Intervention (Hidden)
Community meetings will follow the framework of a public dialogue, developed by Herzig and Chasin (2006). The first community meeting will cover topics related to the arrival and integration of IDPs in local neighborhoods, as well as other issues related to local daily life. The main objective is that participants get to know each other and to recognize the challenges each other group faces (IDPs / locals). This meeting will also be an opportunity for IDPs to tell their stories, and for locals to learn from IDPs.
The second community meeting will focus on prejudice, and it will follow a prejudice exercise that was also developed by Herzig and Chasin (2006). The proposal of this exercise if for meeting participants to reflect on the prejudices felt in their daily lives in the neighborhood, and that come from the individuals in the other group (IDPs / locals).
The third community meeting will focus on religious tolerance, leveraging on the theological knowledge of local moderators. The objective will be to clarify some doubts individuals may have about Islam – given the intervention is being conducted in the context of an ongoing religious extremist insurgency.
The fourth meeting will lead participants to reflect on what they learn throughout the community meetings program, specifically on what can be useful throughout their lives. Participants will also discuss aspirations, and will be encouraged to keep holding community meetings (after this intervention is concluded) if they wish to do so.
Each assessment (baseline, follow-ups and endline) includes several components. All assessments will include a survey measuring demographic characteristics, trust, attitudes and beliefs and social networks. Open ended questions will also be included, with the objective of using text analysis to study individuals thoughts, sentiments and emotions towards IDPs, locals and insurgents.
In addition, all assessments will also include 3 list experiments. One will cover IDPs sense of being discriminated by locals (if the respondent is an IDP) or discrimination against IDPs (if the respondent is a local). The second list experiment will capture individuals trust in people belonging to the other group (IDPs / locals). The third list experiment will capture individuals’ preference for insurgents, using a graphical format where pictures will be displayed – instead of reading out loud multiple sentences (as in the other “traditional” list experiments).
Every assessment will also measure implicit bias towards insurgents by conducting an implicit association test. The two bias categories will be “insurgents” or “government authorities”. The implicit association test will display images (insurgents, government, happy faces, sad faces). As most participants will not be familiar with implicit association tests, a training test (using snakes and food, instead of insurgents and government) will also be conducted.
With the exception of the baseline assessment, all follow-up and endline assessments will also use survey questions to track individuals’ social networks throughout the intervention. The objective is to measure whether community meetings are positively affecting participants’ social networks.
The endline assessment will also include three lab-in-the-field games: dictator, public goods and joy-of-destruction. Participants will play in pairs, and they will not be told their opponents’ identity. Instead, participants will only be informed whether the opponent is an IDPs or a local.
Throughout the intervention, spillovers will also be measured using two strategies. The first one will consist on measuring effects based on geographic proximity to treated individuals. The underlying assumption is that proximity to individuals who participated in community meetings is more likely to generate spillover effects.
The second strategy will consist in inviting participants’ close contacts to a short survey at baseline and endline. Specifically, the main study participants will allowed to invite 2 persons of their choosing to answer a short-survey at baseline. In this survey, invitees will answer questions measuring beliefs and attitudes. At endline invitees will return and answer the same survey. The underlying assumption is the treatment effects may spillover among individuals who interact more with participants of community meetings.