Back to History Current Version

Ethical values in business decisions

Last registered on October 13, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Ethical values in business decisions
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0016953
Initial registration date
October 07, 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
October 13, 2025, 9:51 AM EDT

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

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Chicago

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Booth School of Business, The University of Chicago
PI Affiliation
Harvard University
PI Affiliation
Booth School of Business, The University of Chicago

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2025-10-15
End date
2025-11-10
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Can corporations do evil without being run by evil people? If so, why? This study explores these questions through a survey experiment. Participants face a moral trade-off involving a financially beneficial yet ethically costly decision. The experimental design randomly varies contextual and structural features of the decision to examine how each factor influences the decision-making process. In addition, we aim to analyze individual heterogeneity using measures from moral psychology to understand why participants differ in their responses. The goal is to shed light on how context and incentives shape moral judgment.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Hart, Oliver et al. 2025. "Ethical values in business decisions." AEA RCT Registry. October 13. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.16953-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2025-10-15
Intervention End Date
2025-11-10

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
We intend to use the responses of the survey to answer a number of questions about the drivers of such a decision-making process. Such questions include, but are not limited to, the following:

- Other things being equal, are business decisions affected by the context in which they are made?
- How are decision-makers affected by whether they personally earn money out of the campaign?
- Do respondents feel responsible for the negative consequences of the campaign? Do they implement some cost-benefit analysis?
- Does the number of individuals the decision is shared with impact the decision-making process (in the case of shareholders)?
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We intend to disseminate the survey through a professional polling firm.
Experimental Design Details
We intend to disseminate the survey to a single group of individuals: U.S. citizens with a defined contribution pension plan or an individual retirement account. To construct this group, we rely on a professional polling firm. We briefly summarize the questions that subjects will receive.

In the first section of the survey, each subject will be randomly assigned one of the following treatments:

Treatment A: Sole owner of a soda company
In the first question, the hypothetical individual is the sole owner of a soda company, that could expand the sales of sugary sodas in Africa. This increase in sugar consumption will generate a number of premature deaths. Furthermore, if the marketing campaign is implemented, net profits will increase by a certain amount. The subject is asked to choose between approving or not the marketing campaign.

Treatment B: CEO of a soda company with a variable salary
The question is framed as Treatment A, except for the hypothetical individual being the CEO of the same company, who receives a fixed salary and a variable compensation equal to 10% of the company's net profits.

Treatment C: CEO of a soda company with a variable salary, presenting the campaign at the Board meeting
The question is framed as Treatment A, except for the hypothetical individual being the CEO of the same company, who receives a fixed salary and a variable compensation equal to 10% of the company's net profits. Moreover, in this case, the CEO is asked to choose between presenting or not the campaign at the Board meeting.

Treatment D: CEO of a soda company with a fixed salary
The question is framed as Treatment A, except for the hypothetical individual being the CEO of the same company, whose salary is not linked to the company's performance.

Treatment E: Shareholder in a soda company
The subject is one of a certain number (30 vs 3,000, depending on the randomization) of shareholders in a soda company, who is asked to vote on the preferred strategy. If the decision is implemented, net profits will increase by a certain amount. The subject is asked to choose between voting to approve or to stop the marketing campaign.

Treatment F: Person who can transform a not-for-profit foundation into a for-profit organization
The respondent is now asked to decide whether to transform a not-for-profit foundation dedicated to alerting the population in Africa to the adverse health consequences of sugar consumption into a for-profit organization.

In the second section of the survey, respondents are asked additional questions to assess their perceived responsibility for the negative consequences of the campaign, as well as any cost-benefit analysis they might have considered in reaching their decision.

In the third section of the survey, respondents will be asked a set of socio-demographic questions regarding their academic background (e.g., the highest degree achieved); their age and gender; their economic and political leaning; who they voted in the last U.S. election; their degree of trust in large corporations, health professionals, and the government; their income; whether they own any stock outside of their defined contribution plan; and whether they were brought up religiously.
Randomization Method
Randomization done by Qualtrics
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Single group of individuals
Sample size: planned number of observations
3,000
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
500
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
The University of Chicago IRB
IRB Approval Date
2025-03-26
IRB Approval Number
IRB24-1460

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