Financial Education and Advice: The Case of Robo-advisors
Last registered on May 15, 2019

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Financial Education and Advice: The Case of Robo-advisors
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004102
Initial registration date
April 11, 2019
Last updated
May 15, 2019 8:49 AM EDT
Location(s)

This section is unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
Additional Trial Information
Status
In development
Start date
2019-05-20
End date
2019-05-22
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Some scholars argue that financial literacy is a complement rather than a substitute to financial advice as it allows investors to better assess (and demand) quality and thus have more confidence in the advisor. While financial advisors and managers rely on information asymmetry as part of their business model, several arguments point toward a positive impact of educating investors on financial matters on the use of their services. Thus, we intend to study in a laboratory setting the impact of financial education on the adoption of technology-based advisory algorithms, so-called robo-advisors, as well as the interaction with investor characteristics. On the one hand, they might be in a good position to effectively educate investors due to their broad customer base and digital service provision. On the other hand, they might benefit from communicating the underlying investment logic to oppose algorithm aversion due to the perception of a “black-box” decision-making process.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Litterscheidt, Rouven and David Streich. 2019. "Financial Education and Advice: The Case of Robo-advisors." AEA RCT Registry. May 15. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/4102/history/46580
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2019-05-20
Intervention End Date
2019-05-22
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Use of robo-advisor in incentivized financial decision-making task
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Participants first earn a budget in a real effort task, which is then used in an incentivized four-period financial decision-making game. In each period, subjects allocate their budget to three distinct assets that evolve probabilistically in value. The value of their portfolio after the last period determines their payout. Subjects can delegate decision-making to a robo-advisory service for all or parts of their budget at a proportional fee. The service elicits the subjects’ risk preferences through a risk questionnaire, assigns a risk profile, implements a corresponding portfolio and re-establishes the portfolio weights after each trading period. To investigate the impact of financial education on the willingness to use the robo-advisor, some subjects are provided with additional information on the principles of operation of the robo-advisory algorithm.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization done in laboratory by a computer
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
No clusters
Sample size: planned number of observations
200 students
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
100 students in treatment group, 100 students in control group
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number