Measuring Vote-Selling: Field Evidence from the Philippines

Last registered on June 11, 2016
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Measuring Vote-Selling: Field Evidence from the Philippines
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0001328
Initial registration date
June 11, 2016

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
June 11, 2016, 4:12 PM EDT

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

Locations

Country
Philippines
Region
Southeast Asia

Primary Investigator

Name
Nico Ravanilla
Affiliation
University of Michigan
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Dean Yang
PI Affiliation
Department of Economics and Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Stephen Leider
PI Affiliation
Stephen M. Ross School of Business, University of Michigan
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Allen Hicken
PI Affiliation
Department of Political Science, University of Michigan
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2013-04-01
End date
2013-06-30
Keywords
Electoral
Additional Keywords
vote-selling, vote-buying, elections, democracy, clientalism, Philippines
JEL code(s)
D72, O17
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Using data from an anti-vote-buying field experiment we conducted in the Philippines, we report and validate a proxy measure for vote-selling. We demonstrate that our proxy measure, vote-switching, changes as expected with voter preferences and monetary offers from candidates. Voters are less likely to vote for someone different than their initial preference the larger the favorability rating difference between the preferred and alternative candidates. Similarly, vote-switching increases the more money the alternative candidate offers compared to the preferred candidates. We also describe the effects of the promise-based interventions on vote-switching, reported in full in a companion paper.
External Link(s)
J-PAL Evaluation Summary

Registration Citation

Citation
Hicken, Allen et al. 2016. "Measuring Vote-Selling: Field Evidence from the Philippines." AEA RCT Registry. June 11. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.1328-1.0
Former Citation
Hicken, Allen et al. 2016. "Measuring Vote-Selling: Field Evidence from the Philippines." AEA RCT Registry. June 11. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/1328/history/8744
Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Researchers in the Philippines tested whether a verbal ‘promise’ against vote-buying has any impact on voting behavior. During the May 2013 municipal elections in Sorsogon City, respondents were shown a three-minute video clip that encouraged viewers to turn out to vote, vote for honest and competent candidates, and avoid vote-selling. All respondents were then asked to rank political candidates, indicating for whom they wanted to vote in the upcoming elections, and randomly assigned to one of three groups:
(a) Promise 1 treatment group: asked to promise not to accept money from any candidates
(b) Promise 2 treatment: asked to promise to “vote your conscience,” even if they took money from a candidate.
(c) Comparison: only watched the video.
Following the elections, respondents were surveyed again.
Intervention Start Date
2013-05-01
Intervention End Date
2013-05-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Vote switching
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Vote switching: In the mayoral and vice-mayoral races, a voter is considered to have switched if she reports voting for a candidate who was not their highest rated candidate (including ties) in the baseline survey. For the city-council race, a voter switched if she voted for at least one candidate that was not in their top four highest rated candidates (including ties) in the baseline survey.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The experiment considers outcomes in three types of municipal elections: mayor, vice-mayor and city council in Sorsogon City. During the baseline survey, enumerators visited randomly selected households and showed them the video clip after which respondents were assigned to one of three treatment arms: promise 1, promise 2 and control.

In the month following the election, participants were surveyed a second time. Participants reported whether they had voted, and who they had voted for in each race. Voters could vote for one candidate for mayor, one candidate for vice-mayor, and up to four candidates for city council.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Done in office by computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual voter
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Study not clustered
Sample size: planned number of observations
883 voters
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Control: 300
Promise Treatment 1 (accept no money): 300
Promise Treatment 2 (vote your conscience):300
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
University of Michigan
IRB Approval Date
2013-02-07
IRB Approval Number
HUM00068776
Analysis Plan

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?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
May 31, 2013, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
June 30, 2013, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
Study not clustered
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
748 voters
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Control: 291 Promise Treatment 1: 298 Promise Treatment[ 2: 294
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
Yes
Public Data URL
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.p20151033

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Abstract
MEASURING VOTE-SELLING: FIELD EVIDENCE FROM THE PHILIPPINES

Using data from an anti-vote-buying field experiment we conducted in the Philippines, we report and validate a proxy measure for vote-selling. We demonstrate that our proxy measure, vote-switching, changes as expected with voter preferences and monetary offers from candidates. Voters are less likely to vote for someone different than their initial preference the larger the favorability rating difference between the preferred and alternative candidates. Similarly, vote-switching increases the more money the alternative candidate offers compared to the preferred candidates. We also describe the effects of the promise-based interventions on vote-switching, reported in full in a companion paper.
Citation
Hicken, Allen, Stephen Leider, Nico Ravanilla, and Dean Yang. 2015. “Measuring Vote-Selling: Field Evidence from the Philippines." American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings, May 2015.
URL
https://www.povertyactionlab.org/sites/default/files/publications/735%20Vote-Selling%20in%20Philippines%20May2015.pdf

Reports & Other Materials