Regulating Risk: A Stress-Related Intervention for Loss Aversion

Last registered on January 28, 2026

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

Regulating Risk: A Stress-Related Intervention for Loss Aversion

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0017757

Initial registration date

January 23, 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 28, 2026, 7:35 AM EST

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

Locations

Country

United States of America

Region

Arizona

Primary Investigator

Name

Carola Grebitus

Affiliation

Arizona State University

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Nilufer Cetik

PI Affiliation

Arizona State University

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

In development

Start date

2026-01-26

End date

2026-02-13

Keywords

Behavior, Lab

Additional Keywords

Probability weighting, Loss aversion, Prospect theory, Economics experiments, Randomized Controlled Trial

JEL code(s)

C91, D81, D91

Secondary IDs

OSF: https://osf.io/ye9k2

Prior work

This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.

Abstract

This study examines whether a brief Non-Sleep Deep Rest (NSDR) session can reduce loss aversion, a common cognitive bias where people tend to react more strongly to potential losses than to equivalent gains. Loss aversion plays a major role in behaviors related to finances, health, and risk-taking, and it is often heightened under stress.
We will conduct a laboratory experiment with approximately 600 adult participants. Each participant will be randomly assigned to one of two groups. The treatment group will listen to a short NSDR audio recording, while the control group will listen to a neutral audio recording of equal length. Before and after the audio session, participants will complete a series of economic choices involving real monetary gains and losses. These choices will be used to estimate a loss aversion coefficient for each participant. We will then compare changes in behavior between the two groups. Self-reported stress levels will also be measured before and after the intervention to examine whether reductions in stress explain any change in decision-making.
In a secondary task, participants will select a snack from a small, medium, or large set of options. After the audio session, they will be reminded of their original selection and given the opportunity to either confirm or change it. We will examine whether the complexity of the choice set and the NSDR session influence switching behavior, especially with regard to changes between healthy and unhealthy options.
The goal of this study is to evaluate whether a low-cost, non-pharmacological intervention like NSDR can improve economic decision-making and support self-regulation under conditions of stress.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Cetik, Nilufer and Carola Grebitus. 2026. "Regulating Risk: A Stress-Related Intervention for Loss Aversion." AEA RCT Registry. January 28. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17757-1.0

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)

Participants in the treatment group will experience a guided audio session based on Non-Sleep Deep Rest (NSDR), a form of deep relaxation that involves being still with eyes closed while listening to calming, structured instructions designed to reduce stress and increase focus. The NSDR session lasts approximately 10 minutes and is delivered via headphones in a quiet laboratory setting. Participants in the control group will listen to a neutral audio recording of the same duration. This recording contains emotionally neutral content to match the treatment condition in terms of length, tone, and attention demands, but without the relaxation or stress-reducing elements of NSDR.
Both audio recordings are presented before participants continue to complete a series of economic and behavioral decision-making tasks. The intervention is designed to test whether brief exposure to NSDR influences how individuals evaluate risk and regulate their choices under stress.

Intervention (Hidden)

We use a short Non-Sleep Deep Rest (NSDR) audio recording as the treatment condition to test whether reducing stress can influence loss aversion and risk-related decision-making. NSDR is a passive relaxation protocol that guides participants through a calm, structured audio without requiring active focus or effort. The script includes instructions for breathing and body awareness and is designed to reduce arousal while maintaining alertness. The control group listens to a neutral audio recording of the same length and tone. The content is emotionally neutral and descriptive, with no intention to relax or activate the participant. Both recordings last approximately ten minutes.
The intervention is designed to isolate the effect of a stress-reducing experience on economic decision-making, especially sensitivity to losses. Prior research suggests that stress may amplify loss aversion. If a brief, low-effort intervention like NSDR alters participants' willingness to accept risk or affects the weight they place on losses, that would provide evidence that loss aversion is at least partially state-dependent.

Intervention Start Date

2026-01-26

Intervention End Date

2026-02-13

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

The main outcome of interest is the loss aversion coefficient estimated from participants’ choices in the lottery task. This captures how strongly individuals weigh potential losses relative to gains when making decisions under risk.
A second key outcome is the probability weighting parameter, which reflects how participants perceive and respond to different levels of probability in risky decisions. Both parameters will be estimated using a structural model based on Prospect Theory.
We will also measure within-subject change in loss aversion from pre- to post-intervention, and compare these changes between the treatment and control groups. This allows us to test whether the intervention reduces loss aversion relative to baseline.

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

As a secondary behavioral outcome, we will analyze snack choice switching, specifically whether participants switch from a healthy to an unhealthy option (or vice versa) after the intervention. This helps us explore the broader impact of the intervention on decision stability and self-control.

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two audio conditions and will complete a series of decision-making tasks involving monetary choices. Participants will also complete a behavioral choice task involving snack selection. The study will take place in a controlled laboratory environment, and group assignment will be randomized using a computer-based procedure. All procedures have been approved through the appropriate ethics review process.

Experimental Design Details

This is a lab-based randomized controlled experiment designed to test whether a brief stress-reduction intervention affects loss aversion and risk preferences. Participants are randomly assigned to one of two audio conditions: a Non-Sleep Deep Rest (NSDR) treatment or a neutral control. Assignment is stratified by baseline stress level to ensure balance across groups.
Before the intervention, all participants complete a baseline set of lottery choices designed to estimate individual loss aversion. After the audio, they complete a second set of similar lottery choices. The lotteries involve real monetary outcomes and are incentive-compatible. Some trials hold probabilities constant (e.g., 50/50), while others vary probabilities to allow for estimation of both loss aversion and probability weighting.
In addition to the economic decision task, participants complete a snack choice task. They are randomly assigned to a set size condition (4, 9, or 16 snack options). They choose one snack before the audio and are given the chance to revise or confirm their choice afterward. Snack options are pre-categorized as healthy or unhealthy. We will analyze whether participants switch, and whether the direction of the switch (healthy to unhealthy or vice versa) is influenced by treatment condition and choice complexity.
Participants also complete pre- and post-intervention stress measures. The full session lasts approximately 75 minutes, and all data are collected in person under supervised conditions.

Randomization Method

This is a randomized controlled lab experiment designed to test whether a brief Non-Sleep Deep Rest (NSDR) audio intervention influences loss aversion, probability weighting, and decision stability under stress. Participants are randomly assigned by computer to one of two groups: the NSDR treatment or a neutral audio control. Randomization is stratified based on pre-intervention stress levels, assessed through a short questionnaire at the beginning of the session.
Participants also take part in a snack choice task. They are randomly assigned to one of three choice set sizes (4, 9, or 16 snack options) by the computer, make an initial selection before the audio intervention, and are given a chance to revise or confirm their choice afterward.

Randomization Unit

The unit of randomization is the individual participant. Each participant is independently assigned by computer to either the NSDR treatment group or the neutral audio control group. Randomization is stratified based on baseline stress level, measured at the start of the session. Additional randomization occurs at the individual level for two secondary components: Snack choice set size (4, 9, or 16 options) and incentivization of the Oprea (2024) lottery task, where one in ten participants is randomly selected for real payout.

Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

600 individuals will be randomly assigned into control and treatment groups. No clusters are defined.

Sample size: planned number of observations

600 individuals

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

1) 300 individuals in control group (neutral audio recording), 300 individuals in treatment group (NSDR audio recording)
2) 200 individuals will have 4 options, 200 individuals will have 9 options, 200 individuals will have 16 options available for snack choices

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB