Calibrating Trust: An RCT on Anti-Fraud Education and Verification Behavior among Adolescents

Last registered on March 16, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Calibrating Trust: An RCT on Anti-Fraud Education and Verification Behavior among Adolescents
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018138
Initial registration date
March 15, 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
March 16, 2026, 7:14 AM EDT

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
Zeyang Chen
Affiliation
Renmin University of China
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Yu-Jane Liu
PI Affiliation
Peking University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Jianhong Wang
PI Affiliation
Peking University; The University of Hong Kong
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Tiantian Zhou
PI Affiliation
Peking University
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-03-16
End date
2026-07-31
Keywords
Behavior, Education
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study investigates whether a short, school-based curriculum can improve adolescents' ability to verify information and protect themselves from digital fraud while calibrating their social trust appropriately. We conduct a randomized controlled trial in junior high schools in China, involving approximately 50 classrooms and 2,500 seventh and eighth-grade students. The intervention consists of a 45-minute anti-fraud education module delivered during regular class time. Rather than focusing on fear-based warnings, the curriculum teaches students to:
Identify common fraud signals (false authority, urgency, emotional manipulation); Apply cost-benefit reasoning to information verification decisions; Distinguish between healthy skepticism and excessive distrust. We measure impacts on students' verification behavior, fraud detection sensitivity, and generalized social trust using incentivized experimental tasks adapted from economics literature. This research addresses a critical gap in financial education by providing experimental evidence on whether verification skills—traditionally viewed as innate or experience-based—can be effectively taught in a classroom setting. The findings will inform policy discussions about scalable, cost-effective approaches to reducing youth victimization in the digital economy.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Chen, Zeyang et al. 2026. "Calibrating Trust: An RCT on Anti-Fraud Education and Verification Behavior among Adolescents." AEA RCT Registry. March 16. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18138-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2026-03-18
Intervention End Date
2026-04-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Primary Outcome 1: Information Verification Behavior
Measured through the behaviors in a modified trust game where students decide whether to verify an anonymous partner's type and how much to send to an anonymous partner

Primary Outcome 2: Fraud Detection Sensitivity
Measured as the ability to correctly distinguish between fraudulent and legitimate scenarios. Students evaluate 5 short vignettes and classify each as "likely fraud" or "likely legitimate."

Primary Outcome 3: Generalized Social Trust
Measured through standard World Values Survey question on trust in strangers and different types of social institutions

Exploratory Outcomes:
We will also examine spillover effects on their family and heterogeneous effects by gender, socioeconomic status, and baseline cognitive ability.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We employ a school-based randomized controlled trial with the following structure:
Setting: Public junior high schools (grades 7-8) in China. Schools represent a mix of high-performing and average institutions to enhance external validity.
Participant Recruitment: All students in selected classrooms are invited to participate.
Baseline: Students complete a 10-minute survey during school hours, including demographic questions and baseline outcome measures.
Intervention: Classrooms are randomly assigned to either:
(1) Treatment: Receive a 45-minute anti-fraud education module delivered by their regular teacher
(2) Control: Continue with standard curriculum (no intervention)
The anti-fraud module uses standardized materials (PPT, video, scripted lesson plan) that teachers receive before delivery. Teachers are instructed to follow the script closely to ensure fidelity.
Two waves of follow-up assessments:
(1) Immediate post-test: Administered within 48 hours of the intervention
(2) Three-month follow-up: Conducted during the same academic term to minimize attrition
Incentives: All outcome measurement tasks include real incentives. Students earn tokens exchangeable for school supplies (pencils, notebooks, etc.). Each incentivized question includes a random lottery where one student per classroom receives their earned reward.
School teachers and students' parents also receive a survey to evaluate the students' performance from the third-party's perspective.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Classrooms are first stratified by school and grade level. Within each stratum, classrooms are randomly assigned to treatment or control with equal probability (50/50), which is decided by random numbers generated by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Classroom (cluster)
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
50 classrooms across 3~4 junior middle schools
Sample size: planned number of observations
Students: Approximately 2,500 students (50 students per classroom × 50 classrooms) Observations per student: - Baseline: 1 observation - Immediate post-test: 1 observation - Three-month follow-up: 1 observation Total planned observations: 7,500 student-time observations (2,500 students × 3 time points)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Treatment Group (Anti-Fraud Module):
- 25 classrooms
- ~1,250 students (approximately 50 per classroom)
- Receive: 45-minute anti-fraud education module + all three assessments

Control Group (Standard Curriculum):
- 25 classrooms
- ~1,250 students (approximately 50 per classroom)
- Receive: No intervention + all three assessments
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Faculty Research Committee, Faculty of Business and Economics, The University of Hong Kong
IRB Approval Date
2026-03-12
IRB Approval Number
N/A
Analysis Plan