x

NEW UPDATE: Completed trials may now upload and register supplementary documents (e.g. null results reports, populated pre-analysis plans, or post-trial results reports) in the Post Trial section under Reports, Papers, & Other Materials.
How Trade Became Partisan (Again)
Last registered on February 14, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
How Trade Became Partisan (Again)
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0005454
Initial registration date
February 12, 2020
Last updated
February 14, 2020 7:05 AM EST
Location(s)
Region
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
Stanford University
PI Affiliation
Georgetown University
Additional Trial Information
Status
In development
Start date
2020-02-14
End date
2020-02-28
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Despite a long-standing expectation that trade politics in the US had become a non-partisan affair, the 2016 presidential election witnessed a collapse of support for free trade among Republican voters. While some current work suggests that this was the result of either simple elite cuing, or of rising "nationalist" populism on the right, we demonstrate that these accounts overlook a crucial value that mediated the effectiveness of Trump's narrative about trade as an assault on the American Dream: meritocracy. Americans who believe that the (domestic) market in the US is fair---particularly those facing economic anxiety themselves---were especially primed to respond to Trump's explanation that recent economic frustration was due to an unfair international playing field.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Ballard-Rosa, Cameron, Judith Goldstein and Nita Rudra. 2020. "How Trade Became Partisan (Again)." AEA RCT Registry. February 14. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.5454-1.0.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Respondents in an online survey will be randomly assigned to one of 4 treatment conditions which expose them to information about potential threats to American wellbeing: a "foreign economic policies" framing, a "rising economic inequality" framing, an "automation" framing, and control (no framing information provided).
Intervention Start Date
2020-02-14
Intervention End Date
2020-02-28
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Our primary outcome variable is a measure of respondent preference for trade protection in the US.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Respondents in an online survey will be randomly assigned to one of 4 treatment conditions which expose them to information about potential threats to American wellbeing: a "foreign economic policies" framing, a "rising economic inequality" framing, an "automation" framing, and control (no framing information provided).
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
computer randomization
Randomization Unit
individual survey respondents
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
N/A
Sample size: planned number of observations
500 survey respondents
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
125 respondents
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
Documents
Document Name
Pre-analysis plan
Document Type
other
Document Description
File
Pre-analysis plan

MD5: 97a3d9e48fcf674be9917e785a624ca4

SHA1: cd26acc2c539c049ab3b1ea2b4dccaf5ec5e37f0

Uploaded At: February 12, 2020

IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Human Subjects Research
IRB Approval Date
2018-05-10
IRB Approval Number
46475
Post-Trial
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Intervention
Is the intervention completed?
No
Is 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