Social Information in Sequential Dictator Games - A Replication Study
Last registered on November 30, 2018

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Social Information in Sequential Dictator Games - A Replication Study
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0003607
Initial registration date
November 26, 2018
Last updated
November 30, 2018 10:16 AM EST
Location(s)
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
Texas A&M University
PI Affiliation
Texas A&M University
PI Affiliation
Texas A&M University
PI Affiliation
Texas A&M University
Additional Trial Information
Status
On going
Start date
2018-11-05
End date
2018-12-05
Secondary IDs
Abstract
This study is a replication of a previous study published in 1998. It is a dictator game conducted in 2 rounds. For the dictator game, people are paired and are provided some amount of money to divide among themselves. The dictator determines the allocation. In this experiment, the researchers wish to see the change in dictator allocations, if any, when social information is provided. The information of dictator allocation in the first round being the treatment social information (S1) for the second round.
In this experiment, the subjects are put into groups of 4. For each round, the dictator allocation is 40 tokens (USD 20). Dictator chooses P for herself and 40-P goes to the other non-dictator subject. A higher P implies more self-regarding behavior. All subjects choose P1 and fill out their choice forms. Irrelevant information acts as baseline control here which is the birthday of participant (S2). Experimenter facilitates information exchange on P1 or birthday. All subjects then choose P2. Bingo cage decides which sub-group (even or odd) is sellers/buyers and the order S1 and S2.
The hypotheses tested are, the Zero Social Influence Hypothesis - (Second Price Choice – First Price Choice) between Relevant and Irrelevant treatment groups is not different, differential Social Influence Hypothesis – absence of social payoff and dramatic Social Influence Hypothesis – difference between first choice and information received.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Eckel, Catherine et al. 2018. "Social Information in Sequential Dictator Games - A Replication Study." AEA RCT Registry. November 30. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/3607/history/38097
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2018-11-23
Intervention End Date
2018-12-04
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Information of previous round dictator allocation affects the current dictator allocation.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Our experimental design includes two main treatments. In both treatments, subjects first chose an initial dictator allocation with no information other than the instructions. The Irrelevant Information treatment serves as a baseline control, in which subjects receive socially irrelevant information between their two dictator decisions. In the Relevant Information treatment, each subject learns the first dictator allocation chosen by one other subject. Each subject then specifies a single second dictator allocation to another subject who is different from the subject affected by his initial dictator allocation. In the Irrelevant Information treatment, each subject in the group receives information on another subject's birth date ranging between 0 to 31 and makes the second choice thereafter.

Experimental Design Details
The money is the form of tokens where 1 token = 0.5 dollars. The experiment will be condcuted with 48 subjects. 24 in the treatment group and 24 in the control group. All subjects are put into groups of 4. They will be numbered from 1 to 4. 1 and 3 are paired. Likewise 2 and 4 are paired. The supplies required are informed consent document, instruction sheet, demographic survey questionnaire, paper, pencil, eraser, bingo balls, bingo cage, 10 sided dice, coins, numbered Index cards and envelopes. All subjects will attend only one session. There will be 6 groups in treatment group and 6 in control group. The subjects have to come to the lab only once.
Randomization Method
The subjects are allocated an index card randomly when they enter the lab. Then are allocated to groups of four randomly based on the number on the balls drawn using a bingo cage. The buyer and seller are decided based on bingo ball draws.
Randomization Unit
There will be groups of 4 for both treatment and control group. The subjects are assigned to groups randomly using bingo balls and bingo cage.
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
12 groups of 4
Sample size: planned number of observations
48
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
6 groups for treatment and 6 for control
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Standard deviation = 0.56, p-value is 0.05. 23 subjects required for control. We have 24 subjects in control group.
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Texas A&M University
IRB Approval Date
2018-11-19
IRB Approval Number
IRB2018-1440D
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