New York State Gun Violence Reduction Project

Last registered on January 23, 2024

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

New York State Gun Violence Reduction Project

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0012863

Initial registration date

January 23, 2024

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

January 23, 2024, 1:18 PM EST

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

Locations

Country

United States of America

Region

Primary Investigator

Name

Michael LaForest-Tucker

Affiliation

United States Air Force Academy

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Patrick Sharkey

PI Affiliation

Princeton

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

Completed

Start date

2012-09-01

End date

2022-01-01

Keywords

Crime, Violence, & Conflict

Additional Keywords

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.

Abstract

Can gun violence be deterred at low cost? We report the results of a randomized experiment of a messaging intervention which was designed to reduce gun violence among individuals under parole supervision with a prior violent felony conviction or firearm arrest. The intervention consisted of a group meeting in which high-risk paroled individuals were notified of the sanction they would face upon reoffending while being offered community resources to support re-integration into the community. The program did not lead to a reduction in gun violence or create community spillover effects but did reduce parole violations by 15%.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

LaForest-Tucker, Michael and Patrick Sharkey. 2024. "New York State Gun Violence Reduction Project ." AEA RCT Registry. January 23. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.12863-1.0

Sponsors & Partners

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

Intervention Start Date

2013-02-01

Intervention End Date

2014-07-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Arrests and parole violations

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

The New York State GVRP was implemented in five sites across the state of New York. Two sites were in Albany and Schenectady, mid-sized cities several hours north of New York City. The remaining three sites were in New York City, one each in the Bronx, Manhattan, and Brooklyn. Individuals living in these communities were eligible for the forums if they (1) were on parole, (2) had been convicted of a violent felony or had a prior firearm arrest, (3) did not have a mental health diagnosis or a prior sexual assault charge, (4) had lived within the targeted area for at least 30 consecutive days, and (5) had been released from prison within the prior two years. Forums took place between August 2012 and July 2014 in each of the five sites, with randomized assignment of attendees taking place between February 2013 and July 2014.

Treatment assignment involved two stages of randomization in each of the three NYC study sites. In a first stage of randomization, census tracts within each area were randomly assigned to a “neighborhood treatment group” and a “neighborhood control group.” Individuals who lived within the treated communities were eligible to be called in to the forums. Individuals in the control communities were not eligible to be called in. In the Albany and Schenectady sites, no neighborhood level randomization occurred due to the substantially smaller eligible populations in these cities. In these two sites, all eligible individuals were classified as belonging to the neighborhood treatment group.

In all five study sites, eligible individuals were then randomly assigned to an “individual treatment group” and an “individual control group.” Thus, in the NYC study sites, eligible individuals belonged to one of four study groups based on their combination of neighborhood treatment group and individual treatment group. Only individuals in both the neighborhood and individual treatment group (Group 1) were eligible to be called in to the forums. In the Albany and Schenectady sites, eligible individuals belonged to one of two study groups – an individual treatment group and an individual control group. In these sites, all individuals in the individual treatment group were eligible to be called in.

Experimental Design Details

Randomization Method

In office by a computer

Randomization Unit

Treatment assignment involved two stages of randomization in each of the three NYC study sites. In a first stage of randomization, census tracts within each area were randomly assigned to a “neighborhood treatment group” and a “neighborhood control group.” Individuals who lived within the treated communities were eligible to be called in to the forums. Individuals in the control communities were not eligible to be called in. In the Albany and Schenectady sites, no neighborhood level randomization occurred due to the substantially smaller eligible populations in these cities. In these two sites, all eligible individuals were classified as belonging to the neighborhood treatment group.

Was the treatment clustered?

Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

171

Sample size: planned number of observations

3557

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

Neighborhood treatment + individual treatment: 1101
Neighborhood treatment + individual control: 1054
Neighborhood control + individual treatment: 710
Neighborhood control + individual control: 692

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB