Calibrating Ambition: Goal Setting with Information on Goal Size and Performance among Similar Student

Last registered on November 19, 2025
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Calibrating Ambition: Goal Setting with Information on Goal Size and Performance among Similar Student
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0017061
Initial registration date
November 17, 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
November 19, 2025, 2:43 PM EST

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Name
Sarah Rezaei
Affiliation
Utrecht University
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Bastian Westbrock
PI Affiliation
Swansea University
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2025-11-10
End date
2029-12-31
Keywords
Behavior, Education, Gender, Labor
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study tests whether providing students with information about how others with similar midterm grades performed after setting different types of goals helps them set more effective and realistic goals. During the experiment, students enrolled in an undergraduate microeconomics course are asked to set a target grade for their final exam. Before doing so, some students receive a table showing how previous students with similar midterm grades performed depending on the size of the goal they set (no goal, small, moderate, or high). We examine whether this “outside view” information influences goal choice, study effort, and final exam performance compared to students who receive no information. The findings will shed light on whether third-party performance information can improve goal calibration and academic outcomes.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Rezaei, Sarah and Bastian Westbrock. 2025. "Calibrating Ambition: Goal Setting with Information on Goal Size and Performance among Similar Student." AEA RCT Registry. November 19. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17061-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Students in an undergraduate economics course are randomly assigned to one of two groups. One group is asked to set a goal for their final-exam grade. The other group, before setting a goal, sees information showing how students with similar midterm grades performed in the past depending on the size of the goal they set. The study examines whether this information helps students choose more effective goals and improve their final performance.
Intervention Start Date
2029-06-01
Intervention End Date
2029-09-01

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Final exam grade

Goal attainment (whether the final grade meets or exceeds the goal)

Goal level (numerical or categorized as small, moderate, high)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Final exam grade (0–10 scale): the main measure of academic performance obtained from course administrative records.

Goal attainment: an indicator equal to 1 if the student’s final exam grade is greater than or equal to their stated goal, and 0 otherwise (defined only for those who set a goal).

Goal level: the numeric value of the goal chosen (or categorical bins: small, moderate, high).

These outcomes allow testing whether providing information about similar students’ past outcomes affects (i) the ambition level of goals and (ii) academic performance.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Students enrolled in an undergraduate microeconomics course are randomly assigned to one of two groups during an online activity before their final exam. All students are asked to set a target grade for their final exam. One group sets a goal directly, while the other group first sees information showing how students with similar midterm grades performed in the past depending on the goal size they set. After setting their goals, all students continue with the normal course and final exam. The study compares goal choices and final exam results between the two groups to test whether providing information about similar students helps participants choose more realistic and effective goals.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization will be done automatically via Qualtrics
Randomization Unit
individual students
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
several undergraduate classes (2-5)
Sample size: planned number of observations
500 students
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
300 per treatments
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Utrecht University- Utrecht School of Economics
IRB Approval Date
2024-08-14
IRB Approval Number
24-021
Analysis Plan