x

We are happy to announce that all trial registrations will now be issued DOIs (digital object identifiers). For more information, see here.
Impact of Lottery vs Fixed Incentive on Health Behavior
Last registered on November 17, 2018

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Impact of Lottery vs Fixed Incentive on Health Behavior
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0003558
Initial registration date
November 13, 2018
Last updated
November 17, 2018 9:57 PM EST
Location(s)
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
Purdue University
Other Primary Investigator(s)
Additional Trial Information
Status
Completed
Start date
2018-01-15
End date
2018-03-17
Secondary IDs
Abstract
We compare the effect of two experimental interventions designed to increase physical exercise: a direct economic payment in the form of a certain/fixed financial incentive and a behavioral economic incentive in the form of a lottery based financial incentive.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Katare, Bhagyashree. 2018. "Impact of Lottery vs Fixed Incentive on Health Behavior." AEA RCT Registry. November 17. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.3558-1.0.
Former Citation
Katare, Bhagyashree. 2018. "Impact of Lottery vs Fixed Incentive on Health Behavior." AEA RCT Registry. November 17. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/3558/history/37396.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2018-01-15
Intervention End Date
2018-03-17
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Visits to the recreation center, as a proxy for Physical exercise
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The data is automatically generated from the student card swipes for gaining access to the recreation center.
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
The intervention spanned for 8 weeks from January to March 2018. 1486 freshmen were recruited during their student orientation to participate in the research project. They were randomly assigned to the three treatment groups and a control group. The three treatment groups were 1) fixed incentive group that received a fixed amount for each visit to the recreation center in a week, 2) high lottery incentive group, the participants were entered in a high payout low probability lottery for every visit to the recreation center in a week, and 3) low lottery incentive group, the participants were entered in a low payout high probability lottery for every visit to the recreation center. All the three treatment group payouts had the same expected value. Participants in the treatment groups received an email every Monday morning over the eight-week period reminding them about their chance of winning the lottery or the fixed payment. The probability of winning the lottery remained same over the period of the intervention. Treatment group students received their payout at the end of every week in the form of an online gift card.
Experimental Design Details
The interventions were conducted in spring 2018 at a large public university in the Midwest, US. The intervention spanned for 8 weeks from January to March 2018. 1486 freshmen were recruited during their student orientation to participate in the research project. They were randomly assigned to the three treatment groups and a control group. The three treatment groups were 1) fixed incentive group that received a fixed amount for each visit to the recreation center in a week, 2) high lottery incentive group, the participants were entered in a high payout low probability lottery for every visit to the recreation center in a week, and 3) low lottery incentive group, the participants were entered in a low payout high probability lottery for every visit to the recreation center. All the three treatment group payouts had the same expected value. Participants in the treatment groups received an email every Monday morning over the eight-week period reminding them about their chance of winning the lottery or the fixed payment. The probability of winning the lottery remained same over the period of the intervention. Treatment group students received their payout at the end of every week in the form of an online gift card.
Randomization Method
randomization done in office by a computer
Randomization Unit
Individual level randomization
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
No clusters.
Sample size: planned number of observations
1486 individuals recruited for the experiment. Final sample size =1210
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
292 Control, 291 in Treatment group 1, 293 in Treatment group 2 and 290 in Treatment group 3
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Purdue University
IRB Approval Date
2017-08-11
IRB Approval Number
1708019529
Post-Trial
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Intervention
Is the intervention completed?
No
Is data collection complete?
Data Publication
Data Publication
Is public data available?
No
Program Files
Program Files
Reports and Papers
Preliminary Reports
Relevant Papers