|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
June 09, 2025 09:18 AM
|
After
June 09, 2025 10:06 AM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
We conduct an experimental survey, in which respondents are randomly assigned to one of two main treatment groups or a control group, designed to assess the impact of emotions on policy attitudes:
Positive emotion treatment branch: Respondents watch two one-minute relaxation videos (before the trade and wealth \& taxation blocks) designed to induce calm, and the open-ended policy questions in each policy block are framed in a positive way, prompting optimism. The first video features serene landscapes—green fields, a lake, an eagle in flight, a cyclist by the water, lavender fields, and snow-capped mountains—accompanied by peaceful music. The second video showcases tranquil mountain scenery, a blue sky, a flowing river, and a lush green forest from above, also with peaceful music.
Negative emotion treatment branch: Respondents watch two one-minute anger-inducing videos (before the trade and wealth \& taxation blocks) designed to evoke anger, and the open-ended policy questions in each policy block are framed negatively, further prompting anger. The first video is a one-minute video highlighting government corruption and corporate greed as causes of worsening disasters. It focuses on a wildfire ignited by PG\&E’s failure to replace aging electrical line hooks, which resulted in 84 corporate homicide charges, showing the victims and the destruction caused. The second video is a one-minute video highlighting government favoritism toward corporations and the lack of real accountability. It details how PG&E, despite making \$17 billion annually, faced only a \$3.5 million fine—the maximum penalty under California law—for the wildfire caused by its negligence. The video also exposes how the California Public Utility Commission refused to assist in prosecuting PG\&E, withholding evidence that could have strengthened the case against the company.
Control branch: The open-ended policy questions at the beginning of each policy block are framed in a neutral way.
To be able to disentangle the effect of the video from the effect of the framed question, we also added two secondary treatment groups:
Effect of the framed question only: The open-ended policy questions at the beginning of each policy block are framed in a negative way, prompting anger.
Effect of the video only: Respondents watch the same two relaxation videos and the open-ended policy questions are framed neutrally.
|
After
We conduct three experimental surveys.
In Survey A, respondents are randomly assigned to one of two main treatment groups or a control group, designed to assess the impact of emotions on policy attitudes:
Positive emotion treatment branch: Respondents watch two one-minute relaxation videos (before the trade and wealth \& taxation blocks) designed to induce calm, and the open-ended policy questions in each policy block are framed in a positive way, prompting optimism. The first video features serene landscapes—green fields, a lake, an eagle in flight, a cyclist by the water, lavender fields, and snow-capped mountains—accompanied by peaceful music. The second video showcases tranquil mountain scenery, a blue sky, a flowing river, and a lush green forest from above, also with peaceful music.
Negative emotion treatment branch: Respondents watch two one-minute anger-inducing videos (before the trade and wealth \& taxation blocks) designed to evoke anger, and the open-ended policy questions in each policy block are framed negatively, further prompting anger. The first video is a one-minute video highlighting government corruption and corporate greed as causes of worsening disasters. It focuses on a wildfire ignited by PG\&E’s failure to replace aging electrical line hooks, which resulted in 84 corporate homicide charges, showing the victims and the destruction caused. The second video is a one-minute video highlighting government favoritism toward corporations and the lack of real accountability. It details how PG&E, despite making \$17 billion annually, faced only a \$3.5 million fine—the maximum penalty under California law—for the wildfire caused by its negligence. The video also exposes how the California Public Utility Commission refused to assist in prosecuting PG\&E, withholding evidence that could have strengthened the case against the company.
Control branch: The open-ended policy questions at the beginning of each policy block are framed in a neutral way.
To be able to disentangle the effect of the video from the effect of the framed question, we also added two secondary treatment groups:
Effect of the framed question only: The open-ended policy questions at the beginning of each policy block are framed in a negative way, prompting anger.
Effect of the video only: Respondents watch the same two relaxation videos and the open-ended policy questions are framed neutrally.
In Survey B, respondents are randomly assigned to one of three main treatment groups or a control group, designed to dig further the impact of negative emotions distinguishing fear from anger.
Anger treatment branch: Respondents watch the same two one-minute anger-inducing videos as in Survey A.
Fear treatment branch: Respondents watch two one-minute fear-inducing.
Positive emotion treatment branch: Respondents watch the same two one-minute relaxation videos as in Survey A but are not asked the positively framed open-ended question.
In Survey C, respondents are randomly shown a Tweet with an emotional tone (anger, fear or positive) on a specific policy topic and are asked whether they'd like to retweet it.
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
The key outcome variables of the experiment are policy views on five topics: trade, immigration, taxes and redistribution, democracy/governance and society issues.
|
After
The key outcome variables of these experiments are policy views on five topics: trade, immigration, taxes and redistribution, democracy/governance, society issues, climate change and whether people are willing to retweet a message.
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
We randomize respondents into one of the 4 treatment groups or control groups. We then compare the policy views of the respondents of the two main treatment groups (video + framed questions) to the policy views of the respondents of the control group. To be able to disentangle the effect of the video from the effect of the framed question, we also compare the policy views of the respondents of two secondary treatment groups to the policy views of the control group.
|
After
We randomize respondents into one of the treatment groups or control group. We then compare the policy views or retweeting behavior of the respondents of the treatment groups to the policy views of the respondents of the control group.
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Clusters
|
Before
The planned number of clusters is around 4,000 individuals.
|
After
The planned number of clusters is around 4,000 individuals.
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Observations
|
Before
Approximately 4,000 individuals.
|
After
Approximately 4,000 individuals in each survey.
|
|
Field
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
|
Before
The sample is divided into 5 arms: 820 respondents receive the main negative treatment (video + negatively framed question), 720 respondents receive the main positive treatment (video + negatively framed question), 820 respondents constitue the control group, 820 respondents receive the secondary treatment (negative question only) and 820 respondents receive the other secondary treatment (video relax + neutrally framed question).
|
After
Survey A: The sample is divided into 5 arms: 820 respondents receive the main negative treatment (video + negatively framed question), 720 respondents receive the main positive treatment (video + negatively framed question), 820 respondents constitue the control group, 820 respondents receive the secondary treatment (negative question only) and 820 respondents receive the other secondary treatment (video relax + neutrally framed question).
Survey B: The sample is divided into 4 arms: 1, 000 respondents receive the anger treatment, 1, 000 respondents receive the fear treatment, 1, 000 respondents receive the positive treatment, 1, 000 respondents are assigned to the control group.
Survey C: The sample is divided into 8 arms: 500 respondents see the anger pro-policy Tweet, 500 respondents see the fear pro-policy Tweet, 500 respondents see the positive emotion pro-policy Tweet, 500 respondents see the neutral pro-policy Tweet, 500 respondents see the anger anti-policy Tweet, 500 respondents see the fear anti-policy Tweet, 500 respondents see the positive emotion anti-policy Tweet, 500 respondents see the neutral anti-policy Tweet.
|