x

Please fill out this short user survey of only 3 questions in order to help us improve the site. We appreciate your feedback!
The Effects of Negotiation Skills on Labor Market Outcomes and the Gender Pay Gap
Last registered on July 27, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
The Effects of Negotiation Skills on Labor Market Outcomes and the Gender Pay Gap
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0005701
Initial registration date
April 09, 2020
Last updated
July 27, 2020 11:08 AM EDT
Location(s)
Region
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
University of Chicago
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
Erasmus University
Additional Trial Information
Status
In development
Start date
2020-04-10
End date
2020-10-01
Secondary IDs
Abstract
A widely-held explanation for the gender pay gap is that women do not negotiate salary as much as men. Recent surveys indicate 59% of US employees accepted the salary they were first offered, and did not negotiate. 68% of women did not negotiate while 52% of men did not. Job candidates may not be realizing their full labor market potential by not negotiating. Can we help candidates improve job search outcomes by teaching negotiation skills? Can we help close the gender pay gap in this way?

We will conduct a field experiment in Thailand to give job seekers online training on salary negotiation. The negotiation training aims to teach them that job interview process is a two-way bargaining process with potential room to negotiate. It teaches them ways of pursuing mutual benefits. Also, the training gives them tools for advocating for one's value -- qualitatively and through market expected wages. The central part of the training is to lower psychological costs in initiating negotiation by teaching ways of navigating the negotiation process.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Chotiputsilp, Ratchanon and Taeho Kim. 2020. "The Effects of Negotiation Skills on Labor Market Outcomes and the Gender Pay Gap." AEA RCT Registry. July 27. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.5701-1.2000000000000002.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2020-04-10
Intervention End Date
2020-09-01
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Amount of raise in salary and benefits from the previous position, whether the individual is employed, and whether the individual attempted and negotiated salary raise and other benefits
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Beliefs in social acceptance of negotiation, favorable opinions in the workplace, negotiation skills that can be tested based on the training material, differential effects by gender, and whether respondents are willing to negotiate, respondents' change in expected wages
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
We will ask 7 binary questions to ask their understanding of negotiation process. We will create an index aggregating responders' performance in these questions. We will measure the respondents' willingness to negotiate by asking their comfort levels and future plans of negotiating. We ask this to take into account respondents may not have had opportunities to have interviews during the study period. We are also able to observe what wages they expected by checking their resumes.
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Treated individuals get either of two treatments: full negotiation training or information treatment on expected market wages. The information treatment is also included in the full training. The other individuals are controls. The treatment follows right after collecting baseline information in the same survey. We will implement the endline survey 2-3 months after the initial intervention to collect outcome variables.

All individuals are invited for a "study on interview practices in Thailand." The individuals are collected from resumes on job board sites. After screening individuals who are likely to do job search in the near future, I collect baseline information. Randomization happens thereafter in the same survey. The training, which lasts around 30 minutes, includes text information, video demonstration, and interactive quizzes. The key part of the training is to lower psychological costs to negotiation. Part of the training is giving respondents information what they are expected to get in the market given their occupation, education, and region of residence. This part is given to the information treatment as well. After 2-3 months we will field the endline survey measuring the outcomes. For added reliability of the study, we will give a cash incentive to provide the most recent pay stubs to back up the respondents' claims on their salaries.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization done through Qualtrics survey.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
N/A
Sample size: planned number of observations
We plan on distributing surveys so that we have 7,000 respondents for the baseline survey (men and women equally selected). With attrition we expect to have around 4,200 individuals at the final endline surveys.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
In the endline survey we expect to have 700 men and 700 women in each arm (4,200 total)
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials

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

Request Information
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
The University of Chicago
IRB Approval Date
2020-04-06
IRB Approval Number
IRB20-0289
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