Waiting Instead of Working: Experimental Evidence on Willingness to Work after Delayed Task Access

Last registered on January 06, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Waiting Instead of Working: Experimental Evidence on Willingness to Work after Delayed Task Access
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0017424
Initial registration date
December 27, 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
January 06, 2026, 7:06 AM EST

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

Locations

Country
Zambia
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Anna Veri
Affiliation
Kiel University
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-01-04
End date
2026-08-21
Keywords
Behavior, Labor
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Legal or administrative barriers—such as employment bans for asylum seekers—can prevent people from working even when they initially would like to. This study examines whether such temporary barriers reduce people’s willingness to work even after the barriers are removed and explores possible mechanisms driving this effect.

In a multi-day online experiment, participants repeatedly choose between a well-paid work option and a lower-paid leisure option. In one treatment, participants are repeatedly prevented from carrying out the work option they choose and are instead assigned to leisure, creating a situation in which access to work is externally restricted. In a control group, participants always have full access to the work option.

The central hypothesis is that being repeatedly prevented from working reduces participants’ subsequent willingness to choose the work option, even once access is restored. Possible mechanisms explored include reduced motivation and habit formation.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Veri, Anna. 2026. "Waiting Instead of Working: Experimental Evidence on Willingness to Work after Delayed Task Access ." AEA RCT Registry. January 06. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17424-1.0
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)
Intervention Start Date
2026-01-04
Intervention End Date
2026-01-21

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Participants’ choice between the work option and the leisure option on days 16–18
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The outcome is recorded as a binary variable at the daily level for each participant and can be aggregated at the participant level as the total number of work choices during this period (range: 0–3).

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Motivation scores, learned helplessness scores, habit formation scores, and participants’ choices between the work and leisure options across all days of the study.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Motivation is measured on days 4 and 15 using an adapted version of the Work Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Scale (WEIMS), modified for the experimental work–leisure choice context. Responses to the 10 items are aggregated into an overall motivation score as well as intrinsic and extrinsic motivation sub-scores.
Learned helplessness is measured on day 16 using a six-item, context-specific questionnaire inspired by Quinless and Nelson (1988). Responses are combined into a single learned helplessness score.
Habit formation is measured on day 18 using the Self-Report Habit Index (SRHI; Verplanken & Orbell, 2003), with 12 items referring to the leisure option. Responses are summed to construct a habit strength score.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This study uses a multi-day online experiment in which participants choose daily between a work option and a leisure option. Participants are recruited through the smartphone app Liseli Decision Lab in Zambia and are randomly assigned to one of two treatments.
During the initial part of the study, participants in both treatments can freely choose between the work and leisure options. The key treatment difference occurs after the first four days: in the Control treatment, choices are always implemented as selected, whereas in the Rejection treatment, choices of the work option are frequently not implemented, resulting in participants being assigned to the leisure option instead.
Toward the end of the study, choices are again fully implemented in both treatments. These final days constitute the main outcome period used to compare behaviour across treatments. In addition to daily choices, questionnaires are administered at predefined points during the study.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization is conducted at the individual level using a random number generator implemented in Microsoft Excel. Each participant who is allowed to proceed with the study after day 4 (has missed no more than one day so far) is assigned a random number between 1 and 100. Assignment to the Control or Rejection treatment is based on whether this number falls above or below a predefined cutoff.
Randomization Unit
Individual participants
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
-
Sample size: planned number of observations
300 participants who complete the study (after application of the exclusion criteria) are targeted. Pilot evidence indicates that not all participants who register one week before the start of the study actually begin participation or remain until completion. Accordingly, approximately 430 participants are initially recruited to account for expected non-start and attrition. As a result, depending on realized participation, attrition, and the pre-specified exclusion criteria, the final analytic sample may be smaller or larger than 300.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Approximately 150 participants in Control and 150 participants in Rejection.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Zentrale Ethikkommission der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel
IRB Approval Date
2025-06-30
IRB Approval Number
ZEK-43/25
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information