Disagreement under Imperfect Memory: Theory and Evidence

Last registered on November 10, 2025
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Disagreement under Imperfect Memory: Theory and Evidence
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0017150
Initial registration date
November 09, 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 10, 2025, 10:07 AM 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
Li Tang
Affiliation
University of Birmingham
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Pei Kuang
PI Affiliation
University of Macau
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Michael Weber
PI Affiliation
Purdue University
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2025-11-16
End date
2026-11-30
Keywords
Behavior
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
E31, D84, C83
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
We study how imperfect human memory shapes disagreement. In the experiment, decisions makers need to form beliefs about the unobserved value of a hypothetical company. They receive a sequence of 20 binary signals. Under the controlled environment, we examine how disagreement is affected by the degree of information ambivalence, recalling efforts, and contextual cue.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Kuang, Pei, Li Tang and Michael Weber. 2025. "Disagreement under Imperfect Memory: Theory and Evidence." AEA RCT Registry. November 10. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17150-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Participants are told about a hypothetical company that can be of good or bad quality and receive a sequence of 20 signals or news about it sequentially. Each news item is either positive or negative, with the mix of good and bad news varying across conditions. In some conditions, participants are given small incentives to improve recall accuracy. In others, participants are presented contextual images or cues. Participants then state their belief about the company’s type based on what they remember.
Intervention Start Date
2025-11-17
Intervention End Date
2026-05-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Our primary variable of interest is participants’ belief about whether the company is of good or bad quality (and the related probability) after seeing the news sequence. The main outcome is the level of disagreement in these beliefs across participants exposed to the same information. We also collect measures of participants’ recall of the number of positive and negative news items they have received.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Our secondary outcome records participants’ recall of the type of news at specific positions in the sequence they received.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Participants are presented with a sequence of 20 news items about a hypothetical company that can be of good or bad quality. Each news item is either positive or negative, and the mix of good and bad news varies across conditions. Participants form a belief about the company’s quality after seeing the sequence. They are also asked to recall the number of good and bad news items they received, as well as the type of news appearing at specific positions in the sequence. Some participants are given a cue that prompts a certain type of news or receive “stop-and-think” instructions or monetary incentives to increase recall effort and the probability of correct recall.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Done within qualtrics using javascript.
Randomization Unit
Individual-level.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
We plan to collect data from around 4500 participants.
Sample size: planned number of observations
4500 participants.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
500 in each groups.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Reading Research Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2025-10-24
IRB Approval Number
N/A
Analysis Plan