Automation Risk From AI Affects Young Adults Occupation Choice

Last registered on April 26, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Automation Risk From AI Affects Young Adults Occupation Choice
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0013424
Initial registration date
April 21, 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
April 26, 2024, 11:44 AM EDT

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

Last updated
April 26, 2024, 12:01 PM 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
Marcus Rundström
Affiliation
Lund University
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
Withdrawn
Start date
2024-04-21
End date
2024-05-15
Keywords
Labor
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
A13, C90, J20, J24
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Will the possibility of AI replacement affect career decisions for young adults? We test this using an RCT with information treatment. I leverage an online experiment to investigate how automation risk affects the attractiveness of occupations and the desirability of entering a specific occupation. The experiment consisted of one treatment group and a control group.

I am modifying a simple model by Wiswall and Zafar (2018), which predicts a lower probability of entering an occupation if the automation risk for the occupation is underestimated. While the outcome may be intuitive, I am the first to study how occupational automation risk affects the desirability of entering a specific occupation. Compared to previous work on automation’s effect on labor markets, I go one step further
and extend the literature by Autor et al. (2003) to answer how labor market outcomes change as an effect of technological development by including AI in the automation risk.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Rundström, Marcus. 2024. "Automation Risk From AI Affects Young Adults Occupation Choice." AEA RCT Registry. April 26. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.13424-2.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
I first let everyone guess the automation risk for four occupations: teachers, nurses, office clerks, and economists. Then, I provided the automation risk for the treatment group. Finally, participants will answer questions about these occupations to see if automation risk changes perceptions about these jobs.
Intervention Start Date
2024-04-21
Intervention End Date
2024-04-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Attractiveness of entering the occupation, and probability of entering the occupation.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Social status, future salary, job security, retirement age, and preferences for political action.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
I construct two I use an online experiment consisting of two groups. Both groups first answer questions about their background, job preferences, and belief in the automation risk for four occupations: nurses, teachers, office clerks, and economists. The treatment group is provided with the automation risk for these occupations. The last block of questions shows up after treatment. Both groups answer these.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
I use the randomization feature in Qualtrics.
Randomization Unit
individual.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
There are no clusters, only individuals.
Sample size: planned number of observations
600 individuals.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Among 300 individuals in the treatment group and 300 individuals in the control group.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
0.3 in absolute effect. 1.5 std. Alpha= 0.05.
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
Analysis Plan