x

We are happy to announce that all trial registrations will now be issued DOIs (digital object identifiers). For more information, see here.
Gender Differences in Work Advice: A Laboratory Investigation
Last registered on June 10, 2019

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Gender Differences in Work Advice: A Laboratory Investigation
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004244
Initial registration date
June 05, 2019
Last updated
June 10, 2019 9:48 PM 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
WZB Berlin
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
University of Sydney
Additional Trial Information
Status
In development
Start date
2019-06-06
End date
2020-12-01
Secondary IDs
Abstract
We use a laboratory experiment to investigate whether men and women receive different work advice in a setting where the quality of the advisee is ambiguous. At a later stage, we also aim to test whether a potential gender difference in advice is removed when advisors are provided with more objective indicators of the advisee's performance, and when they are not made aware of the advisee's gender.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Silva Goncalves, Juliana and Roel van Veldhuizen. 2019. "Gender Differences in Work Advice: A Laboratory Investigation." AEA RCT Registry. June 10. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.4244-1.0.
Former Citation
Silva Goncalves, Juliana and Roel van Veldhuizen. 2019. "Gender Differences in Work Advice: A Laboratory Investigation." AEA RCT Registry. June 10. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/4244/history/47827.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2019-06-06
Intervention End Date
2019-12-02
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
See the pre-analysis plan
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
See the pre-analysis plan
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
We develop a novel experimental design in which one group of participants ("the workers") are asked to choose between two different jobs. A second group of participants ("the advisors") are asked to give advice to workers to help them make their decision. Workers write a short motivation letter that advisors can use to help determine their advice.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Roles are assigned randomly when participants enter the experimental laboratory.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
160 participants (80 workers and 80 advisors)
Sample size: planned number of observations
160 participants (80 workers and 80 advisors)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
160 participants (80 workers and 80 advisors)
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
We expect to be able to detect a 14 percentage point gender gap in the fraction of workers receiving advice A. More details are in the pre-analysis plan.
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2019-04-23
IRB Approval Number
2019/257
Analysis Plan

There are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information