The effect of perceived meaning of work on unethical behavior

Last registered on January 21, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
The effect of perceived meaning of work on unethical behavior
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0005330
Initial registration date
January 21, 2020

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
January 21, 2020, 1:49 PM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2020-01-28
End date
2021-12-31
Secondary IDs
Abstract
In a laboratory experiment, we examine how perceived meaning of work affects participants’ unethical behavior at work. All participants work on the same real-effort task. In the first treatment, there is no apparent meaning of the task. In the second treatment, meaning is introduced in form of minimal work recognition. Afterwards, participants self-determine their pay-off in private via die-roll with an opportunity to cheat without consequences or other people knowing. Furthermore, this study looks at the relation between produced output and unethical behavior.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Jaussi, Stefanie. 2020. "The effect of perceived meaning of work on unethical behavior." AEA RCT Registry. January 21. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.5330-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Participants work on a real-effort task with varying levels of meaning by treatment.
Intervention Start Date
2020-01-28
Intervention End Date
2021-04-01

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Deviation from expected pay-off distribution (1/6 for each dice-roll outcome) by treatment and by quantity produced (output of the real-effort task). Lying behavior is captured at the aggregate level.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Lab experiment. Between-subject design. Participants are randomized at the session level either to the treatment with no meaning or to the treatment with minimal meaning. There are two stages: First, participants work on a real-effort task with varying levels of meaning by treatment. The experimenters capture individual output quantity and quality. Second, participants self-determine their pay-off for the real-effort task through a die-roll. In the end, participants fill out a questionnaire.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Computer (lab experiment)
Randomization Unit
Experimental session
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
In total about 260 participants.
Sample size: planned number of observations
In total about 260 participants.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
About 130 participants per treatment.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Business Administration, Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Bern
IRB Approval Date
2020-01-20
IRB Approval Number
022020

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials