Authentic social problems and the formation of civic agency

Last registered on October 16, 2026

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Authentic social problems and the formation of civic agency
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0019910
Initial registration date
October 09, 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
October 16, 2026, 2:24 PM 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

Affiliation
University of New South Wales

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
University of New South Wales

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-10-09
End date
2027-09-12
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Whether people act on collective problems depends not only on what they know, but on whether they see those problems as real, theirs, and solvable. Most higher education still presents social issues as abstract exercises, so it is unclear if authentic contact with live problems and named partners changes civic dispositions or merely makes problems feel more interesting. This randomized trial tests whether these dispositions change when a real-world problem is attached to a named external partner, rather than presented only as a “real problem,” and when peer feedback comes from more or less disciplinary mixed groups.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Dobrescu, Loretti Isabella and Alberto Motta. 2026. "Authentic social problems and the formation of civic agency." AEA RCT Registry. October 16. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.19910-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2026-10-09
Intervention End Date
2027-04-23

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
A seven-item social impact agency and orientation index, measured separately after each of three activities.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The seven-item social impact agency and orientation index consists of the following items. Each item uses a 0-10 scale, with higher scores indicating greater confidence, efficacy, responsibility, or intention to contribute.
1. I am confident that I can make a meaningful contribution to addressing a real social problem.
2. I am confident that I can use my knowledge and skills to help address real-world problems.
3. Working together, people like me can make a meaningful difference to important social problems.
4. Collective action can be effective in addressing difficult social problems.
5. I feel a personal responsibility to contribute to addressing important problems in society.
6. I believe I should use my knowledge and skills to make a positive difference in society.
7. If I had a concrete opportunity to contribute to solving a social problem, I would be likely to take it.

We construct the index by standardising each of items using its pooled baseline mean and standard deviation, then averaging the standardised items equally. Where survey responses are missing, we construct the primary index as follows:
• Include only those observations where five out of seven index items were completed,
• Average the available standardised items per the methodology described previously.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary outcomes are:
• Individual self-efficacy
• Collective efficacy
• Civic responsibility
• Intention to contribute.
• Partner salience
• Peer contributions
• Value of additional group or individual effort
• Student actions in a gamified learning environment
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
We will follow the same method as for the primary outcomes. Individual self-efficacy uses primary outcome items 1–2, collective efficacy items 3–4, civic responsibility items 5–6, and intention to contribute item 7. Multi-item scores will average their standardised items equally. Each outcome will be measured after all three activities. Post-activity surveys also include:

• Four questions regarding partner salience:
1. The challenge felt like a real problem rather than an academic exercise.
2. I felt connected to the external partner and/or the people affected by the problem.
3. I felt that the work produced by my group could genuinely be useful to the external partner.
4. Knowing that a real external partner was involved affected how seriously I engaged with the challenge.

• Four questions regarding peer contributions:
1. The different knowledge and perspectives reflected in my groups feedback improved the quality of the revised answer
2. My own knowledge and skills made a distinctive contribution through my feedback.
3. Considering the different perspectives in my group’s feedback changed the way I thought about the problem.
4. Group members made complementary contributions by providing feedback on different aspects of the solution.

• Three questions regarding the value of contributions, or additional group or individual effort
1. What is the probability that the work produced by your group will make a meaningful contribution to the external partner?
2. Suppose your group spent one additional hour improving its solution. What is the probability that this additional work would meaningfully improve the value of the solution for the partner?
3. What is the probability that an additional contribution made specifically by you would meaningfully improve your group's final solution?

We will also record additional behavioural outcomes in the form of student actions in a gamified learning environment. This gamified experience occurs following treatment. We will collect individual decisions by round, payoffs, and the information available at each decision.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Nothing to report prior to the experiment.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization will be carried out by computer.
Randomization Unit
Each student will be randomly assigned to either the treatment or control group.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Not applicable: individual student randomisation.
Sample size: planned number of observations
Approximately 481 students in Term 3 2026, with one baseline survey and three post-activity surveys; approximately 350 students in Summer Term 2027, with one baseline survey and three post-activity surveys; and approximately 1,300 students in Term 1 2027, with one baseline survey and three post-activity surveys.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Approximately 240 students in Term 3 2026, approximately 175 students on Summer Term 2027, and approximately 650 students in Term 1 2027.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
UNSW Human Research Advisory Panel
IRB Approval Date
2026-10-05
IRB Approval Number
iRECS12485 (under review)