|
Field
Trial Start Date
|
Before
August 20, 2024
|
After
February 09, 2025
|
|
Field
Trial End Date
|
Before
August 20, 2025
|
After
October 02, 2025
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
August 28, 2024 02:58 PM
|
After
January 25, 2025 09:47 AM
|
|
Field
Intervention Start Date
|
Before
October 04, 2024
|
After
February 09, 2025
|
|
Field
Intervention End Date
|
Before
June 20, 2025
|
After
July 31, 2025
|
|
Field
Randomization Unit
|
Before
Individuals are randomised at the unit of their year of entry and whether they are an undergraduate or postgraduate.
|
After
Individuals are randomised by subject grouping (e.g. MBAs vs Management Studies Tripos)
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Observations
|
Before
1000 students
|
After
800 students
|
|
Field
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
|
Before
~500 students in treatment, 500 in control. This will be split by cluster.
|
After
~400 students in treatment, 400 in control. This will be split by cluster.
|
|
Field
Intervention (Hidden)
|
Before
Working with a University of Cambridge college, we randomised students into receiving an email with information on upcoming canteen menus. We are able to match this treatment/control data with students spending in the College Canteen, a popular place for students to eat subsidised meals. We wish to test whether students who receive the additional menu information are more or less likely to visit the canteen, and purchase food, than individuals who do not receive the information. In the absence of the emails, the only way to obtain information on the canteen menu is to visit the canteen. We hypothesise that students who don't receive the email, may visit the canteen and exhibit sunk cost fallacy and purchase canteen food. Whereas, those who receive the email, alter their food decisions in advance and do not exhibit sunk cost fallacy.
|
After
Working with a University of Cambridge Department, we randomised students into receiving an email with information on upcoming canteen menus. We are able to match this treatment/control data with students spending in the Department Canteen, a popular place for students to eat subsidised meals. We wish to test whether students who receive the additional menu information are more or less likely to visit the canteen, and purchase food, than individuals who do not receive the information. In the absence of the emails, the only way to obtain information on the canteen menu is to visit the canteen. We hypothesise that students who don't receive the email, may visit the canteen and exhibit sunk cost fallacy and purchase canteen food. Whereas, those who receive the email, alter their food decisions in advance and do not exhibit sunk cost fallacy.
|