|
Field
Trial Status
|
Before
on_going
|
After
completed
|
|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
This experiment tests what influences the linking decisions between individuals through job referrals, and whether these social job networks are formed strategically. I randomly generate job opportunities for young job seekers from dense urban neighbourhoods in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Some participants are enabled to refer individuals from their neighbourhood to the same job, and I repeat this experiment for several rounds. Explanatory variables of interest are various referral treatment indicators, various measures of participants' network centrality, as well as dyadic characteristics of two individuals in the social networks. Outcomes of interest are a variety of referral indicators between two individuals.
|
After
This experiment tests what influences the linking decisions between individuals through job referrals, and whether these social job networks are formed strategically. I randomly generate job opportunities for young job seekers from dense urban neighbourhoods in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Some participants are enabled to refer individuals from their neighbourhood to the same job, and I repeat this experiment for several rounds. Explanatory variables of interest are various referral treatment indicators, various measures of participants' network centrality, as well as dyadic characteristics of two individuals in the social networks. Outcomes of interest are a variety of referral indicators between two individuals as well as on-the-job performance.
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
August 30, 2018 10:56 AM
|
After
March 02, 2021 01:51 PM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
The study is a lab-in-the-field experiment on social network referrals in day labour markets.
The study comprises three different referral interventions:
1. Referral treatment (revealed social network centrality)
2. Referral treatment (concealed characteristics)
3. Referral treatment (performance incentivised)
4. Control group
In detail, the treatments/interventions are defined as follows: Intervention 1 allows participants to refer one other person from their neighborhood to the same day work the next day (the work is provided by the researcher). For this intervention, participants are given an exhaustive list with all eligible other individuals living in their neighborhood, including everyone’s degree centrality (as measured by number of connections in the neighborhood). Intervention 2 is similar to intervention 1, but does not reveal the other individuals’ degree centrality. Intervention 3 is similar to intervention 1, but the person referring another individual from the neighborhood to the day work receives a payment based on the referrals work performance.
In general, the day work I am providing is similar to office-style, workplace-related jobs. The task performance is incentivised for all participants, with a maximum payment of 200 ETB (~ 7 GBP). Work sessions take place on consecutive days or are spread over a whole day. The multiple rounds of the lab-in-the-field experiment are unannounced ex ante (to ensure comparability between other/same referrals).
|
After
The study is a lab-in-the-field experiment on social network referrals in day labour markets.
The study comprises three different referral interventions:
1. Referral treatment (open, control) (C)
2. Referral treatment (performance incentivised) (T1)
3. Referral treatment (partly anonymous) (T2)
4. Referral treatment (fully anonymous) (T3)
In detail, the treatments/interventions are defined as follows: The control referral treatment (C) is an un-incentivized, open job referral, similar to `standard' job referrals mostly observed in reality. Workers in this group can invite someone from their neighborhood network to the next work session without incentives and `in the field'. Treatment variation 1 (T1) introduces an incentive treatment, meaning that the worker making a job referral gets a financial reward which is linear in the performance of the invited worker.The second margin of variation shocks the visibility of the referral. Workers in the control referral condition can additionally make partly anonymous or fully anonymous referrals to other workers. Under partly anonymous referrals (T2), the invited worker does not know the identity of the inviting worker, but can reciprocate the referral, while under fully anonymous referrals (T3), reciprocation is now allowed.
In general, the day work I am providing is similar to office-style, workplace-related jobs. The task performance is incentivised for all participants, with a maximum payment of 200 ETB (~ 7 GBP). Work sessions take place on consecutive days or are spread over a whole day. The multiple rounds of the experiment are unannounced ex ante (to ensure comparability between other/same referrals).
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
My main outcome of interest is whether individual i makes a referral to individual j.
|
After
My main outcome of interest is whether individual i makes a referral to individual j as well as on the job performance of the invited worker.
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
Short summary:
- Baseline survey of over 600 individuals;
- Several rounds of a lab-in-the-field experiments with three different referral treatments;
- Follow-up phone survey of participants
Details:
- I randomly select 17 densely populated urban neighbourhoods in Addis Ababa, where I collect baseline data on young unemployed individuals and their social networks.
