x

We are happy to announce that all trial registrations will now be issued DOIs (digital object identifiers). For more information, see here.
Pre-Analysis Plan for A Public Goods Game in Urban Uganda
Last registered on September 09, 2019

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Pre-Analysis Plan for A Public Goods Game in Urban Uganda
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004616
Initial registration date
August 23, 2019
Last updated
September 09, 2019 9:59 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
UEA
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
UEA
Additional Trial Information
Status
In development
Start date
2019-09-02
End date
2019-10-25
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Previous research has shown randomising the language of public goods games leads to significantly different contribution levels for bilingual subjects. However, the mechanism is not well understood. In the first paper described here we will measure norms and expectations, testing each as candidate mechanisms. Do bilingual people contribute more in one language because they feel they should, expect others to do so, or have internalised certain behaviours? This has direct relevance for bilingual subjects (the majority of the world) as well as shedding light on the importance of frames for revealed preferences. In addition to testing mechanisms, this experiment will act as a robustness check on Clist & Verschoor (2017, JDE), by examining the same question in a new (urban) setting.

In a second paper, we will examine the role of place in determining norms and expectations. Our experiment will be conducted in Kampala, amongst people with an ethnic or cultural link to a more rural eastern part of Uganda (Bugishu). All subjects will then have at least two geographical references. We will measure norms and expectations for our Kampala-based subject pool regarding behaviour in both Kampala and Bugishu. For norms this will make use of a novel hypothetical design. This will allow us to examine how internal migration, and the associated places, affect norms and expectations of cooperative behaviour.

In a third paper, we will examine how these differences manifest over the length of time a person has been exposed to a given place. We will compare the most recent arrivals to Kampala with others, in order to see whether norms and expectations can be learnt. We will also compare those that visit Bugishu more frequently with others, in order to see whether norms and expectations can be unlearnt.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Clist, Paul and Joshua Hill. 2019. "Pre-Analysis Plan for A Public Goods Game in Urban Uganda." AEA RCT Registry. September 09. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.4616-1.0.
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)
Intervention Start Date
2019-09-02
Intervention End Date
2019-10-25
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
1. Contributions in the public goods game
2. Norms
3. Expectations.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
See PAP document.
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Time in Kampala, and frequency of visiting Bagishu.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
We randomise the language a given experimental session is conducted in. We then:
1. Play a two-player linear public goods game, after some control questions.
2. Measure expectations in two locations.
3. Measure norms in two locations.
4. Conduct a short survey.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomisation at the session level by computer.
Randomization Unit
session level
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
300 subjects requested (with budget and desire for more, but likely constraints in identifying bilingual subjects)
Sample size: planned number of observations
300
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
50/50 split by language planned.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
We have power of around 0.89 to find effect sizes previously found, with n=300.
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
International Development Ethics Committee, University of East Anglia.
IRB Approval Date
2019-04-02
IRB Approval Number
N/A
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information