Responding to Positive and Negative Past Interactions

Last registered on February 12, 2025
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Responding to Positive and Negative Past Interactions
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0015358
Initial registration date
February 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
February 12, 2025, 10:12 AM EST

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

Locations

Country
Uganda
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Till Wicker
Affiliation
Tilburg University
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2025-02-10
End date
2025-02-28
Keywords
Behavior
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Discrimination is widespread across the world, and a variety of contexts. However, most studies on discrimination only consider static interactions, and hence do not internalize that discriminatory actions can have spillover effects on future interactions (i.e. dynamic discrimination). This lab-in-the-field among refugees in Uganda explores the dynamic nature of discrimination, by seeing how past interactions affect future interactions with individuals of the same group.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Wicker, Till. 2025. "Responding to Positive and Negative Past Interactions." AEA RCT Registry. February 12. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15358-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
There are two interventions, which only differ in the first round of the game. In the first treatment, the manager allocating a task will be a real person (where only the name is reported, but it reveals the nationality). In the second treatment, the manager is a computer.
Intervention (Hidden)
The second treatment consists of 3 rounds as well. Rounds 2 and 3 are identical to treatment 1. The only difference is in round 1. Rather than the manager being an actual person, it is a computer allocating the 10 sheets of paper between the two workers.
Intervention Start Date
2025-02-10
Intervention End Date
2025-02-28

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
division of labor in task #2; time taken to complete task in task #2, effort put in in task #2 (measured by number and quality of envelopes created).
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
A lab-in-the-field experiment will be conducted in Uganda. Individuals will be randomized across two treatments. The participants will first complete a brief baseline survey, then the treatments, followed by a debriefing.
The first treatment consists of 3 rounds. In the first round, the participant is a worker, whom a manager has assigned a task to. The manager had to divide 10 sheets of paper across two workers. The workers use the sheets of paper to create an envelope. Both the manager and the other worker are real people and from the same country, while the participant of the study is from a different country.
In the second round, the participant now becomes the manager, and has to divide 10 sheets of paper between two workers. One of the workers is from the same country as the participant, while the other is from the same country as the manager and other worker from Task #1.
In the third round, the participant is told that they are considered for a further (real) job, for which a manager has to choose two individuals a week later. The workers can signal their ability to the manager, by making as many envelopes from sheets of paper in 7 minutes. The manager then sees the worker’s name and productivity, before deciding which two workers to choose.
The second treatment consists of 3 rounds as well. Rounds 2 and 3 are identical to treatment 1. The only difference is in round 1. Rather than the manager being an actual person, it is a computer allocating the 10 sheets of paper between the two workers.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization is done by the survey platform (qualtrics).
Randomization Unit
Individual Level.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
no clusters
Sample size: planned number of observations
400 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
200 in Treatment #1, 200 in Treatment #2.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
MDES = 0.25 s.d.
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
TiSEM Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2025-01-28
IRB Approval Number
IRB FUL 2024-015
Analysis Plan

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?
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