Credit Where Credit is Due: Attribution and Rebel Governance in Conflict-Affected Myanmar

Last registered on March 05, 2026

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

Credit Where Credit is Due: Attribution and Rebel Governance in Conflict-Affected Myanmar

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0015406

Initial registration date

February 18, 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 20, 2025, 6:37 AM EST

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

Last updated

March 05, 2026, 5:10 PM EST

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

Locations

Country

Myanmar

Region

Primary Investigator

Name

Nicolas Cerkez

Affiliation

Oxford University

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Alexandra Hartman

PI Affiliation

University College London

PI Name

Jonathan Weigel

PI Affiliation

UC Berkeley

PI Name

Kyaw Zay Ya

PI Affiliation

Swiss TPH

Additional Trial Information

Status

Completed

Start date

2022-10-10

End date

2023-11-30

Keywords

Crime, Violence, & Conflict, Governance, Health

Additional Keywords

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.

Abstract

A wide range of experimental social science literature explores how attribution of public service delivery matters for politics (e.g. Martin and Raffler, 2021; Raffler, 2022; Grossman and Slough, 2022). A second, mostly observational, literature explains how groups engaged in armed conflict with the state ("rebels") govern areas during and after conflict (e.g. Loyle et al., 2021). We use a randomized control trial (RCT) of a mental health and psycho-social skills program provided by ethnic health organisations (EHOs) in areas outside of full Myanmar government control and ask: What is the impact of public service provision on preferences about governance in conflict-affected areas? Under what conditions does external support for civilian activities by non-state organisations shape legitimacy, social cohesion and loyalty?

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Cerkez, Nicolas et al. 2026. "Credit Where Credit is Due: Attribution and Rebel Governance in Conflict-Affected Myanmar." AEA RCT Registry. March 05. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15406-1.2

Sponsors & Partners

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

Intervention (Hidden)

We study the political economy of providing a public good to individuals living in rural Kayin, Myanmar. The precise intervention we study was registered under RCT ID: AEARCTR-0012552. We randomly allocate a mental health or group solidarity program amongst 90 villages in partnership with the local government. The mental health intervention, described in more detail in the PAP, consists of ten weekly meetings, covering topics such as "stress", "depression and anxiety", "resilience and self-care", or "stress management". The program is a version of the widely known CETA program. The group solidarity program also consists of ten weekly meetings where participants meet to conduct group activities, such as for example cooking or planting trees.

Intervention Start Date

2023-02-06

Intervention End Date

2023-06-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Variables measuring what entity (e.g., local or national government) individuals want to provide public goods. See PAP for details.

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

See PAP for details.

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

See PAP for details.

Experimental Design Details

Our design spans 90 villages in Myanmar. We randomly split our 90 villages into three:
- 30 villages serve as a control group (no treatment)
- 30 villages receive the mental health intervention (treatment 1)
- 30 villages receive the group solidarity treatment (treatment 2).
We additionally cross-randomize 15 villages in both treatment 1 and treatment 2 to receive an additional religious treatment. This religious treatment consists of a "prayer for others" at the beginning of the group sessions.
Within each village, 13 participants were identified (with the help of village elders/local leaders) to be part of the study.

Randomization Method

Randomization done in office by a computer

Randomization Unit

The village within Kayin, Myanmar.

Was the treatment clustered?

Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

90 villages (30 control, 30 treatment 1, 30 treatment 2)
13 individuals per village
1170 individuals in total

Sample size: planned number of observations

1170

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

30 villages: control
30 villages: group solidarity treatment (+15 of these villages get a light tough religious intervention)
30 villages: mental health intervention (+15 of these villages get a light tough religious intervention)

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB