Reducing Prejudice Against Muslims in the US

Last registered on May 15, 2020

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

Reducing Prejudice Against Muslims in the US

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0002984

Initial registration date

May 03, 2020

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

May 15, 2020, 4:43 PM EDT

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

Locations

Country

United States of America

Region

Primary Investigator

Name

Mohamed Abbadi

Affiliation

University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Yan Chen

PI Affiliation

University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Ann Lin

PI Affiliation

University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Kentaro Toyama

PI Affiliation

University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

Completed

Start date

2017-06-24

End date

2018-12-31

Keywords

Other

Additional Keywords

Prejudice, Reducing Bias, Muslims, Lab in the field

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Abstract

Evidence from different disciplines, including behavioral economics, psychology, and political science, suggests that conversation-based interventions could reduce prejudice against out-groups at least in the short term. In this study, we compare the effects of two conversation-based interventions, perspective taking, and value consistency, on reducing anti-Muslim bias in a randomized control trial. We implement this trial in the metro Detroit area – home to one of the largest Muslim population in the United States. We measure the impact of the interventions and two to three months afterward. Particularly, we measure whether these interventions increase trust beliefs and behaviors towards two groups, Muslims, and non-Muslims using the investment game as an instrument. Measurements taken immediately after the intervention suggest that (1) value consistency increases trust beliefs and behaviors in both Muslims and non-Muslims; (2) perspective taking marginally increases trust behaviors in Muslims compared to non-Muslims and improves beliefs about the trustworthiness of Muslims; and (3) the combination of a hijab-wearing canvasser and a Muslim partner increases behaviors indicative of trust in Muslims. While not as strong, our results are in line with Broockman and Kalla (2016) results that suggest perspective taking reduces prejudice against transgender.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Abbadi, Mohamed et al. 2020. "Reducing Prejudice Against Muslims in the US." AEA RCT Registry. May 15. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.2984-1.0

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 two interventions, perspective taking and value consistency, are conversation-based interventions that require active processing of information.
In perspective taking conversations, canvassers discuss their previous experiences of prejudice and prompt respondents to share similar experiences.
In value consistency conversations, canvassers engage with respondents on values that are incompatible with prejudice such as kindness, opportunity, and tolerance.

Intervention Start Date

2017-06-24

Intervention End Date

2017-09-10

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Investment Amount (trust behaviors).
List randomization (anti-muslim and anti-immigrant hostility)

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Investor's Guess

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

The investor's guess of how much the second player (responder) will return. This is a measure of belief about the responder's trustworthiness.

Experimental Design

Canvassers went door-to-door in selected census tracts in two cities in the Metro Detroit area - Dearborn and Warren - and asked individuals to participate in the study. Those who agreed to participate were randomly assigned to one of three arms: control group (recycling), intervention-1 (analogic perspective taking) or intervention-2 (value consistency). Each canvasser was trained on the three types of conversation-based interventions along with a common protocol that encapsulates them.

Experimental Design Details

Randomization Method

Each canvasser is given a randomly generated list of conversations that they will engage in. Subjects who agree to participate in the study are assigned the conversation type (control or one of the two treatments) that is at the top of the randomly generated list.

Furthermore, there is randomization at the outcome measures. For the investment game, half of the participants play the game with a Muslim sounding name and the other half with a non-Muslim sounding name. Randomization of the names happens via random draw from a set of envelopes that contain Muslim and non-Muslim sounding names.
For the list randomization, the computer randomly selects one of three sets of questions everytime a canvasser is conducting an interview.

Randomization Unit

Individual

Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

Sample size: planned number of observations

960 Subjects

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

320 in each treatment arm

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

Assuming equal variance between any treatment and the placebo condition, we hope to see a minimum detectable size to be 1/3 of the standard deviation (δ=s.d./3). α=0.01 and β = 0.05 yields a sample size of 320 per condition.

Supporting Documents and Materials

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

IRB