Belief Disagreement and Instability under Stochastic Recall: Quantitative Beliefs

Last registered on February 04, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Belief Disagreement and Instability under Stochastic Recall: Quantitative Beliefs
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0017805
Initial registration date
January 31, 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
February 04, 2026, 10:12 AM EST

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

Last updated
February 04, 2026, 11:48 AM EST

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

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
2026-02-01
End date
2027-01-31
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 memory shapes belief formation, cross-sectional belief disagreement, and within-individual belief dynamics over time. In a two-part online study, participants are randomly assigned to one of three groups, each of which views the same sequence of numerical data generated from a stationary AR(1) process. After observing the sequence, participants report recall of realized values and estimate the underlying mean of the process, allowing us to isolate the role of imperfect memory in belief formation in a controlled statistical environment. One day later, participants are recontacted to re-elicit beliefs and recall of the previously presented data, enabling us to measure belief disagreement across individuals and belief changes within individuals over time.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Kuang, Pei, Li Tang and Michael Weber. 2026. "Belief Disagreement and Instability under Stochastic Recall: Quantitative Beliefs." AEA RCT Registry. February 04. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17805-1.1
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Participants take part in a two-part online study.

In Part 1, participants are randomly assigned to one of three groups. Participants are randomly assigned at the individual level to one of three experimental conditions with equal probability. Randomization is implemented by the survey software prior to the start of the task and is independent of participant characteristics. The three conditions differ only in the persistence and noisiness of the underlying data-generating process from which participants observe a sequence of 20 numerical realizations.

Group 1 observes a low-persistence, low-noise process and serves as the control condition. Group 2 observes a high-persistence, low-noise process Group 3 observes a high-persistence, high-noise process

Aside from the persistence and noise parameters of the process, all aspects of the experimental protocol—including instructions, number of observations, display format, timing, incentives, and outcome elicitation—are identical across conditions.

Within each group, participants view the same sequence of numerical data generated from a stationary AR(1) process, with observations presented one at a time. After viewing the full sequence, participants complete a set of questions eliciting their recall of realized values and their beliefs about the underlying mean of the process.

In Part 2, conducted one day after Part 1, participants are recontacted and asked a follow-up set of questions eliciting recall of the previously presented data and updated beliefs about the mean of the process.
Intervention Start Date
2026-02-01
Intervention End Date
2027-01-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcomes are participants’ beliefs and recalls following exposure to the data sequence. These include beliefs about the underlying statistical properties of the process, in particular participants’ estimates of the mean, as well as recall of realized values.

The main outcomes of interest are (i) cross-sectional belief disagreement among participants exposed to the same data sequence and (ii) within-individual belief changes between Part 1 and Part 2.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The study uses a two-part online experimental design. In Part 1, participants are randomly assigned to one of three groups, each of which views the same sequence of numerical data generated from a stationary AR(1) process, with observations presented one at a time. The data-generating process differs across groups. After viewing the data sequence, participants provide assessments related to the process, including estimates of the underlying mean, as well as measures of recall of realized values.

Participants observe 20 numerical realizations from a stationary AR(1) process and displayed sequentially on separate screens. Participants are randomly assigned to one of three groups that vary the persistence and volatility of the underlying process. Group 1 observes a low-persistence, low-noise process and serves as the control condition. Group 2 observes a high-persistence, low-noise process Group 3 observes a high-persistence, high-noise process. In all groups, the long-run mean of the process is fixed at 5 and unknown to participants. After viewing the sequence, participants are directed to some unrelated tasks. Afterward, they report their best estimate of the series average, with accuracy incentives, and then complete a free recall task in which they list any values they remember freely. This design mirrors the theoretical environment in which agents observe a common realized history but form beliefs based on stochastic recall.

Part 2 of the study is conducted approximately one day after Part 1. Participants are recontacted and asked a follow-up set of questions related to the same data sequence, including repeated belief elicitation about the mean of the process and recall of the previously presented values.

The experimental design allows for comparisons of beliefs and recall across participants exposed to the same data sequence and within individuals across the two parts of the study.
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
Around 1800 respondents.
Sample size: planned number of observations
Around 1800 respondents.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Around 600 respondents per group.
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