Hocus Pocus: Potterian Economics and Economic Sentiments

Last registered on January 02, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Hocus Pocus: Potterian Economics and Economic Sentiments
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0014990
Initial registration date
December 15, 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 02, 2025, 7:05 AM EST

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

Locations

Region
Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Bar-Ilan University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Bar-Ilan University

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2020-05-03
End date
2024-08-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.
Abstract
There is evidence that fictional works influence readers and shape their views. We study the effect of Potterian economics—the economic ideas found in Harry Potter books, on the books’ readers. To assess the effect of Potterian economics on the views and sentiments of the readers of Harry Potter on economic matters, we conducted surveys in Israel and Georgia. The experimental design enables us to control for (a) socio-demographic factors, for factors related to (b) general reading-preferences and (c) fantasy-genre reading-preferences, and for (d) movie-watching versus book-reading preferences, suggesting that the effect of the Potterian economics that we document is causal.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Levy, Daniel and Avichai Snir. 2025. "Hocus Pocus: Potterian Economics and Economic Sentiments." AEA RCT Registry. January 02. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.14990-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
We conduct a survey in two rounds, in Israel and Georgia. In Israel, the survey was conducted in May−June 2020 and in May 2021, in Hebrew. We recruited participants by sending links to the questionnaire via university and college students’ social networks. We also place a link to the questionnaire on a Facebook page of Harry Potter fans. The survey in Georgia is conducted in June 2020 and in March 2021, in English. The participants are BA and MA students at the International School of Economics at Tbilisi State University.
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2020-05-04
Intervention End Date
2024-08-16

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The goal is to assess the effect HP books have on its readers' economic perceptions and attitudes.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We divide participants randomly into two groups. One group is asked questions about Harry Potter universe. The second group is asked question about twilight book series. Then, the participants are asked to fill out a survey questionnaire. The first part of the questionnaire is composed of some statements, and the participants are asked to indicate to what extent they agree/disagree with each of the statements using a 5-point Likert scale: “completely disagree” “somewhat disagree,” “undecided,” “somewhat agree,” and “completely agree.” The statements touch various economic issues including banks and bankers, monetary economics, political economy, industrial organization and market structure, inequality, social mobility, human capital, and economic growth. In the last part of the questionnaire, we ask socio-demographic questions, which serve as controls. We also ask the participants questions about the number of Harry Potter books they have read (0–7), the number of Harry Potter movies they have seen (0–8), the number of another popular book series they have read, the number of the books' movie adaptations they have seen, and the average number of books they read in a typical year.
Experimental Design Details
In the first part, the participants are asked 7 questions about HP/Twilight universe. In the second part, they are asked five questions about their views on various economics/social matters. In the third part, we ask socio-demographic questions, which serve as controls. We also ask the participants questions about the number of Harry Potter books they have read (0–7), the number of Harry Potter movies they have seen (0–8), the number of Twilight books they have read (0–4), the number Twilight movies they have seen (0–5), and the average number of books they read in a typical year.
Randomization Method
The different conditions are assigned based on the birth month - (1) January, March, May, July, September, and November (2) February, April, June, August, October, and December
Randomization Unit
Individuals
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Israel and Georgia - Two Countries
Sample size: planned number of observations
About 2,000 in total
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Equal division b/n control and treatment
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Approximately: 0.02 Delta(log-treatment - log-control)
Supporting Documents and Materials

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

Request Information
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
BIU - Economics - Departmental Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2024-07-31
IRB Approval Number
N/A

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?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
August 30, 2024, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
August 30, 2024, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
1
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
About 2,000 - we have yet double-check
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
1,000 control and 1,000 treatment (approximately), randomize at the participant level
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

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

Request Information

Program Files

Program Files
No
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Abstract
Recent studies in psychology and neuroscience offer systematic evidence that fictional works exert a surprisingly strong influence
on readers and have the power to shape their opinions and worldviews. Building on these findings, we study ‘Potterian economics’,
the economic ideas, insights and structure, found in Harry Potter books, to assess how the books might affect economic literacy. A
conservative estimate suggests that more than 7.3% of the world’s population has read the Harry Potter books, and millions more
have seen their movie adaptations. These extraordinary figures underscore the importance of the messages the books convey. We
explore the Potterian economic model and compare it to professional economic models to assess the consistency of the Potterian
economic principles with the existing economic models.We find that some of the principles of Potterian economics are consistent with
economists’ models. Many other principles, however, are distorted and contain numerous inaccuracies, contradicting professional
economists’ views and insights. We conclude that Potterian economics can teach us about the formation and dissemination of folk
economics—the intuitive notions of naïve individuals who see market transactions as a zero-sum game, who care about distribution
but fail to understand incentives and efficiency and who think of prices as allocating wealth but not resources or their efficient use.
Citation
Levy, Daniel, and Avichai Snir (2022), "Potterian Economics," Oxford Open Economics 1 (July), 1–32, Online Supplementary Appendix, https://doi.org/10.1093/ooec/odac004.

Reports & Other Materials