Experiments on risk framing and moral appeal in the context of the Coronavirus spread

Last registered on July 17, 2023

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

Experiments on risk framing and moral appeal in the context of the Coronavirus spread

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0005573

Initial registration date

March 19, 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

March 19, 2020, 12:13 PM EDT

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

Last updated

July 17, 2023, 3:56 AM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Country

Germany

Region

Primary Investigator

Name

Moritz Drupp

Affiliation

University of Hamburg

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Martin Quaas

PI Affiliation

University of Leipzig and idiv

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Jasper Meya

PI Affiliation

University of Leipzig and idiv

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Björn Bos

PI Affiliation

University of Hamburg

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

Completed

Start date

2020-03-19

End date

2022-12-31

Keywords

Finance & Microfinance, Health

Additional Keywords

pandemic, risk-taking, moral appeal, private contribution to a public good, self-defence, compliance with regulations, truth-telling, coronavirus

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.

Abstract

We aim at a better understanding of what shapes individual behavior in times of the spread of the Coronavirus.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Bos, Björn et al. 2023. "Experiments on risk framing and moral appeal in the context of the Coronavirus spread." AEA RCT Registry. July 17. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.5573-1.6

Sponsors & Partners

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

Our study exploits the spread of the Coronavirus in Germany.

Intervention (Hidden)

Intervention Start Date

2020-03-19

Intervention End Date

2022-12-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

- private provision of a public good (e.g., “social distancing”, hygiene measures, and willingness to get tested)
- motivation to provide the public good
- support of enforcement of the public good provision
- risk taking
- truth-telling
- infection with the Coronavirus

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

We conduct a panel survey experiment with 3 waves. The survey includes questions on subjects’ current health level, past and planned behavior related to the Coronavirus, support for governmental measures to slow the Coronavirus, as well as stated preferences. Please refer to our Pre-Analysis Plan for more details.

Experimental Design Details

Our survey includes two incentivized experiments to measure risk-taking and truth-telling based on Cohn et al. (2014, 2015).

Furthermore, we manipulate the risk framing and moral appeal to subjects in two independent information treatments:
1) In the first information treatment, we make risk concerning the Coronavirus either more or less salient. Subjects receive factual information about the health and economic risk triggered by the Coronavirus. We vary those messages and impose a high-risk and a low-risk framing.
2) In the second information treatment, we provide subjects with a statement of a medical infectologist that appeals to subject`s moral. His statement highlights either the moral duty of subjects (deontological ethics) or subject`s consequences (consequentialist ethics).

Each information treatment also includes one control group.

We exploit three natural sources of variation in the risk to get infected with the Coronavirus (resulting in different ratios of private and external benefits of behavioural change):
1) spatial heterogeneity
2) heterogeneity between societal groups (e.g., people older than 60, people with previous illnesses)
3) heterogeneity over time in the course of the epidemic dissemitation

Please refer to our Pre-Analysis Plan for more details.

Randomization Method

Randomization of respondents over treatment groups in the survey is done via a computer and independent for each information treatment.

Randomization Unit

Individual randomization over survey respondents.

Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

The first survey wave will encompass 3.650 respondents. Depending on the willingness to participate in the survey again (and the timing of survey waves two and three), approximately 2.660 respondents will be in the second survey wave and approximately 1.330 respondents will be in the third survey wave.

Sample size: planned number of observations

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

For each of the two information treatments, we assign subjects with an equal probability into the respective control and treatment groups. Hence, we expect 1/3 of all subjects in the respective control group, 1/3 of the subjects in the first respective treatment group, and 1/3 of all subjects in the second respective treatment group.

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB