Resilience-Thinking Training for College Students

Last registered on February 13, 2023

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Resilience-Thinking Training for College Students
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0010927
Initial registration date
February 08, 2023

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
February 13, 2023, 10:38 AM EST

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

Locations

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
CUNY

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Pratt Institute & Research Foundation CUNY

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2022-02-07
End date
2023-09-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
We conduct a randomized evaluation of an in-depth group workshop where New York City Public College (QC) students were introduced to the resilient-thinking approach, which offers conceptual tools to cope with unexpected negative shocks. Treated youths were offered a 90-minute workshop where they identified challenges in their community both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and brainstormed strategies to address them. The goal of the workshops was to increase students’ level of resilience, a well-known protective factor against exposure to adverse social determinants of health. After being introduced key elements from the resilience-thinking approach, students worked both individually and in groups of five to seven students each, sharing their experiences about the challenges in their community both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, identifying the most common challenges, brainstorming on strategies to address them, and identifying potential bottom-up solutions to their community challenges.

One month before the workshops were to take place, a random sample of QC students were invited to apply online to participate in a resilience-thinking workshop after completing an online survey. Students were informed that, due to space limitations, application was no guarantee of being selected to participate in the workshop as only a small group of students would be selected by lottery; and that workshop participants would be remunerated $50 cash at the end of the workshop and after completion of the exit survey. To be eligible to participate, students had to be 18 years old or older, registered to classes during the semester of the workshop, seeking an undergraduate degree, and had to apply online to participate in the 90-minute workshop. Most survey respondents (92.8% in Spring 2022 and 95% in Fall 2022) applied to the workshop, adding to a total of 750 applicants, 335 of which did so in the Spring semester. Due to budget constraints, the evaluation sample was limited to 76 students in the Spring semester, and 186 students in the Fall semester. Hence, a total of 262 students were randomly assigned to the treatment group. We randomly selected a similar number of students for the control group.

Using an online survey, we measured students’ resilience level both at application and at the end of workshop, which were a month apart. Randomization took place two weeks after application. At application, we also measured students’ baseline mental health as well as whether they are born in the United States or a first-generation college student. Between three to six months after randomization, students completed a follow-up survey on their resilience level, depression, anxiety and PTS disorder. From the college administrative records, we also observe students’ other demographic characteristics and baseline socio-economic status. Program implementation data informs us on which students were randomly assigned to the treatment and control group, which workshop students in the treatment group were assigned to, and whether they attended the workshop.

The short-term outcome is student's resilience level, measured at the end of the workshop (for treated students) and at application (for control students). Medium-term outcomes include resilience, anxiety, depression, and PTS all measured in the follow-up survey, between 3 and 6 months after randomization.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
De Balanzo Joue, Rafael and Nuria Rodriguez-Planas. 2023. " Resilience-Thinking Training for College Students ." AEA RCT Registry. February 13. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.10927-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
We conduct a randomized evaluation of an in-depth group workshop where New York City Public College (QC) students were introduced to the resilient-thinking approach, which offers conceptual tools to cope with unexpected negative shocks. Treated youths were offered a 90-minute workshop where they identified challenges in their community both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and brainstormed strategies to address them. The goal of the workshops was to increase students’ level of resilience, a well-known protective factor against exposure to adverse social determinants of health. After being introduced key elements from the resilience-thinking approach, students worked both individually and in groups of five to seven students each, sharing their experiences about the challenges in their community both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, identifying the most common challenges, brainstorming on strategies to address them, and identifying potential bottom-up solutions to their community challenges.
Intervention (Hidden)
We conduct a randomized evaluation of an in-depth group workshop where New York City Public College (QC) students were introduced to the resilient-thinking approach, which offers conceptual tools to cope with unexpected negative shocks. Treated youths were offered a 90-minute workshop where they identified challenges in their community both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and brainstormed strategies to address them. The goal of the workshops was to increase students’ level of resilience, a well-known protective factor against exposure to adverse social determinants of health. After being introduced key elements from the resilience-thinking approach, students worked both individually and in groups of five to seven students each, sharing their experiences about the challenges in their community both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, identifying the most common challenges, brainstorming on strategies to address them, and identifying potential bottom-up solutions to their community challenges.
Intervention Start Date
2022-03-09
Intervention End Date
2022-11-22

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The short-term outcome is student's resilience level, measured at the end of the workshop (for treated students) and at application (for control students). Medium-term outcomes includes resilience measured in the follow-up survey, between 3 and 6 months after randomization.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
N.a.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Anxiety, depression, and PTS disorder measured between 3 and 6 months after randomization.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
N.A.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
One month before the workshops were to take place, a random sample of QC students were invited to apply online to participate in a resilience-thinking workshop after completing an online survey. Students were informed that, due to space limitations, application was no guarantee of being selected to participate in the workshop as only a small group of students would be selected by lottery; and that workshop participants would be remunerated $50 cash at the end of the workshop and after completion of the exit survey. To be eligible to participate, students had to be 18 years old or older, registered to classes during the semester of the workshop, seeking an undergraduate degree, and had to apply online to participate in the 90-minute workshop. Most survey respondents (92.8% in Spring 2022 and 95% in Fall 2022) applied to the workshop, adding to a total of 750 applicants, 335 of which did so in the Spring semester. Due to budget constraints, the evaluation sample was limited to 76 students in the Spring semester, and 186 students in the Fall semester. Hence, a total of 262 students were randomly assigned to the treatment group. We randomly selected a similar number of students for the control group.
Experimental Design Details
One month before the workshops were to take place, a random sample of QC students were invited to apply online to participate in a resilience-thinking workshop after completing an online survey. Students were informed that, due to space limitations, application was no guarantee of being selected to participate in the workshop as only a small group of students would be selected by lottery; and that workshop participants would be remunerated $50 cash at the end of the workshop and after completion of the exit survey. To be eligible to participate, students had to be 18 years old or older, registered to classes during the semester of the workshop, seeking an undergraduate degree, and had to apply online to participate in the 90-minute workshop. Most survey respondents (92.8% in Spring 2022 and 95% in Fall 2022) applied to the workshop, adding to a total of 750 applicants, 335 of which did so in the Spring semester. Due to budget constraints, the evaluation sample was limited to 76 students in the Spring semester, and 186 students in the Fall semester. Hence, a total of 262 students were randomly assigned to the treatment group. We randomly selected a similar number of students for the control group.
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
10 workshops were conducted (4 in Spring 2022 and 6 in Fall 2022). Randomization was done at the student level in Spring 2022 and again in Fall 2022.
Sample size: planned number of observations
524 students, of which 262 students were randomly assigned to the treatment group.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Due to budget constraints, the evaluation sample (treatment students) was limited to 76 students in the Spring semester, and 186 students in the Fall semester. Each semester, a similar number was assigned to the control group.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
The power analysis shows that our power ranges between 71% and 90% in four out of six alternative assumptions, which is a very decent outcome for such type of interventions, especially given that we are assuming relative small impacts ranging between 10% and 14% of the control-group composite mean of 5.0344
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
CUNY University Integrated Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2021-08-24
IRB Approval Number
IRB File #2021-0586

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?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials