Coordination and Collective Action in Urban Residential Communities: A Conjoint Survey Experiment

Last registered on August 20, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Coordination and Collective Action in Urban Residential Communities: A Conjoint Survey Experiment
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0019374
Initial registration date
August 13, 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
August 20, 2026, 9:04 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
zhongqi lei
Affiliation
中国人民大学
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
meng miao
PI Affiliation
中国人民大学
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2026-08-09
End date
2026-10-31
Keywords
Behavior, Governance, Welfare
Additional Keywords
collective action, coordination, urban governance, residential communities, conjoint experiment
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study examines individual preferences and decision-making in collective action settings within urban residential communities in China. We conduct a randomized conjoint survey experiment in which respondents evaluate hypothetical community-level proposals with experimentally varied characteristics. The study aims to understand how different features of collective decision-making and coordination affect individual evaluations and choices.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
lei, zhongqi and meng miao. 2026. "Coordination and Collective Action in Urban Residential Communities: A Conjoint Survey Experiment." AEA RCT Registry. August 20. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.19374-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2026-08-09
Intervention End Date
2026-09-13

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcome is respondents’ evaluation of hypothetical community-level proposals presented in the conjoint experiment. In each conjoint task, respondents rate each proposal on a 1–10 scale, with higher scores indicating a more favorable evaluation or greater support for the proposal. The resulting rating serves as the primary outcome measure and is used to assess how experimentally varied proposal characteristics affect respondents’ evaluations across repeated conjoint tasks.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This study uses a randomized conjoint survey experiment to examine individual evaluations of alternative community-level proposals in urban residential settings. Respondents are presented with a series of hypothetical proposals whose characteristics are randomly varied according to the conjoint design. Each respondent evaluates multiple proposal profiles and rates each profile on a 1–10 scale, with higher scores indicating greater support. Random assignment of profile characteristics allows us to estimate how variation in different features of the proposals affects respondents’ evaluations. The experiment is embedded in a broader survey that also collects relevant respondent characteristics and attitudes for descriptive and supplementary analyses.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization is implemented by computer within the conjoint survey. Attribute levels are randomly assigned and combined according to the predefined conjoint design to generate hypothetical proposal profiles. Respondents therefore evaluate different randomly generated combinations of proposal characteristics across tasks.
Randomization Unit
Conjoint profile within respondent. Attribute levels are randomized at the profile level within each respondent across repeated conjoint tasks. There is no separate respondent-level treatment assignment.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
No clusters are used in this study.
Sample size: planned number of observations
Approximately 200 respondents.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
There are no fixed between-respondent treatment arms. All respondents participate in the conjoint experiment, with proposal attribute levels randomized within respondents across conjoint tasks.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
Analysis Plan