Scarcity and Groupiness

Last registered on August 14, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Scarcity and Groupiness
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0014171
Initial registration date
August 14, 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
August 14, 2024, 3:56 PM EDT

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Name
Aluma Dembo
Affiliation
Reichman University
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Tali Regev
PI Affiliation
Reichman University
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2024-08-14
End date
2024-12-31
Keywords
Behavior, Lab
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This project explores the role scarcity plays in deepening divides within a segmented society. We aim to experimentally examine whether inducing a scarcity mindset in a controlled laboratory setting affects how individuals allocate their giving toward socially proximate and distant partners.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Dembo, Aluma and Tali Regev. 2024. "Scarcity and Groupiness." AEA RCT Registry. August 14. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.14171-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
We randomly assign participants to a scarcity treatment (or control). We use a variation on a scarcity elicitation task presented in Roux et al (2015). We also randomly pair participants with someone who is similar to them or different from them based on a demographic survey they complete at the beginning of the experiment.
Intervention Start Date
2024-08-14
Intervention End Date
2024-12-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The change in how much people give to another person after the treatment.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
We use a modified dictator game to elicit social preferences (Andreoni and Miller 2002, Fisman et al. 2007). Subjects are asked to divide an endowment M of tokens between themselves (S) and another participant (O), such that S + O = M. In each round the total endowment and dollar value of token to self (Vs) and dollar value of token to other (Vo) varies. In the three pre-treatment rounds the values of (M, Vs, Vo) are A: (80, 1, 1); B: (60, 2, 1); C: (40,1,3). In the post-treatment rounds they are A: (100, 1, 1); B: (75, 2, 1); C: (50,1,3). We randomize the order between the three pre-treatment rounds as well as between the three post-treatment rounds. For each round we calculate the fraction of dollars to self (Ds). The outcome variable is the difference between Ds in pre-treatment and post-treatment for each paired round (A, B, and C). The result is three observations per individual measuring the change in behavior.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Instead of fraction dollars to self, we look at fraction tokens to self. Also validate the similarity and difference partner assignment as well as attention to partner's state (see experimental design).
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We conduct the experiment using a Qualtrics survey on a subject pool randomly recruited through the Prolific platform. Subjects are asked a series of demographic questions and are then are told they will be paired randomly with someone who is "similar" or "different" from them and either from the same US state or a different US state from them. They are asked to complete three baseline modified dictator game tasks. Then they are randomly assigned to either a scarcity treatment or a control treatment. After they are asked to complete three post-treatment modified dictator game tasks. And lastly we elicit beliefs about the demographic characteristics of their partner. The entire study is not incentivized, a flat rate participation fee is provided at the completion of the study.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization is embedded in the Qualtrics survey and conducted by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Randomization is at the individual subject level.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
200 individuals (no clustering)
Sample size: planned number of observations
200 individuals.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
50 individuals in each treatment arm: in similar partner control, different partner control, similar partner treatment, different partner treatment.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Reichman University
IRB Approval Date
2024-08-11
IRB Approval Number
2024156_P
Analysis Plan