Does relational quality in a group affect CPR management?

Last registered on December 20, 2022


Trial Information

General Information

Does relational quality in a group affect CPR management?
Initial registration date
December 05, 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
December 13, 2022, 10:43 PM EST

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

Last updated
December 20, 2022, 4:27 AM EST

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



Primary Investigator


Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
CEEM CNRS University of Montpellier
PI Affiliation

Additional Trial Information

In development
Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
We observe experimentally whether relational quality perceived by members of a group affects CPR management. To this aim, we induce first different levels of relational quality in groups through competitive, cooperative and neutral effort tasks, and then let the groups play a repeated CPR. We also aim at understanding the role of communication on perceived relational quality, comparing the effect of communication with the effect of the effort task.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Brugnach, Marcela, Dimitri Dubois and Stefano Farolfi. 2022. "Does relational quality in a group affect CPR management? ." AEA RCT Registry. December 20.
Experimental Details


Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The effect of perceived relational quality in a group on the management by that group of a Common Pool Resource (CPR)
The effect that communication (cheap talk) has on relational quality in a group and then on the management by that group of CPR
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Our experimental design allows testing the following hypotheses:

H1: The rule of payment (individual, cooperation or competition) in the effort task creates different relational qualities between the group members. . This can be in the positive sense or in the negative one.
H2: Better relational quality improves (respectively, worst relational quality worsens) cooperation in CPR dilemmas.
H3: Communication (before a CPR game) improves group identity and solidarity, which is a crucial component of relational quality (Cardenas et al., 2004))
H4: Communication has an additive effect to a cooperative real effort task on improving relational quality in a group and therefore the management of CPR.

The experimental protocol involves two steps. 1) An effort task where players will count numbers in columns. The rule of payment in the effort task can be individual, cooperative or competitive. 2) a CPR game is played with or without communication .

A questionnaire containing qualitative questions to elicit the players’ perceptions of relational quality is submitted to players after the effort task and after the CPR. The same questionnaire is submitted to players after the two steps.

A between procedure will be used to test the treatment effect. Within a treatment, the questionnaires will check the changes in perceived relational quality due to the effort task and to communication.

Sequence of steps in the protocol:

Effort task | Questionnaire 1 |(Communication) | CPR game | Questionnaire 2 |

The treatments will consist of different initial real effort tasks and different levels of communication during the CPR game, as indicated below:

T0 (Baseline) individual initial task, no communication
T1 = cooperative initial task, no communication
T2 = competitive initial task, no communication
T3 = individual initial task, communication
T4 = cooperative initial task, communication
T5 = competitive initial task, communication

Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
The participants are students from various disciplines of the university of Montpellier randomly selected from a pool of nearly 3,000 volunteers handled with the Online Recruitment Software for Economic Experiments (ORSEE).

Randomization Unit
Sessions of 20 participants (5 groups, N =4) will be run.
Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
18 sessions
Sample size: planned number of observations
360 players
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
We will run 3 sessions/treatment, for a total of 18 sessions, corresponding to 360 participants (90 groups).
Each treatments will have 60 participants (15 groups).
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials

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

Request Information

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
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