Language of Inflation Targets - Expectations

Last registered on January 07, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Language of Inflation Targets - Expectations
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0014671
Initial registration date
October 27, 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
January 07, 2025, 11:42 AM EST

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

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Middlebury College

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City

Additional Trial Information

Status
Withdrawn
Start date
2024-10-27
End date
2025-01-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study will explore how people interpret the language used in reference to inflation targeting goals and explore if different language impacts expectations. This experiment will expand the set of interpretations to include inflation expectations.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Dzholos, Mariia and David Munro. 2025. "Language of Inflation Targets - Expectations." AEA RCT Registry. January 07. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.14671-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
In an online survey, we will explore how people interpret different language used by the Federal Reserve in reference to its inflation targeting goals and we will explore how this different language impacts individuals' expectations about the path of inflation. In this experiment we expand the set of interpretations to include one on inflation expectations.
Intervention (Hidden)
In an online survey, we will explore how people interpret different language used by the Federal Reserve in reference to its inflation targeting goals. In particular, the Fed uses different language when it refers to its inflation goals, and some of this language may engender different interpretations than what the Fed intends. To study this, we will provide subjects with different versions of inflation target language and solicit their interpretations of what this language means in terms of what the Feds goals are. We will also use an incentivized question to explore if this different language impacts individuals' expectations about the path of inflation.
Intervention Start Date
2024-10-28
Intervention End Date
2024-12-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Subjective scoring on how closely each interpretation provided aligns with their interpretation of different Fed language.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
This is not relevant for our study as we will be reporting the main variables directly.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
As secondary outcomes we may also explore how responses differ across demographic groups, and subjects' economic knowledge (as measured by correct answers to some inflation questions)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This is a follow-up experiment to an already registered trial (AEARCTR-0014490) where we expand the set of possible interpretations relative to the first experiment. This is more of a choice experiment than an RCT as there are no treatment/control groups per se. We are simply interested in how individuals interpret different language and if different forms of language impact expectations. However, we can estimate statistical difference in the interpretation choices given between different variants of language. In this light you could treat the different prompts as "treatments" and the design is all within-subject.

Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Since there are no treatments in this survey randomization is not very relevant. We will randomize the order that subjects see different answers/interpretations to control for any order effects, and this randomization will be done by Qualtrics.
Randomization Unit
The only randomization is the ordering of answers/interpretations and this will be done at the subject-level.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
100 (individuals will respond to multiple questions)
Sample size: planned number of observations
100 (individuals will respond to multiple questions)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
100, no treatment arms.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Statistical tests will be comparing the interpretations scores across the prompts. You could think of the different prompts as different "treatments" (all within subject variation). To see if the different prompts engender different interpretations we can conduct a paired t-test. From the pilot data power calculations suggest we would need small sample sizes to achieve power of 0.8 or greater. For example, we are interested in how the interpretations scores for interpretation 3 are different conditional on the prompts. From the pilot data, comparing scores for interpretation 3 across the different prompts yields the following sample sizes for alpha=0.05 and statistical power=0.8: N=3, N=4, N=3, and N=5. With a Bonferroni correction for, say, these 4 tests, gives adjusted sample sizes of N=4, N=5, N=4, and N=7. So we are extremely well powered with N=100.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Middlebury College
IRB Approval Date
2024-09-18
IRB Approval Number
IRB ID: 377

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