete as in Niederle and Vesterlund (2007) under three different treatments (baseline, affirmative action, and prosocial option).
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
The randomization is done in the office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Experimental sessions.
Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
2 (male and female)
Sample size: planned number of observations
200 subjects
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
100 subjects control (private), 100 subjects treatment (public)
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
the University of Tokyo IRB
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number


Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

Request Information


Is the intervention completed?
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials