Heterogeneity in probability perception and its effect on insurance decisions: How does partisanship affect our daily choices?

Last registered on December 09, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Heterogeneity in probability perception and its effect on insurance decisions: How does partisanship affect our daily choices?
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0014936
Initial registration date
December 04, 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 09, 2024, 4:52 PM EST

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
Oliver Raab
Affiliation
CUNY Graduate Center
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2024-12-05
End date
2026-08-31
Keywords
Behavior, Crime, Violence, & Conflict
Additional Keywords
Partisanship, Media
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This paper analyzes the impact of decision-makers' heterogeneous perception of crime likelihood on their insurance decision. I assume that exogenous news about crime likelihood is digested differently for Republican and Democrat supporters, weighting information according to news source partisanship. Different probability weights result in distorted decision choices of suboptimal insurance deductibles. In addition, the paper tests if this notion can be corrected after the bias is explicitly revealed and if the correction would last.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Raab, Oliver. 2024. "Heterogeneity in probability perception and its effect on insurance decisions: How does partisanship affect our daily choices?." AEA RCT Registry. December 09. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.14936-1.0
Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2024-12-05
Intervention End Date
2026-08-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
1. Effect of the Biased Partisan News on Crime Perception and Insurance Decisions
2. Effect of the Correction Signal on Crime Perception and Insurance Decision
3. Effect of the Correction Signal Retention on Crime Perception and Insurance Decision
Primary Outcomes (explanation)



Effect of the Biased Partisan News on Crime Perception and Insurance Decisions:
Participants will report their perception of the crime rate in the hypothetical neighborhood after exposure to partisan news sources. They will then select deductible amounts in a hypothetical insurance task, allowing the study to assess how perceived crime rates influence their insurance decisions.
Effect of the Correction Signal on Crime Perception and Insurance Decision:
The study investigates whether providing participants with information about the bias in the news sources improves the accuracy of their perceived crime rates and encourages more optimal deductible choices.
Effect of the Correction Signal Retention on Crime Perception and Insurance Decision:
The study also explores whether the effects of the correction signal fade over time when information about the bias is no longer reinforced, leading to a potential return to biased perceptions and suboptimal decision-making.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Participants are recruited on prolific and are asked to respond to a survey. The survey has three stages. In Stage 1, participants watch three short videos about specific neighborhood with varying crime rate biases, estimate the crime rate, evaluate an insurance lottery, and select a deductible. In Stage 2, biased groups watch updated videos with a disclaimer revealing the bias, repeating the same tasks to compare with Stage 1. In Stage 3, biased groups view videos without the disclaimer, repeating the tasks to assess the lasting impact of the correction.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
The randomization method will be done by the computer, specifically in qualtrics. Each participant will be randomly assigned to a different treatment group.
Randomization Unit
The randomization unit is an individual participant.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
The upper limit for participants is 150.
Sample size: planned number of observations
The upper limit for participants is 150.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
The upper limit for participants is 150. That would make at most 50 participants per each group.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University Integrated Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2024-11-25
IRB Approval Number
2024-0686-GC
Analysis Plan