The Scale Shapes the Answer: Evidence from Time-Use Reporting

Last registered on September 25, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
The Scale Shapes the Answer: Evidence from Time-Use Reporting
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0019758
Initial registration date
September 17, 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
September 25, 2026, 9:45 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
Yue Li
Affiliation
University College London
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Jiemin Xu
PI Affiliation
Jinan University
PI Name
yiming xia
PI Affiliation
Southwestern University of Finance and Economics
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2026-09-17
End date
2026-12-31
Keywords
Behavior
Additional Keywords
Measurement
JEL code(s)
C81 C83
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study examines how response ranges and elicitation formats affect the reporting of a continuous variable: time use. We plan to recruit 900 students and randomly assign them to six conditions. Five use identical sliders with upper bounds of 24, 12, 8, 6, or 4 hours, while the sixth uses numerical entry. We estimate effects on total reported time and its distribution, and compare within-condition standardized distributions to assess whether differences reflect shifts in location and scale or changes in distributional shape. We also compare slider and numerical-entry responses in terms of dispersion, heaping, and internally inconsistent reports. Finally, we characterize how reports under one elicitation method map into those under another using distributional comparisons and quantile-based transformations. The study provides experimental evidence on how survey response design shapes continuous self-reported outcomes.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Li, Yue, yiming xia and Jiemin Xu. 2026. "The Scale Shapes the Answer: Evidence from Time-Use Reporting." AEA RCT Registry. September 25. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.19758-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The intervention varies the response format used to report time use.
In five conditions, students report time using the same slider interface, with the slider upper bound set to 24, 12, 8, 6, or 4 hours.
In the sixth condition, students report time using an numerical-entry field.
Intervention Start Date
2026-09-17
Intervention End Date
2026-09-23

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
total reported time on five activities, measured separately for a typical weekday and a typical weekend
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
total reported time is constructed as the sum of reported hours across the five activities.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
reported time spent on each of five activities
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Randomization is conducted within class. Larger allocation shares increase precision for comparisons among the wider slider ranges.
60 % of students are assigned equally to slider conditions with upper bounds of 24, 12, and 8 hours,
Remaining 40 % are assigned equally to the 6-hour, 4-hour, and numerical-entry conditions.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Computerized lottery-style random draw implemented through the online survey platform, stratified by class.
Randomization Unit
individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
900 students
Sample size: planned number of observations
900 students
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
around 180 for scale 24, 12, 8
around 120 for scale 6, 4 and entry
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Research ethics committee of the China Center for Behavioral Economics and Finance
IRB Approval Date
2025-03-18
IRB Approval Number
N/A
Analysis Plan