x

We are happy to announce that all trial registrations will now be issued DOIs (digital object identifiers). For more information, see here.
Easy Money, Cheap Talk, or Peeling Spuds
Last registered on April 29, 2019

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Easy Money, Cheap Talk, or Peeling Spuds
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004149
Initial registration date
April 28, 2019
Last updated
April 29, 2019 11:00 PM EDT
Location(s)
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
UiB
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
University of Aberdeen
Additional Trial Information
Status
On going
Start date
2017-02-05
End date
2019-06-30
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Economic theory assumes that investment choices do not depend on the source of the budget. We test this assumption in the lab. In the experiments, we divide participants into two groups: those that obtain an endowment through a windfall and those that obtain the same amount through completing a physical effort task (the ”hard-earned” group). In a previous treatment, we have showed that that individuals in the hard-earned group make less risky and more patient choices than individuals in the windfall group. In the current experiment, we wish to expose the control group to a "settling in" period, so that the control and treated group spend approximately the same amount of time in the lab before making choices.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Hvide, Hans and Jae Ho Lee. 2019. "Easy Money, Cheap Talk, or Peeling Spuds." AEA RCT Registry. April 29. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.4149-1.0.
Former Citation
Hvide, Hans and Jae Ho Lee. 2019. "Easy Money, Cheap Talk, or Peeling Spuds." AEA RCT Registry. April 29. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/4149/history/45666.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
We divide participants into two groups: those that obtain an endowment through a windfall and those that obtain
the same amount through completing a physical effort task (the ”hard-earned” group). We test whether individuals in the hard-earned group make less risky and more patient choices than individuals in the windfall group.

Please note that the experiment is a follow-up on a previously run experiment (and disseminated as a working paper) by Hvide and Lee. For the risk task we follow Holt & Laury (2002).
Intervention Start Date
2019-04-01
Intervention End Date
2019-05-31
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Risk choices
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Risk preferences. Method described in our previous working paper.
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
We divide participants into two groups: those that obtain an endowment through a windfall and those that obtain
the same amount through completing a physical effort task (peeling potatoes). In the current experiment the control ("windfall") group will have a settling in period of about 30 minutes. Apart from that all the details are the same as in the initial experiment
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
By a computer.
Randomization Unit
Individuals
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
About 60 individuals in each group, 120 in total
Sample size: planned number of observations
About 60 individuals in each group, 120 in total
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
About 60 individuals in each group, 120 in total
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Not calculated.
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
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