The Performance Effects of Relative Performance Information and Feedback Detail: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Austria

Last registered on July 01, 2019

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
The Performance Effects of Relative Performance Information and Feedback Detail: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Austria
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004141
Initial registration date
May 02, 2019

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
May 23, 2019, 5:43 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
July 01, 2019, 4:23 AM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
WHU – Otto Beisheim School of Management

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2018-10-09
End date
2019-08-31
Secondary IDs
Abstract
We seek to establish how feedback can be customized to optimize performance. We will extend knowledge on this topic by using a field experiment in a competitive sport setting (a commercial training simulator used by elite football clubs) to scientifically establish the types of feedback that work best on average and for players of different profiles. Specifically, we will test the performance effects of relative performance feedback (absolute vs relative vs absolute and relative) and feedback detail (high-level vs detailed). We will do so by randomly assigning different types of feedback to the players (high-level and absolute, high-level and relative, high-level and both absolute and relative, detailed and absolute, detailed and relative, detailed and both absolute and relative).
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Koppers, Sebastian. 2019. "The Performance Effects of Relative Performance Information and Feedback Detail: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Austria." AEA RCT Registry. July 01. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.4141
Former Citation
Koppers, Sebastian and Sebastian Koppers. 2019. "The Performance Effects of Relative Performance Information and Feedback Detail: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Austria." AEA RCT Registry. July 01. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/4141/history/49029
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)
Subjects perform a football (soccer) drill in a training simulator at a field site (professional football training facility). Between each round of the drill, the subjects receive feedback on their performance on that round of the drill.
Intervention Start Date
2018-10-09
Intervention End Date
2019-08-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
We employ two measures of player performance on the drill: accuracy of passes (as measured by meters from target), and reaction time of player (as measured by duration in time in seconds from release of ball until pass hits target area). These measures are captured by the football training simulating. We also measure the subjects' heart rates whilst they perform the drill. This serve to proxy for effort (level of heart rate) and stress (variability of heart rate).
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
We conduct a post-experiment survey to measure the following constructs: perceived value of feedback about performance, social comparison involvement, information quantity, focus, shift of focus, focus on best or worst, influence of feedback on focus, motivation, trust, and perceived threat of feedback.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Perceived value of feedback is based on items from Zingoni & Byron (2017). Social comparison involvement is based on Tafkov (2013). Focus, shift of focus, focus on best or worst, influence of feedback on focus, information quantity and motivation are measured using items specifically developed for this study. The measure of trust is based on Kizilcec (2016). Perceived threat of feedback uses the instrument developed in Zingoni & Byron (2017).

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We employ a fully-interacted 3x2 design to evaluate the performance effects of relative performance feedback and feedback detail.
Experimental Design Details
We employ a fully-interacted 3x2 design to evaluate the performance effects of relative performance feedback and feedback detail. In the relative performance feedback treatment arm of the experiment, subjects are randomly assigned to one of three conditions: relative feedback (subjects see their performance rank on each of the performance measures), absolute feedback (subjects see their absolute performance on each of the performance measures), both absolute and relative feedback (subjects see both their performance rank and absolute performance on each of the performance measures). In the feedback detail treatment arm of the experiment, subjects are randomly assigned to one of two conditions: high-level (subjects see their aggregate performance on the performance measures) and detailed (subjects see their disaggregated performance on the performance measures, broken out by different features of the training drill).
Randomization Method
Subjects are randomly assigned to one of six treatment groups. To do this, we employ a quasi-blocked randomization design, whereby we generate a random sequence of numbers to assign male subjects to treatment and a random sequence of numbers to assign female participants to treatment. We do this to make sure that fewer female participants do not cluster in one treatment group and bias experimental results (true blocked randomization not possible due to no-shows of registered participants).
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
180 individuals
Sample size: planned number of observations
180 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
We assigned our total sample evenly across each of the treatment cells: Absolute & High- level (30 subjects), Absolute & Detailed (30 subjects), Relative & High-level (30 subjects), Relative & Detailed (30 subjects), Absolute & Relative & High-level (30 subjects), Absolute & Relative & Detailed (30 subjects)
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Performance as measured by handling time. Given a sample size of 90 subjects per treatment arm, the minimum detectable effect size is .08 seconds, which is equivalent to change in performance by 0.4 standard deviations (or 3% of the mean level of performance).
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number

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