How does a fraud scandal impact trust in science?

Last registered on November 08, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
How does a fraud scandal impact trust in science?
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0013481
Initial registration date
April 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
April 26, 2024, 12:29 PM EDT

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

Last updated
November 08, 2024, 5:27 PM EST

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

Locations

Country
Brazil
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Leon Viscome Eliezer
Affiliation
FGV - São Paulo School of Economics
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Luigi Garzon
PI Affiliation
FGV - São Paulo School of Economics
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Nícolas Goulart
PI Affiliation
FGV - São Paulo School of Economics
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2024-04-01
End date
2024-06-30
Keywords
Behavior
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
D73, D83, D84, I23
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study addresses how unethical behavior in scientific research impacts trust in science, contributing to a literature on the consequences of corruption and unethical behavior. We propose an informational delivery experiment with high school students in Brazil, where we present them with a summary of a suspected fraud scandal in behavioral science. We divide treated subjects into a "fraud" arm, where they only learn about the fraud accusations, and an "accountability'' arm, where they learn about the investigation and punishment processes involved; this allows us to tell apart the effects of learning about cheating from catching cheaters. We measure the effect on beliefs in science, the use of scientific evidence to update world views, real life attitudes towards science, and spillovers to other fields of research. The results of this experiment can enlighten academic institutions about the consequences of fraud, and guide public communication with respect to informing about accountability.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Viscome Eliezer, Leon, Luigi Garzon and Nícolas Goulart. 2024. "How does a fraud scandal impact trust in science?." AEA RCT Registry. November 08. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.13481-1.1
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)
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2024-04-24
Intervention End Date
2024-05-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Trust in science, interest in academic activities, use of scientific evidence to update beliefs (which are constructed in a survey), and real world actions towards scientific-related activities, which include reading and sharing scientific evidence, demanding books related to scientific topics, and attending a class on a science-related topic.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
These variables will be constructed as indexes from survey answers.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Teenagers who participate in the Brazilian Economics Olympiad can take part in a survey experiment, where they answer a baseline and an endline survey a couple of weeks apart from each other. The informational intervention is in the beginning of the endline survey. We use answers from two surveys to construct a measure of belief updating. After the endline survey, participants are reached with the possibility of engaging in a behavioral economics class for free, and with a third survey wave to collect longer term effects on beliefs.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Blocks were matched in triplets, following an adaptation of Yuehao Bai's "pairs of pairs" algorithm, and then randomized to different treatment arms.
Randomization Unit
Block randomization at the school level, to avoid contamination bias.
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
500 schools.
Sample size: planned number of observations
1500 students.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Average between 2 and 3 students per school, with substantial heterogeneity.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
COMITÊ DE CONFORMIDADE ÉTICA EM PESQUISAS ENVOLVENDO SERES HUMANOS – CEPH/FGV
IRB Approval Date
2024-03-18
IRB Approval Number
P.483.2023
Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan Documents

How does a fraud scandal impact trust in science?

MD5: fd12d6fd20912db224d13c1a19924514

SHA1: dd0c29c89d8eb97d1043f2992d3e031e7397069f

Uploaded At: April 23, 2024

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?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials