Trust or Paperwork? Individual Preferences over Public Administration

Last registered on June 03, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Trust or Paperwork? Individual Preferences over Public Administration
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018674
Initial registration date
May 22, 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
June 03, 2026, 8:12 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
Philip Mielcarek
Affiliation
University of Hohenheim
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Nadja Dwenger
PI Affiliation
University of Hohenheim
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-05-27
End date
2029-12-31
Keywords
Behavior, Other
Additional Keywords
Public administration, accuracy, efficiency, individual preferences, trust, administrative burden.
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This project examines individual preferences regarding the optimal design of public administration.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Dwenger, Nadja and Philip Mielcarek. 2026. "Trust or Paperwork? Individual Preferences over Public Administration." AEA RCT Registry. June 03. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18674-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
This project examines individual preferences regarding the optimal design of public administration.
Intervention Start Date
2026-05-27
Intervention End Date
2026-06-10

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
We consider three groups of outcomes regarding a hypothetical reform of public administration:
(1) Stated preferences.
(2) Beliefs and attitudinal responses.
(3) Incentivized behavioral support.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This project examines individual preferences regarding the optimal design of public administration. The main part of our study consists of describing a hypothetical reform of public administration. The reform is characterized by several attributes which we vary in randomized treatments. We use a mixed design and the assignment of respondents to experimental conditions is between subjects. We do not have a pure control group that receives no information. The experimental conditions are:
1. Baseline
2. Speed
3. Cost savings
4. Erroneous approvals
5. Ex post correction costs

Unless otherwise specified, the "Baseline" experimental condition serves as the reference category in the analyses. The respective attribute levels are varied within subjects.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization done by software.
Randomization Unit
Individual.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
5,000 individuals.
Sample size: planned number of observations
5,000 individuals.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
We will use two samples:
(1) Adult individuals (aged 18+) from the general population in Germany.
(2) Bureaucrats working in the public administration in Germany.

Each sample consists of 2,500 respondents, equally distributed among five experimental conditions (500 observations each). The general population sample will be recruited through an external survey provider. The bureaucrat sample will be recruited directly by the research team using commercially available lists of public administrations in Germany. To reach individual bureaucrats, we will send postal invitations to relevant departments.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
With a planned sample of 2,500 observations per sample, distributed equally across the five experimental conditions, the study has 88% power to detect effect sizes of 0.2 standard deviations between the baseline and each treatment group. For the bureaucrat sample, the power calculations additionally require an assumption about the average response rate. Based on previous studies that recruited respondents in the German public administration by postal invitation, we assume a response rate of about 30%. Under this assumption, we plan to send the survey invitation to between 7,500 and 10,000 municipal administrative units. In larger municipalities, we sample multiple administrative units within the same municipality.
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Hohenheim
IRB Approval Date
2025-12-12
IRB Approval Number
2025/79
Analysis Plan