AEA RCT Registry

Field	Before	After
Study Withdrawn		No
Intervention Completion Date		November 30, 2018
Data Collection Complete		Yes
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)		559 over 4 treatments (incl. control group)
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?		No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations		559
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms		Control: 139 Personal health: 133 Climate change: 144 Animal welfare: 143
Data Collection Completion Date		December 08, 2018

Field	Before	After
Paper Abstract		We report evidence from a field experiment (𝑁 = 561) on how different reasons for reducing the consumption of red meat (health, climate and animal welfare) impact intentions to change behavior, the consumption of red meat and the enjoyment of meals. Surprisingly, the three concepts are not aligned. On average, two treatments affect intentions to reduce meat consumption, only one affects behavior, while all affect enjoyment of meals containing red meat. This contributes to the emerging discussion of the welfare effects of nudging. We find that behavioral changes are driven by our female participants eating in company. This confirms the importance of the social environment both in explaining gender differences and the channels by which nudges affect behavior.
Paper Citation		Perino, G., & Schwirplies, C. (2022). Meaty arguments and fishy effects: Field experimental evidence on the impact of reasons to reduce meat consumption. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 114, 102667.
Paper URL		https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2022.102667

Fields Changed