Belief Disagreement and Instability under Stochastic Recall

Last registered on January 22, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Belief Disagreement and Instability under Stochastic Recall
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0017671
Initial registration date
January 19, 2026

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 22, 2026, 1:51 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
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
2026-01-19
End date
2027-01-18
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 cross-sectional belief disagreement and within-individual belief instability. In Part 1 of the experiment, decisions makers need to form beliefs about the unobserved value of a hypothetical company. They receive a sequence of 20 binary signals. We examine how disagreement is affected by the degree of information ambivalence and recalling efforts. In Part 2, we follow up with respondents one day after the Part 1 to re-elicit their beliefs and recalls.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Kuang, Pei, Li Tang and Michael Weber. 2026. "Belief Disagreement and Instability under Stochastic Recall." AEA RCT Registry. January 22. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17671-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
In Part 1 of the experiment, 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. Some participants receive “stop-and-think” instructions to increase recall effort and the probability of correct recall. Participants then state their belief about the company’s type based on what they remember. In Part 2, we follow up with these respondents one day after Part 1 and re-elicit their beliefs about the company’s type based on what they remember from Part 1.
Intervention Start Date
2026-01-20
Intervention End Date
2026-12-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Our primary variable of interest is participants’ belief about whether the company is of good or bad quality, as well as the associated probability, after observing the news sequence. The main outcome is the level of cross-sectional belief disagreement and within-individual belief instability for participants exposed to the same information in both Parts 1 and 2. We also collect measures of participants’ recall of the number of positive and negative news items they received in both Parts 1 and 2.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
In Part 1 of the experiment, 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. Some participants also receive “stop-and-think” instructions to increase recall effort and the probability of correct recall. One day after Part 1, we re-invite these respondents to participate in Part 2, where we re-elicit their beliefs and 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 2000 participants in Part 1 and follow-up with them one day later in Part 2.
Sample size: planned number of observations
2000 participants in Part 1.
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