x

We are happy to announce that all trial registrations will now be issued DOIs (digital object identifiers). For more information, see here.
Does self-reflection, professional skills, or cash lead to the highest socio-emotional and economic gains for women in Rwanda?
Last registered on October 15, 2019

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Does self-reflection, professional skills, or cash lead to the highest socio-emotional and economic gains for women in Rwanda?
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004846
Initial registration date
October 14, 2019
Last updated
October 15, 2019 9:48 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
UC Berkeley Dept of Agricultural and Resource Economics
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
Georgetown University
PI Affiliation
Georgetown University
Additional Trial Information
Status
On going
Start date
2019-08-26
End date
2021-06-30
Secondary IDs
Abstract
We randomly assign women participants to one of three conditions. One third of participants are invited to attend Storytelling for Leadership (SfL), a two-day workshop that teaches leadership skills by teaching participants to self-reflect and develop a personal narrative. One third of participants are invited to attend a professional development (PD) workshop, which teaches participants skills including public speaking, networking, goal setting, and identifying new opportunities. The final third of participants are not invited to attend a workshop, but instead receive the per-participant cost of the workshop in cash, approximately USD 35. We hypothesize that women who participated in the Storytelling for Leadership (SfL) workshop will express higher socio-emotional gains than women who participated in the professional development (PD) workshop, and both SfL and PD participants will express higher socio-emotional gains than women in the cash control group, and that these effects hold even when controlling for economic gains. Furthermore, we hypothesize that women who participated in the Storytelling for Leadership (SfL) workshop will express higher economic gains than women who participated in the professional development (PD) workshop, and both SfL and PD participants will express higher economic gains than women in the cash control group.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Lang, Megan, Edward Soule and Catherine Tinsley. 2019. "Does self-reflection, professional skills, or cash lead to the highest socio-emotional and economic gains for women in Rwanda?." AEA RCT Registry. October 15. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.4846-1.0.
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)
We randomly assign participants to one of three conditions. One third of participants are invited to attend Storytelling for Leadership (SfL), a two-day workshop that teaches leadership skills by teaching participants to self-reflect and develop a personal narrative. One third of participants are invited to attend a professional development (PD) workshop, which teaches participants skills including public speaking, networking, goal setting, and identifying new opportunities. The final third of participants are not invited to attend a workshop, but instead receive the per-participant cost of the workshop in cash, approximately USD 35.
Intervention Start Date
2019-09-04
Intervention End Date
2019-10-01
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Socio-emotional: self-advocacy, number of leadership positions currently held, connections within cooperatives, connections within the home and village, problem solving, effective communication.
Economic: estimated income, likelihood of working for money, marginal utility of expenditure.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
We have four measures of self-advocacy. Participants rate on a five-point frequency scale the statements “I ask others to support me”, “I seek out new opportunities”, and “I ask others to connect me to new opportunities.” We also ask, “Suppose you learn about a job that pays RWF 1000 more each day than you currently earn. It is not guaranteed that you will get the job, and it will cost you 2 days wages if you apply. How inclined would you be to apply for the job?” This question is on a four-point scale. We combine all four measures into an equally weighted index to estimate changes.

We have five measures of connection with others in the cooperative: people are likely to come to me for advice, I help others, I have people with whom I feel completely secure, there are people who will stand by me during difficult times, and people know a lot about me. We measure all five outcomes on a five-point frequency scale (almost never true, true less than half the time, true about half the time, true more than half the time, almost always true). We will combine these outcomes into an index, equally weighting each measure, to estimate changes in how connected women feel with others in their cooperative.


We elicit the same five measures of connection with others in participants’ homes and villages as we elicit for others in participants’ cooperatives. Again, we will combine these outcomes into an index.

We have two measures of problem solving, both measured on a five-point scale. We combine these into an index, equally weighting each measure.

We have six measures of effective communication that we combine into an index. Participants rate the following five statements on a five-point frequency scale: I make suggestions to others, if I have a problem or a new idea that would affect or benefit my community I raise it to others in my community, people understand me when I make a suggestion for how to accomplish a task, people understand me when I give them feedback, and people understand what I am saying when I ask them to do something. We also ask whether participants have spoken up in a group situation where they did not know everyone present in the past two weeks.

We ask for an estimate of income earned by the participant over the past month. If a participant cannot provide an estimate, we provide intervals of RWF 5,000 and ask the participant to choose the one that seems closest to what they think they earned. In the case that a participant chooses an interval, we will use the midpoint of the interval as the estimate of income.

We ask participants to describe their current work situation and code one for participants who are working in any form, including an apprenticeship, and zero otherwise.

We calculate each participant’s marginal utility of expenditure using information about household composition and consumption expenditures on a set of eighteen food items following Ligon (2017).
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Socio-emotional: self-perceived social status, connection to workshop group, self-evaluation of value, resilience, self-perception as a leader, aspirations for the future.

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
We measure self-perceived social status in present, five years in the past, and five years in the past on a scale between one and ten. We examine four measures of changes in self-perceived social status between the baseline and follow-up surveys: (1) current self-perceived social status; (2) self-perceived social status five years from now; (3) difference between current measure and five years in the past; (4) difference between five years from now and five years in the past.

We measure how connected and together participants feel with one another using a six-point scale.

We have two measures eliciting self-value, both of which are on a five-point scale. We combine these into an index, equally weighting each measure.

We have two measures of resilience, both measured on a five-point scale. We combine these into an index, equally weighting each measure.

We ask how closely participants identify as being a leader on a six-point scale.

We have five measures of aspirations for the future. First, does the participant have a role model? Second, does the participant believe that they can ever be as successful as their role model? Third, conditional on answering yes to the second question, how long does the participant think it will take to be as successful as their role model? Fourth, does the participant have a goal they are working toward? Fifth, has the participant achieved the goal they stated for themselves at the start of the study? We estimate effects for all five dimensions separately.
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
We randomize 451 participants into one of three groups.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Done in an office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual participants.
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
451 women.
Sample size: planned number of observations
We will have 451 individuals observed in each of three survey rounds, plus 308 women observed in the post workshop survey.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
154 in SfL, 155 in PD, 142 in the cash control group.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
UC Berkeley Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects
IRB Approval Date
2019-08-25
IRB Approval Number
2018-01-10656
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information