To what extent does the choice to acquire information determine learning?

Last registered on April 29, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
To what extent does the choice to acquire information determine learning?
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0012401
Initial registration date
December 19, 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
December 21, 2023, 8:02 AM EST

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

Last updated
April 29, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Name
Marta Grabowska
Affiliation
London School of Economics and Political Science
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Mylene Lagarde
PI Affiliation
London School of Economics and Political Science
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2024-01-31
End date
2024-08-30
Keywords
Behavior, Health
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study explores the impact of (no) choice in information acquisition on learning outcomes in the context of health communication. Decisions about investments into health are often made under uncertainty by individuals who lack perfect information. Information provision interventions are used to counteract this by supplying accurate information. However, these interventions often fail to improve participants’ knowledge or shift their decisions towards the optimum. This study investigates one potential reason for this: the fact that the way that information is acquired affects the extent of learning. I study whether giving individuals a choice in accessing information about the new malaria vaccine affects their attention to the information and their resulting knowledge about, and support for, the vaccine. I do this in a survey experiment conducted in Ghana where I randomly assign participants to 1) passively watch a placebo video about child development; 2) passively watch the treatment video about the malaria vaccine; 3) the choice group, where participants express a preference between the placebo and treatment videos. In group 3, there is a further randomisation of participants following the choice; some watch the video they preferred, while others watch the video they did not prefer. I compare how individuals respond to the treatment video if they watch it passively, watch it "keenly" (after choosing it), or watch it "forcedly" (after choosing against it). Through this study, I seek to inform health communication strategies, particularly in the context of emerging health interventions.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Grabowska, Marta and Mylene Lagarde. 2024. "To what extent does the choice to acquire information determine learning?." AEA RCT Registry. April 29. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.12401-2.0
Sponsors & Partners

Sponsors

Partner

Name
Innovations for Poverty Action (Ghana)
Type
ngo
URL
https://poverty-action.org/ghana-overview
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
There are two information videos used in the experiment: the ``malaria'' video, which provides information about malaria in children and the new vaccine, and the ``IDS'' or infant-directed speech video, which is an active control video\footnote{The videos in different languages were developed and made publicly available by \citet{dupas2023informing}, to whom we are deeply grateful for their permission to re-use the content in this study.}. The ``malaria'' video covers information such as malaria mortality and morbidity figures, including the burden in Ghana; effects of malaria on the community; the benefits of the vaccine; and other malaria prevention strategies. The video is an animation voiced over in several languages by local actors to ensure each participant receives the content in the vernacular. The control ``IDS'' video is very similar in format, design style and duration, and is likewise translated for each region. The only difference is in content: the video explains that talking to babies from a young age helps them develop cognitively, provides practical examples of how to fit IDS into your life, and how to engage others in the household in talking to the baby.
Intervention Start Date
2024-02-07
Intervention End Date
2024-04-10

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
1. Attention to information measured through a summary index of video recall and knowledge recall.
2. Malaria vaccine efficacy beliefs measured as a likelihood out of 10.
3. Intention to vaccinate own children, if eligible in the future.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
1. For the measure of the level of attention paid to the info video, we ask the respondent to recall five details regarding the video they just watched. The focus of the questions is on the production and story side of the video, such as the characters (e.g., ``what was the colour of the baby's dress?'') and the background (e.g., ``was it raining when...''), rather than the information content. For the knowledge recall, we will summarise the participants' knowledge across five domains covered by the info video. The questions vary in difficulty in order to provide a meaningful measure of knowledge and differential learning between respondents.
2. We elicit posterior beliefs about own child's malaria risk 1) without any preventative measures, 2) in a scenario where the child sleeps under a bed net every night, 3) in a scenario where the child had been given the malaria vaccine. We ask participants to consider the likelihood out of 10 that the child will get malaria in each of the scenarios.
3. Intention to vaccinate own child if eligible, elicited using a list experiment.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
1. Endorsement of the malaria vaccine
2. Demand for further information about the vaccine
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
As the vaccine is not yet available everywhere in Ghana, we are unable to offer the vaccine to the participants’ children. Therefore, we capture a range of measures which reveal interest and support for the vaccine. We capture the following revealed measures of support: endorsement (two methods - lieklihood of recommending to others, and being willing to share the malaria information with own contacts) and demand for further information (two methods - decision to receive updates about the vaccine over SMS and asking more questions about the vaccine and malaria when offered the chance to inquire further.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Participants who consent to take part in the study will be randomly assigned to one of 3 intervention arms:

1. Placebo arm: participants passively (i.e., with no choice of video offered) watch a placebo information video about an unrelated topic on child care. The video is very similar in design to the malaria video but delivers none of the information. This arm consists of 560 participants.
2. Passive treatment: participants passively watch the intervention video. This arm consists of 564 participants.
3. Offered a choice: participants are asked for their preference between the placebo and the intervention videos. They learn that their choice is more likely to be shown, though it is still randomised by the survey device. There are 1,654 participants in this arm.

A second randomisation then takes place, assigning participants to either their choice video or not. This creates four further intervention arms:
3.1 Those who wanted to view the intervention video and are shown it ("chosen" viewers) - 558 participants
3.2 Those who wanted to view the placebo video but are shown the intervention video ("forced" viewers) - 824 participants
3.3 Those who wanted to view the placebo video and are shown it - excluded from analysis, 203 participants
3.4 Those who wanted to view the intervention video but are shown the placebo video - excluded from analysis, 69 participants
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomisation done within each survey device according to pre-specified randomisation proportions. We use SurveyCTO.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
0
Sample size: planned number of observations
2,506 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
1. Placebo arm: 560.
2. Passive watch: 564.
3. Chosen watch: 558.
4. Forced watch: 824.
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
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Ghana Health Service Ethics Review Committee
IRB Approval Date
2023-10-03
IRB Approval Number
GHS-ERC: 014/03/23
IRB Name
LSE Research Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2023-08-30
IRB Approval Number
254973
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information