| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Trial Status | Before on_going | After completed |
| Field Abstract | Before We estimate demand for redistribution by a stratified sample of US citizens selected from the bottom and top 20% of the US income distribution. Participants decide how much money to redistribute from an entrepreneur earning more than $100,000 in real life (labelled Person 1), to an individual earning less than $10,000 in real life (labelled Person 2). Person 1 is initially assigned $50 in this interaction upon completion of a task, while Person 2 is assigned $1. Using conjoint analysis, the real-life characteristics of sixteen Person 1s and four Person 2s are used to investigate the relevance of both the willingness to reward individual merit and the beliefs in trickle-down economics in accounting for participants’ preferences for redistribution. Participants are administered 16 different redistributive choices matching eight different profiles for Person 1 and two different profiles for Person 2. We manipulate (a) the number of hours worked (a measure of merit for both Person 1 and 2); (b) Whether Person 1 founded or inherited their firm (a measure of merit for the entrepreneur); (c) The number of employees in Person 1’s firm; and (d) The amount donated by Person 1 within a year (c and d being measures of the trickle-down potential of the rich choices). One randomly selected decision is actually implemented. To check for external validity, in the second wawe of the study we add a choice on how much money to donate to a charity supporting poor people in the US. | After We estimate demand for redistribution by a stratified sample of US citizens selected from the bottom and top 20% of the US income distribution. Participants decide how much money to redistribute from an entrepreneur earning more than $100,000 in real life (labelled Person 1), to an individual earning less than $10,000 in real life (labelled Person 2). Person 1 is initially assigned $50 in this interaction upon completion of a task, while Person 2 is assigned $1. Using conjoint analysis, the real-life characteristics of sixteen Person 1s and four Person 2s are used to investigate the relevance of both the willingness to reward individual merit and the beliefs in trickle-down economics in accounting for participants’ preferences for redistribution. Participants are administered 16 different redistributive choices matching eight different profiles for Person 1 and two different profiles for Person 2. We manipulate (a) the number of hours worked (a measure of merit for both Person 1 and 2); (b) Whether Person 1 founded or inherited their firm (a measure of merit for the entrepreneur); (c) The number of employees in Person 1’s firm; and (d) The amount donated by Person 1 within a year (c and d being measures of the trickle-down potential of the rich choices). In a follow-up wave, we also manipulate (e) The amount of patents obtained by Person 1’s firm in the last year. One randomly selected decision is actually implemented. To check for external validity, in the second wawe of the study we add a choice on how much money to donate to a charity supporting poor people in the US. |
| Field Last Published | Before November 30, 2022 05:01 PM | After August 09, 2023 07:21 AM |
| Field Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms | Before We plan conjoint analysis in which 5 attributes have been manipulated: (a) the number of hours worked by the rich stakeholder (Person 1); (b) the number of hours worked by the poor stakeholder (Person 2); (c) Whether Person 1 founded or inherited their firm; (d) The number of employees in Person 1’s firm; (e) The amount donated to charity by Person 1 within a year. | After We plan conjoint analysis in which 5 attributes have been manipulated: (a) the number of hours worked by the rich stakeholder (Person 1); (b) the number of hours worked by the poor stakeholder (Person 2); (c) Whether Person 1 founded or inherited their firm; (d) The number of employees in Person 1’s firm; (e) The amount donated to charity by Person 1 within a year; (f) The amount of patents obtained by Person 1’s firm in the last year |
| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Document | Before |
After
pre-plan AER_updated.pdf
MD5:
0057bdc7ca2c15bb2f81ef8f5cfa8fde
SHA1:
a7b2b58c6ec2b552b7dc521792f2e7336d1f8c50
|
| Field Title | Before | After Updated pre-plan |