Paternalism and Decision-Making under Cognitive Load

Last registered on January 27, 2025
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Paternalism and Decision-Making under Cognitive Load
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0015268
Initial registration date
January 27, 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 27, 2025, 10:34 AM 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
Matthias Holzmann
Affiliation
KU Eichstaett-Ingolstadt
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Alexander M. Danzer
PI Affiliation
KU Eichstätt-Ingolstadt
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2025-01-27
End date
2025-12-31
Keywords
Behavior, Finance & Microfinance
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
D01, D04, D91
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
In economic decision-making, individuals often face cognitive load and distractions, which can impair their decision quality and ability to focus on tasks. Therefore, we run a two-wave survey experiment investigating how perceived reductions in decision quality due to cognitive load and distractions influence the willingness to regulate others’ choices. The study, conducted on a representative sample of the German population, assigns participants the role of choice architects (CAs), tasked with constructing payoff sets for decision-makers (DMs) selecting among risky lotteries. In the treatment group, CAs are informed that DMs face cognitive load while choosing their preferred lotteries, which is induced by requiring DMs to simultaneously perform a memorization task. In the control group DMs face no additional cognitive load. The study also examines the beliefs and motives underlying these regulatory behaviors.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Danzer, Alexander M. and Matthias Holzmann. 2025. "Paternalism and Decision-Making under Cognitive Load." AEA RCT Registry. January 27. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15268-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
In a survey experiment, choice architects (CAs) can (in concealed fashion) select lottery choices for potential payoff from a fixed choice set of four lotteries for other survey participants called decision-makers (DMs). CAs are informed that DMs are distracted while choosing their preferred lottery or not.
Intervention Start Date
2025-01-27
Intervention End Date
2025-02-21

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Whether CAs exclude certain lotteries for potential payoff for the DMs, and the number of lotteries excluded.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
See PAP

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
CAs' assessment of DMs' ability to focus and make a reasonable choice when selecting their preferred lottery; motives for restrictions
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
See PAP

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
In this experiment, decision-makers (DMs) will face a decision environment involving uncertainty, where they must choose from several lotteries that determine their payment. Meanwhile, so-called choice architects (CAs) will have the ability to determine (in concealed fashion) for the decision-makers (DMs) the payoff set from a fixed choice set of four lotteries. CAs decide how many and which lotteries to make available to the DMs for potential payoff. In the treatment condition, CAs will be informed that DMs will have to memorize a 7-digit number, thereby inducing cognitive load through diverted attention. This should lead CAs to believe that DMs are unable to sufficiently evaluate the decision problem, prompting CAs to exclude certain lotteries to prevent DMs from making mistakes. By contrast, in the control condition, DMs will not face any cognitive load through remembering a number.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Survey Program Qualtrics
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
600
Sample size: planned number of observations
600
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
300 in each treatment arm (planned)
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB KU Eichstaett-Ingolstadt
IRB Approval Date
2024-07-27
IRB Approval Number
183-2024
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information