x

Please fill out this short user survey of only 3 questions in order to help us improve the site. We appreciate your feedback!
When Social Identity Matters: Low Self-Esteem in Highly Esteemed Groups Predicts “We-thinking”
Last registered on September 05, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
When Social Identity Matters: Low Self-Esteem in Highly Esteemed Groups Predicts “We-thinking”
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004655
Initial registration date
September 01, 2019
Last updated
September 05, 2020 5:51 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
University of Michigan
Other Primary Investigator(s)
Additional Trial Information
Status
On going
Start date
2019-12-28
End date
2020-12-31
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Social motivations, such as esteem, enjoy wide recognition as critical determinants of human behavior. According to R. Akerlof (2016), esteem is defined as an individual’s judgment of how good an agent/group is compared with reference agents/groups. In this paper, we focus on two types of esteem: a person’s self-esteem and the esteem conferred on the group to which the person belongs. We extend a model based on R. Akerlof where individuals face a tradeoff between maximizing the group’s payoffs and their individual payoffs, and their willingness to maximize the group’s payoffs is positively related to the extent to which their group-esteem is higher than their self-esteem. Our main prediction is that subjects with high (low) group-esteem and low (high) self-esteem are most (least) engaged in maximizing the group’s payoffs. To test this prediction, we conduct a laboratory experiment in which self-esteem and group-esteem are manipulated through an inter-personal and inter-group competition in which subjects answer questions from an established IQ test. Subjects allocate tokens such that either their own or the group’s payoff is maximized.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Song, Zhewei. 2020. "When Social Identity Matters: Low Self-Esteem in Highly Esteemed Groups Predicts “We-thinking”." AEA RCT Registry. September 05. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.4655-3.0.
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
2019-12-28
Intervention End Date
2020-12-31
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
The number of tokens subjects' allocate to their personal account and the number of tokens they allocate to their group's account.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Subjects' self-reported group attachment level
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
This study is intended to test the following main predictions: 1) When a person has high group-esteem and low self-esteem, she puts more weight on her group’s payoff than her own payoff and thus allocates more to her group than herself. 2) When she has low group-esteem and high self-esteem, she puts more weight on her own payoff than her group’s payoff and thus allocates more to herself than her group.
I conduct a laboratory experiment to test the hypotheses above. The experiment has two treatments: Baseline and TreatInfo. Subjects in the TreatInfo treatment receive information about their group status (i.e. win the group battle or not) and individual status (i.e. win the individual battle or not) before their allocation between their groups and themselves, while subjects in the Baseline do not have the information before their allocation. Both treatments consist of four stages. There are six subjects in each session. I use z-Tree (Fischbacher, 2007) to program this experiment. The show-up fee is $8.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
By a computer
Randomization Unit
individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
174 individuals
Sample size: planned number of observations
174 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
30 individuals in Baseline; 144 individuals in TreatInfo
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Health Sciences and Behavioral Sciences Institutional Review Board at the University of Michigan
IRB Approval Date
2019-08-26
IRB Approval Number
HUM00168499
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information