The Consequences of Legal Debt: Evidence from a Field Experiment

Last registered on August 07, 2019

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

The Consequences of Legal Debt: Evidence from a Field Experiment

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0002865

Initial registration date

April 13, 2018

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

April 15, 2018, 3:10 PM EDT

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

Last updated

August 07, 2019, 4:14 PM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Country

United States of America

Region

Midwest

Primary Investigator

Name

Rebecca Goldstein

Affiliation

Harvard University

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Bruce Western

PI Affiliation

Columbia University

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Helen Ho

PI Affiliation

Harvard University

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

On going

Start date

2017-09-25

End date

2020-09-01

Keywords

Agriculture, Welfare

Additional Keywords

Criminal justice, legal debt

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Abstract

This trial investigates whether relief from legal financial obligations associated with misdemeanor criminal offenses leads to decreased criminal justice system involvement and improved labor market outcomes.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Goldstein, Rebecca, Helen Ho and Bruce Western. 2019. "The Consequences of Legal Debt: Evidence from a Field Experiment." AEA RCT Registry. August 07. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.2865-3.0

Former Citation

Goldstein, Rebecca, Helen Ho and Bruce Western. 2019. "The Consequences of Legal Debt: Evidence from a Field Experiment." AEA RCT Registry. August 07. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/2865/history/51376

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)

The treatment subjects have their misdemeanor court fees and their District Attorney fees waived. If they are subject to probation supervision, their supervision fees are waived (they still must comply with all conditions of supervision). If the court orders them to attend classes, the fees for the classes are also waived (they still must attend the classes). The control subjects are sent a letter with general information.

Intervention Start Date

2017-09-25

Intervention End Date

2019-03-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Criminal justice system involvement and labor market outcomes.

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Criminal justice system involvement is defined multiply by stays in jail, misdemeanor charges or convictions, and felony charges or convictions post-treatment. Labor market outcomes are defined both by employment status and wages post-treatment compared to pre-treatment.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Housing stability, detailed financial stability

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Housing stability is defined by whether or not the subject experienced an eviction post-treatment and whether they have a place to live that is not a homeless shelter or a homeless encampment. Detailed financial stability is a self-reported measure at one-year follow-up that the subjects do not have trouble meeting monthly expenses. We are also hoping to access some administrative measures of financial stability, such as whether or not the subjects have been sued by creditors.

Experimental Design

Subjects are consented into the study in either jail or court awaiting disposition for a misdemeanor offense. They are randomized into either treatment or control groups at the time of their conviction (if convicted; if acquitted they are no longer eligible for the study).

Experimental Design Details

Subjects are consented into the study in either the Oklahoma County Jail or Oklahoma County Court awaiting disposition for a misdemeanor offense. They are randomized into either treatment or control groups at the time of their conviction (if convicted; if acquitted they are no longer eligible for the study).

Randomization Method

Randomization is done via Qualtrics. We do not require the algorithm to evenly spread subjects between the two groups, so we will likely not have exactly the same numbers off treatment and control subjects. The algorithm that Qualtrics uses to randomly select an option is the Mersenne Twister

Randomization Unit

Individual.

Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

Sample size: planned number of observations

600

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

300 treatment, 300 control

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

With 300 treatment and 300 control subjects, for a binary outcome (such as re-conviction), the minimum difference in rates to detect a significant difference at the 0.05 level with power 0.8 and a two-sided alternative is 16.17%.

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB