Skills Mismatch: Sources and Consequences

Last registered on July 10, 2024


Trial Information

General Information

Skills Mismatch: Sources and Consequences
Initial registration date
July 03, 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
July 08, 2024, 1:13 PM EDT

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

Last updated
July 10, 2024, 6:02 AM EDT

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



Primary Investigator

University College London

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
University College London
PI Affiliation
Research Institute for Policy Evaluation and Design, University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce
PI Affiliation
Yale University
PI Affiliation
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

Additional Trial Information

In development
Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Skills mismatch, defined by the discrepancy between workers’ skills and job skill requirements, can have negative effects on workers’ income and career progression. Past research has studied its causes separately which include (i) workers not fully knowing their own skill levels; (ii) lacking of labour market information; (iii) lacking confidence and adherence to social norms. For example, female workers may perceive that a programmer is not a suitable job for women.

The project will study the role of these three factors and their interactions on skills mismatch using a randomised controlled trial (RCT). The RCT involves giving participants who are final-year college students in Thailand different treatments. The three main treatments are as follows: providing information on individual ability; providing information on labour markets; and promoting growth mindset in a job search process context. The project will collect panel data on actual labour market outcomes, subjective beliefs and individual characteristics then analyse mechanisms and consequences of skills mismatch.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Piyapromdee, Suphanit et al. 2024. "Skills Mismatch: Sources and Consequences." AEA RCT Registry. July 10.
Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information
Experimental Details


The project will use a randomised controlled trial (RCT) approach. The RCT involves giving participants who are final-year college students in Thailand different treatments. The three main treatments are as follows:

1. Providing individual ability: the intervention will evaluate skill levels using tests of quantitative, language (thai) and noncognitive skills. The test results will be presented to the participants in this treatment group. Each participant receives this result in private and individually.

2. Providing information on labour market: the intervention will use currently available data of the labour force survey. Each participant will receive personalised information about the returns and skill requirements of occupations they are interested in as well as broad information of the current labor market environment.

3. Promoting Growth Mindset: the intervention will produce video media that provide training of a growth mindset in a job search process context. All participants in this treatment will receive the same video.

Treatments are randomized at the individual level. This experiment has 8 experimental groups: 7 treatment groups (G1-G7) and 1 control group (G8).

We target fourth-year (final-year) college students in general majors such as arts and humanities. The age range is based on the ages of final-year college students in Thailand.
Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Types of jobs applied; Job search behaviours; Perception on job prospects; Employment status; Earnings; Perception on own abilities
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The target population are fourth-year (final-year) undergraduate students in public and private universities in Bangkok and surrounding areas. The sample includes students in faculties and fields that are not considered specialized in terms of occupations, such as humanities, economics, business administration, science, and engineering. We exclude specialised majors such as medicine, dentistry, and law. Approximately, the number of students taking part in the first survey is 5,500 people.

There are 8 groups of programs that voluntary participants. The assignment of participants into each group is conducted on the basis of randomisation. Each group will take part in each different program’s curriculum and activities.

The randomisation is conducted at the individual level.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomisation is done by a computer after the invited participants will have agreed (and have seen the information sheet and the consent form) to continue taking part in the baseline survey in the first meeting.
Randomization Unit
The randomisation is conducted at the individual level.
Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
There is no cluster. However, we start by randomly selecting the targetting universities/higher institutions from the full population of higher institutions in and around Bangkok Metropolitan. The randomisation is stratified by the type of the institutions (public or private).
Sample size: planned number of observations
5,500 students in the baseline.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
688 students in the baseline.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
The sample size is based on statistical calculation. Given that the randomization unit for this experiment is at the individual level, if we aim to test the hypothesis at the significance level 0.05, with an effect size of approximately 0.20 SD, the size of sample in each experimental group with statistical power is approximately 0.80 is approximately 400 people. That means the overall sample size should be approximately 3,200 people at the end of the project. We anticipate that there will be approximately 10 percent of the sample attrition annually. Therefore, the size of sample students in the first survey should be approximately 5,500 people so that in the final year (the next 5 years) there will still be about 3,200 people in the final round.

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
the UCL Humanities, Arts, and Sciences Research Ethics Committee (HAS REC)
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
IRB Name
Human Research Ethic Committee, University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number