- Within the selected neighbourhoods, I take a census (door-to-door solicitation) of all eligible resident individuals, where eligibility is defined as follows: Permanently living in the selected neighbourhood; between 18 and years of age; not in permanent employment or education.
- These eligible individuals are surveyed with a baseline questionnaire, including questions on personal characteristics, labour market outcomes, behavioural questions, and a detailed social network section, containing a range of questions about every other eligible individual in the neighbourhood.
- I then conduct a lab-in-the-field experiment in various locations in Addis Ababa: After the baseline survey, a random subsample from each neighbourhood is invited to a paid day job (the lab-in-the-field experiment). Lab sessions take place separate by neighbourhood
- The lab sessions consist of a work-related and quantifiable effort task. After the completion of the task, participants are randomly allocated to different work referral treatments (described above). The day job experiment is repeated over three rounds.
- A few days after participating in the lab-in-the-field experiment, participants are called by phone and asked follow-up questions on the referral decisions they made.
- Eventually, this experiment tests what influences the linking decisions between participants through the different referral treatments, and whether these social job networks are formed strategically. A particular focus will be on the role of networks centrality in referring other workers vs. correlated social characteristics of individuals. A further focus will be on reciprocity in referring (measured over the multiple rounds of the experiment) as well as permanent exclusion from the temporary day labour market opportunities I am generating.
|
After
Short summary:
- Baseline survey of over 700 individuals;
- Several rounds of a lab-in-the-field experiments with three different referral treatments;
- Follow-up phone survey of participants
Details:
- I randomly select 16 densely populated urban neighbourhoods in Addis Ababa, where I collect baseline data on young unemployed individuals and their social networks.
- Within the selected neighbourhoods, I take a census (door-to-door solicitation) of all eligible resident individuals, where eligibility is defined as follows: Permanently living in the selected neighbourhood; between 18 and years of age; not in permanent employment or education.
- These eligible individuals are surveyed with a baseline questionnaire, including questions on personal characteristics, labour market outcomes, behavioural questions, and a detailed social network section, containing a range of questions about every other eligible individual in the neighbourhood.
- I then conduct a lab-in-the-field experiment in various locations in Addis Ababa: After the baseline survey, a random subsample from each neighbourhood is invited to a paid day job (the lab-in-the-field experiment). Lab sessions take place separate by neighbourhood
- The sessions consist of a work-related and quantifiable effort task. After the completion of the task, participants are randomly allocated to different work referral treatments (described above). The day job experiment is repeated over three rounds.
- A few days after participating in the lab-in-the-field experiment, participants are called by phone and asked follow-up questions on the referral decisions they made.
- Eventually, this experiment tests what influences the linking decisions between participants through the different referral treatments, and whether these social job networks are formed strategically. A particular focus will be on the role of networks centrality in referring other workers vs. correlated social characteristics of individuals. A further focus will be on reciprocity in referring (measured over the multiple rounds of the experiment) as well as permanent exclusion from the temporary day labour market opportunities I am generating.
|
|
Field
Randomization Method
|
Before
Randomisation before sessions done in office by a computer (allocation to lab sessions and treatment groups)
|
After
Randomisation before sessions done in office by a computer (allocation to work sessions and treatment groups)
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Clusters
|
Before
17 neighbourhoods, without clustering. All treatments are implemented in all neighbourhoods
|
After
16 neighbourhoods, without clustering. All treatments are implemented in all neighbourhoods
|
|
Field
Intervention (Hidden)
|
Before
The day labor market game is repeated over three consecutive rounds.
Further sub-treatments include referrals that are not taking place within the same neighborhood:
a. Anonymous referral: anonymously referring somebody unknown from a different, but similar neighborhood to the job, only knowing the person’s gender, age, and degree centrality.
b. Open referral: referring somebody unknown from a different, but similar neighborhood to the job, only knowing the person’s gender, age, and degree centrality. After this referral, it is revealed to the other person who invited him/her.
c. Anonymous gift: making an anonymous small gift to somebody unknown from a different, but similar neighborhood to the job, only knowing the person’s gender, age, and degree centrality.
|
After
The day labor work sessions are repeated over three consecutive rounds.
|