Experiment on Narratives and Information in Persuasion

Last registered on June 12, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Experiment on Narratives and Information in Persuasion
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018792
Initial registration date
June 02, 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 12, 2026, 11:47 AM EDT

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

Locations

Country
United States of America
Region
San Diego

Primary Investigator

Name
Alisher Batmanov
Affiliation
UC San Diego
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Bridget Galaty
PI Affiliation
UC San Diego
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2026-04-23
End date
2026-12-31
Keywords
Behavior, Lab
Additional Keywords
Cheap-Talk Communication, Causal Narratives, Persuasion, Information
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
We study how informational advantage (cheap talk) and narrative persuasion interact in the same experimental setting. In an inference task, receivers observe a dataset and make predictions after receiving a message from a sender who may have additional information and who communicates either through a simple recommendation or an elaborate narrative explanation. By varying the sender’s information and communication mode, we isolate the effects of new information versus new interpretation. We examine how the effects of these message types differ based on whether the senders and receivers have aligned or misaligned preferences. This allows us to test predictions from models of strategic information transmission and competing narratives, and to assess when persuasion works through informational advantage versus framing.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Batmanov, Alisher and Bridget Galaty. 2026. "Experiment on Narratives and Information in Persuasion." AEA RCT Registry. June 12. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18792-1.0
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 take part in an incentivized prediction task. Before making a decision, each participant may receive a message from another participant who is acting as an adviser. The study varies the information available to the adviser and the format in which the adviser communicates.
Intervention Start Date
2026-04-23
Intervention End Date
2026-12-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcomes are two measures of how persuasive an adviser's message is. The first is the distance between a participant's prediction and the recommendation provided by the adviser. The second is whether a participant's prediction matches the adviser's recommendation exactly.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The distance outcome is measured as the number of steps on the response scale between a participant's prediction and the adviser's recommendation, where a smaller distance indicates greater persuasion. The exact-following outcome is a binary indicator equal to one when a participant's prediction matches the adviser's recommendation exactly.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary outcomes include the accuracy of a participant's prediction relative to the true outcome, the participant's stated preference over which type of adviser to interact with, and the participant's ability to predict outcomes in a separate prediction task.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Prediction accuracy is measured as the distance between a participant's prediction and the true outcome. Adviser preference is measured by which adviser type a participant selects when given a choice. Predictive ability is measured by the distance between predictions and true outcomes in an additional set of prediction tasks.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This is an incentivized experiment with two roles, advisers and decision-makers. A decision-maker observes a dataset and makes a prediction about an outcome after receiving a message from an adviser. The design varies whether the adviser has additional information beyond what the decision-maker observes, whether the adviser communicates only a recommendation or a recommendation accompanied by a written explanation, and whether the adviser and decision-maker have aligned or misaligned incentives. The information and format of messages vary within decision-makers, while incentive alignment varies between participants.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization is performed by computer.
Randomization Unit
Randomization is at the individual participant level. The information and format of the messages a decision-maker sees vary within participants, while the alignment of incentives between advisers and decision-makers varies between participants.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
70-100 senders and 100-200 receivers
Sample size: planned number of observations
70-100 senders and 100-200 receivers
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
35-50 senders assigned to the misaligned-incentive condition and 35-50 senders assigned to the aligned-incentive condition.
75-150 receivers assigned to the misaligned-incentive condition and 25-50 receivers assigned to the aligned-incentive condition.


Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
UC San Diego IRB
IRB Approval Date
2025-04-24
IRB Approval Number
#812520
Analysis Plan