The Impact of Technology on Electoral Participation in South Africa

Last registered on December 02, 2016
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
The Impact of Technology on Electoral Participation in South Africa
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0001705
Initial registration date
December 02, 2016

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
December 02, 2016, 1:35 PM EST

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

Locations

Country
South Africa
Region
Africa

Primary Investigator

Name
Craig McIntosh
Affiliation
IRPS/UCSD
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
James D. Long
PI Affiliation
University of Washington
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Danielle F. Jung
PI Affiliation
Emory University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Clark Gibson
PI Affiliation
University of California, San Diego
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Karen Ferree
PI Affiliation
University of California, San Diego
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2014-04-07
End date
2014-05-07
Keywords
Electoral, Governance
Additional Keywords
Technology, Citizen participation, Political engagement
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Can new technology be used to improve the quality of democracy by boosting citizen participation? In this paper we report on the VIP:Voice platform, which was constructed to allow South African citizens to engage politically through an ICT platform, to report on political events in their communities, and to monitor their polling places on election day. We sent out over 50 million 'Please Call Me' messages encouraging South Africans to register on the system, and provided a multi-channel platform allowing citizens to engage politically via low-tech mobile phones and high-tech social media. We find starkly different demographic profiles of users across channels, indicating that the success of efforts to overcome marginalization using ICT will be partially determined by the technological channel used. Attrition of users across each step in the engagement process is high, and while thousands of citizens are willing to engage in costly political actions based only on intrinsic motivation, extrinsic incentives induce large increases in participation rates. Using the platform, we were able to recruit citizen volunteers willing to monitor 12 percent of the polling stations in 38 percent of the wards in the country.
External Link(s)
J-PAL Evaluation Summary

Registration Citation

Citation
Ferree, Karen et al. 2016. "The Impact of Technology on Electoral Participation in South Africa." AEA RCT Registry. December 02. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.1705-1.0
Former Citation
Ferree, Karen et al. 2016. "The Impact of Technology on Electoral Participation in South Africa." AEA RCT Registry. December 02. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/1705/history/12212
Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Phase 1: Individuals were encouraged to register for the platform and were either required to pay all associated fees (messaging costs, etc.) themselves (standard arm); were promised to have their interaction fees covered (free arm); or were entered into a lottery for R55 when they registered (lottery arm).

Phase 2: All respondents were asked to complete five separate pre-election surveys. Participants completed a brief set of demographic questions, a "What's Up?" survey about local campaign activities; the "VIP" survey which was a standard set of polling questions; a "Push" survey about local political activities; and a "Thermometer" survey about voting intentions.

Phase 3: Individuals who registered as volunteer COs were either offered R5 or R50 as an incentive to complete their tasks. The set of tasks expected of COs involved returning to polling stations on the day after the election to observe whether or not a tally sheet had been posted, to submit information about the tally via SMS, and, if equipped with a phone that could take photos, to take a photograph of the results sheet.

Phase 4: Individuals were reminded to vote with one of three messages: a simple reminder which acted as the control; a reminder plus an 'intrinsic' message which included reference to the "voice" dimension of political participation; or a reminder plus an 'extrinsic' treatment which included a message reminding citizens that their inked finger would show others that they had voted (visibility), designed to activate considerations of social pressure to vote. Two surveys were also given in Phase 4 - one of voter experience at polling stations (with free participation), and a second post-election survey to gauge satisfaction with the electoral process (incentivized with a lottery).
Intervention Start Date
2014-04-07
Intervention End Date
2014-05-07

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Political participation, Demographics of participants by platform
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Political participation rates were measured in the absence/presence of extrinsic incentives, and when lotteries versus small expected value transfers were given. Researchers also measured the influence of the different technology platforms on engaging participants.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Researchers designed and deployed a unique ICT/DM platform to conduct series of experiments during South Africa's 2014 national election. In Phase 1, one month before the election, researchers recruited South African citizens into the ICT/DM platform. In Phase 2, respondents completed a series of demographic and election related surveys. Phase 3 included recruiting a set of volunteers from the initial respondents to serve as Citizen Observers (COs) on voting day. In Phase 4, researchers implemented a Get Out the Vote (GOTV) reminder experiment, accompanied by two surveys.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
50 million initial 'Please Call Me' messages were sent out
Sample size: planned number of observations
50 million
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
50 million individuals initially contacted. Subsequent treatments were randomized once participants opted in.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Study has received IRB approval. Details not available.
IRB Approval Date
Details not available
IRB Approval Number
Details not available
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?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
May 07, 2014, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
May 07, 2014, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
90,646 individuals registered for the platform
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
Yes
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
90,646 individuals registered for the platform
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Phase 1: 90,646 individuals registered for the platform. Phase 2: 34,718 individuals completed a demographic survey. 15,461 individuals completed a demographic survey plus one of the other election related surveys. Phase 3: 41,863 individuals were invited to participate as COs. 2,498 individuals agreed to participate as COs. Phase 4: 77,878 individuals were sent a GOTV message. 5,038 responded to questions on participation. 6,978 supplied information on voter experience.
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Abstract
Using Technology to Promote Participation in Emerging Democracies: VIP:Voice and the 2014 South African Election
Citation
Ferree, Karen, Clark Gibson, Danielle Jung, James Long and Craig McIntosh. "Using Technology to Promote Participation in Emerging Democracies: VIP:Voice and the 2014 South African Election." Working Paper, November 2015.
URL
https://www.povertyactionlab.org/sites/default/files/publications/3899%20Technology%20and%20Participation%20in%20SA%20Oct2015_5.pdf
Abstract
Can technology help citizens overcome barriers to participation in emerging democracies? We argue that, by lowering costs, technology brings new participants into the political process. However, by shaping the selection of participants, it also generates a “crowd” that is both more responsive to incentives (malleable) and more sensitive to costs (fragile). We illustrate these dynamics using VIP:Voice, a novel, multi-channel information and communication technology/digital media (ICT/DM) platform that we built to encourage South African political engagement during the 2014 national elections. VIP:Voice recruited South Africans through a variety of methods and allowed citizens to engage via low-tech mobile phones and high-tech social media. VIP:Voice generated engagement in over 250,000 South Africans, but saw large attrition as people were asked to switch from low-cost digital engagement to high-cost, real-world engagement. The implementation of a standard platform across multiple technology channels, combined with a set of experiments in the role incentives play in driving participation, reveal how technology shapes not just the level of participation but the very nature of the crowd that forms.
Citation
Ferree, Karen, Clark Gibson, Danielle Jung, James Long and Craig McIntosh. "How Technology Shapes the Crowd: Participation in the 2014 South African Election" Working Paper, April 2016.
URL
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55af94b0e4b0cc8a396f8c40/t/572221e52eeb818e05d4b2fe/1461854694098/SA_ICT_2016.pdf

Reports & Other Materials