How to encourage formal work?

Last registered on June 26, 2024

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
How to encourage formal work?
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0013884
Initial registration date
June 25, 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
June 25, 2024, 2:13 PM EDT

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

Last updated
June 26, 2024, 3:51 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

Affiliation
University of Reading

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Bentley University
PI Affiliation
Development Pathways
PI Affiliation
Nudge Lebanon
PI Affiliation
Nudge Lebanon
PI Affiliation
International Social Security Association
PI Affiliation
Development Pathways
PI Affiliation
University of Reading
PI Affiliation
University of Antwerp

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2024-07-21
End date
2026-10-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study aims to experimentally test whether financial constraint, attractiveness of worker benefits, and information and behavioural frictions are significant barriers to social security participation.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Altindag, Onur et al. 2024. "How to encourage formal work?." AEA RCT Registry. June 26. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.13884-1.1
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Providing financial incentives, worker benefits, and information about social security through different modes of communication.
Intervention Start Date
2024-07-21
Intervention End Date
2025-09-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Worker registration into social security
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
• Understanding of social security
• Costs and time taken to register and contribute to SSC
• Perception of SSC
• Usage of SSC platform and services
• Employment
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We randomly assign firms to treatment and control groups, stratifying by social security branch. Each firm is registered under a specific administrative branch of the SSC.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Stratified randomisation conducted using Stata.
Randomization Unit
Firm
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Stratified randomisation, no clustering.
Sample size: planned number of observations
Maximum of 4,002 firms
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Analysis of main outcomes using administrative data:
- Control group: maximum of 2,002 firms
- Subsidy treatment group: maximum of 1,000 firms (500 firms will be approached with SMS+ method and 500 firms will be approached with firm visits)
- Subsidy + child benefit treatment group: maximum of 1,000 firms (500 firms will be approached with SMS+ method and 500 firms will be approached with firm visits)

Analysis of exploratory outcomes using firm survey data:
- Control group: maximum of 933
- Subsidy treatment group: maximum of 933
- Subsidy & child benefit treatment group: maximum of 933
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Accounting for sample design and clustering, what is the minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes. Specify the unit, standard deviation, and percentage. Assuming power of 80% and alpha as 5%, the minimum detectable effect size (MDE) that we will be able to detect for each treatment is 0.11 s.d. Pooling both treatment arms together, the MDE that we will be able to detect is 0.089 s.d. A maximum of 1,000 firms will be approached with in-person firm visits and a maximum of 1,000 firms will be approached with the SMS+ approach. The MDE of in-person firm visits compared with SMS+ approach is 0.13 s.d.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Ethics Committee for the Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Antwerp
IRB Approval Date
2023-10-23
IRB Approval Number
49521