War and Peace: How Economic Prospects Drive Conflictuality - Survey

Last registered on January 10, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
War and Peace: How Economic Prospects Drive Conflictuality - Survey
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0015055
Initial registration date
January 08, 2025

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 10, 2025, 1:39 PM EST

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

Last updated
January 10, 2025, 2:39 PM EST

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
CNRS - Université de Lyon - GATE

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Shandong University
PI Affiliation
Shandong University
PI Affiliation
Shandong University

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2024-12-22
End date
2025-06-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.
Abstract
Future economic prospects may influence the likelihood of cooperation or conflict between rising and established powers. We propose to conduct a survey to examine whether a representative sample of the American population presented with an optimistic global economic growth scenario for the future and a pessimistic scenario with negative global economic prospects (in random order) will make different predictions about the likelihood of a conflict between China (a rising power) and the US (a dominant country but whose relative strength may decline) in the future.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Jiang, Shuguang et al. 2025. "War and Peace: How Economic Prospects Drive Conflictuality - Survey." AEA RCT Registry. January 10. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15055-1.1
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Our experiment does not have an intervention. We have two randomized variations in this survey. This treatment variation is about whether an individual is first shown an optimistic scenario about future trends in the global economy before being shown a pessimistic scenario about future trends in the global economy, or is first shown a pessimistic scenario about future trends in the global economy before being shown an optimistic scenario. The treatment manipulation is only to control for possible order effects.
Intervention Start Date
2025-01-08
Intervention End Date
2025-01-15

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Probability that tensions between China and the United States escalate into a conflict within the next decade in each scenario
Under which global economic trends are major powers most likely/least likely to engage in conflicts
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
To test the main hypothesis that the likelihood of a conflict is increased by negative economic prospects, we will construct an individual variable capturing the difference in conflict probabilities between the two scenarios (pessimistic - optimistic). We will test whether this variable is significantly larger than from 0.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
We have three secondary outcomes:
- Opinion on the likelihood of a cooperative policy being reciprocated with peace
- Beliefs about the evolution of global economic activity over the coming decades
- Level of support for a US preemptive strike against China
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
We plan to test whether the level of support for a preemptive strike by the US against China depends on the individuals' beliefs about the evolution of global economic activity over the coming decades. Our hypothesis is that the support for a preemptive strike will be higher among individuals who believe in negative economic prospects.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
In the survey, we will describe scenarios about future trends in the global economy in random order across participants. Specifically, one scenario will present optimistic long-term global economic prospects, predicting continued growth and prosperity over the coming decades. In this scenario, advances in technology and global trade may drive sustained long-term growth, increasing the potential for shared prosperity worldwide. The other scenario is pessimistic about long-term global economic prospects, forecasting a deterioration in the global economic situation over the coming decades. In this scenario, technological stagnation, financial instability, and unexpected shocks may hinder long-term growth, thereby decreasing the potential for shared prosperity worldwide.
After each scenario, we will ask participants how likely they think tensions between China and the United States are to escalate into conflict over the next decade.
After reading the two scenarios and answering the two questions on the probability of conflict, we will ask participants how they expect global economic activity to evolve over the coming decades, and under which global economic trends the major powers are most likely and least likely to engage in conflicts.
Then, we will ask them whether they think a policy of increased diplomacy and cooperation is likely to be reciprocated with peace.
Finally, we will ask them to what extent they would support a preemptive strike by the US against China while they still have a relative advantage.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization by the program
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
NA
Sample size: planned number of observations
800 individuals (nationally representative sample recruited through Prolific)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
400 observations for each order (positive economic prospects / negative economic prospects)
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
To detect a small-size effect (d=0.25) with alpha=5% and a 95% power when comparing the within-subject probabilities of conflict in the optimistic and pessimistic scenarios (Wilcoxon signed-rank tests), we need to collect at least 220 observations in each condition (controlling for order effects). We increase the total sample to 800 observations to study the support for a preemptive strike according to personal beliefs regarding the evolution of global economic activity, controlling for individual heterogeneity in terms of political affiliation and gender in a regression analysis.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
GATE-Lab Ethics Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2025-01-08
IRB Approval Number
2024-12