Familiarity, Test Performance and Implications for Fairness

Last registered on August 07, 2025
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Familiarity, Test Performance and Implications for Fairness
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0014879
Initial registration date
November 20, 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
December 05, 2024, 10:54 AM EST

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

Last updated
August 07, 2025, 12:29 PM EDT

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

Locations

Country
Brazil
Region
Country
Italy
Region
Country
Portugal
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Dalila Figueiredo
Affiliation
Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Lucas Finamor
PI Affiliation
São Paulo School of Economics - Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV)
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2024-11-21
End date
2025-05-31
Keywords
Education
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
We study the effect of topic familiarity on test performance in standardized English tests. The hypothesis is that test performance is capturing more than ability, and it is being confounded with familiarity, which in turn is affected by SES, gender, race, and other cultural factors. If this is the case, then these tests are acting as unfair gatekeepers to important economic opportunities. We test these hypotheses in this project by eliciting baseline topic familiarity and also experimentally varying familiarity.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Figueiredo, Dalila and Lucas Finamor. 2025. "Familiarity, Test Performance and Implications for Fairness." AEA RCT Registry. August 07. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.14879-2.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2024-11-21
Intervention End Date
2025-05-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Familiarity; English Writing Proficiency
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We elicit and experimentally vary participants' familiarity and evaluate how that affects writing performance.
Experimental Design Details
Our experimental design randomly manipulates whether an individual reads the article on the topic that they will be asked to write the essay on. There are 6 topics, which are always considered in pairs. Individuals randomized into pair A, only answer questions, read, and write about topics 1 and 2. Those randomized into pair B only interact with topics 3 and 4. Finally, those in pair C only interact with topics 5 and 6.

We randomly allocate each participant into one pair (A, B, or C) and in one of 5 treatment arms (T, C1, C2, C3, and A). The T group is the treated group, that is, those that read and write the essay on the same topic. C1, C2, and C3 are different control groups, who write an essay on a different topic from the one they read about. The difference across these groups is that C1 is completely identical to T, apart from reading an article on a different topic from the essay. C3 does not answer familiarity questions after reading the article, but instead only after writing the essay. C2, instead, reads a second article on the topic of the essay after having to write the essay and then answers familiarity questions. A is an alternative control group that is allowed to choose which of the 6 topics they will write about.
Randomization Method
Randomization is done in the Qualtrics software
Randomization Unit
Individual level
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
0
Sample size: planned number of observations
1200
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
480 treatment arm
360 control group 1
120 control group 2
120 control group 3
120 control group 4
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Ethics Committee at the European University Institute
IRB Approval Date
2021-03-12
IRB Approval Number
N/A
IRB Name
COMITÊ DE CONFORMIDADE ÉTICA EM PESQUISAS ENVOLVENDO SERES HUMANOS – CEPH/FGV
IRB Approval Date
2023-06-15
IRB Approval Number
P.176.2023
IRB Name
Review of the Ethics Council of the Max Planck Society
IRB Approval Date
2024-09-12
IRB Approval Number
2024_31
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information

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