Response bias and surveyor identity in field evaluations

Last registered on July 13, 2018

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Response bias and surveyor identity in field evaluations
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0001496
Initial registration date
September 23, 2016
Last updated
July 13, 2018, 11:09 AM EDT

Locations

Region
Region
Region
Region
Region
Region
Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
World Bank

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
OECD
PI Affiliation
Oxfam

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2016-07-01
End date
2018-12-31
Secondary IDs
Abstract
We examine the impact on individuals' responses in a household survey of the information that they receive about the identity of the organisation(s) conducting the study. We implement this experiment across eight countries as part of the evaluation of a range of Oxfam field projects.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Cassidy, Rachel, Jonathan Lain and Simone Lombardini. 2018. "Response bias and surveyor identity in field evaluations." AEA RCT Registry. July 13. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.1496-4.0
Former Citation
Cassidy, Rachel et al. 2018. "Response bias and surveyor identity in field evaluations." AEA RCT Registry. July 13. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/1496/history/31775
Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2016-07-01
Intervention End Date
2016-12-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Differential/biased responses in key project evaluation variables and variables linked to eligibility for donor-funded programs.
See pre-analysis plan
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We randomise the information that individuals receive during household surveys about the identity of the organisation(s) conducting the study. We implement this experiment across eight countries as part of the evaluation of a range of Oxfam field projects (note nine countries were originally planned, but Oxfam eventually did not carry out fieldwork in the ninth country due to various constraints).
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomisation function in the tablet software SurveyCTO.
Randomization Unit
Individual respondent level (this also corresponds to the household level, as only one individual is interviewed per household).
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
5,641 individuals
N.B. these individuals are spread across eight countries.
Sample size: planned number of observations
5,641individuals N.B. these individuals are spread across eight countries.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
See pre-analysis plan: 2,348; 2,723, 285 and 267 respectively
These individuals are spread across eight countries.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Oxfam GB Ethics Team; University of Oxford CUREC
IRB Approval Date
2016-06-24
IRB Approval Number
CUREC: ECONCIA16-17-001
Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan Documents

13.07.2018_CassidyLainLombardini

MD5: 992fb86a1a229ebd3e44fb780b97fe05

SHA1: 454daa15626e82d7994b4529a76ba06d189668e2

Uploaded At: July 13, 2018

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

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