Reducing Prejudice Against Muslims in the US

Last registered on May 15, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Reducing Prejudice Against Muslims in the US
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0002984
Initial registration date
May 03, 2020
Last updated
May 15, 2020, 4:43 PM EDT

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
PI Affiliation
University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
PI Affiliation
University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2017-06-24
End date
2018-12-31
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 are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

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

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?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
NA
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 are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Health Sciences and Behavioral Sciences Institutional Review Board (IRB-HSBS)
IRB Approval Date
2017-06-21
IRB Approval Number
HUM00130282
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials