Rule bending on the frontlines of public service delivery

Last registered on October 27, 2022

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

Rule bending on the frontlines of public service delivery

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0005835

Initial registration date

May 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

May 19, 2020, 2:00 PM EDT

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

Last updated

October 27, 2022, 1:42 PM EDT

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

Locations

Country

Denmark

Region

Capital Region

Primary Investigator

Name

Paw Hansen

Affiliation

University of Copenhagen, Department of Political Science

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status

Completed

Start date

2020-06-01

End date

2020-06-30

Keywords

Labor, Welfare

Additional Keywords

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Prior work

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

Abstract

What role does front-line workers' motivation play in known heuristics affecting their decision making with clients? Will different types of motivation, for example, reduce or increase biases and discrimination?

Previous research suggests that when front-line workers face deservingness relevant cues in interaction with clients a psychological `deservingness heuristic' is triggered causing front-line workers to think about their decisions in terms of who deserves help - disregarding recognized legal or political standards.

The study examines this claim by drawing on data from a conjoint experiment embedded in a large-scale survey among Danish social workers.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Hansen, Paw. 2022. "Rule bending on the frontlines of public service delivery." AEA RCT Registry. October 27. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.5835-1.1

Sponsors & Partners

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

The intervention consists of manipulation of information cues regarding client characteristics in an online survey among Danish social workers.

Intervention Start Date

2020-06-01

Intervention End Date

2020-06-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Social workers willingness to sanction clients on a 10-point scale.

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

The study involves an individually randomized trial - building on survey data. The experiment is carried out among a nonprobability
sample of Danish social workers.

All survey respondents are first presented with an introductory text identical across experimental conditions. Then, respondents are presented with descriptions of three fictive clients, one by one, and asked if they would sanction in each of the given cases. The descriptions of clients is randomized using a conjoint approach drawing randomly from a pool of information cues (client characteristics).

Experimental Design Details

The study involves an individually randomized trial - building on survey data. The experiment is carried out among a nonprobability
sample of Danish social workers.

All survey respondents are first presented with an introductory text identical across experimental conditions. Then, respondents are presented with descriptions of three fictive clients and asked if they would sanction in each of the given cases. The descriptions of clients is randomized using a conjoint approach drawing randomly from a pool of information cues (client characteristics): age, length of unemployment, years of working experience, previous job type, reason for loss of job, civil status, whether they seem motivated to find a new job and whether they have been sanctioned before.

Randomization Method

Randomization is carried out by simple randomization by computer.

Randomization Unit

Individual survey respondent.

Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

300 individual respondents.

Sample size: planned number of observations

300 individual respondents each making decisions about 3 fictive clients = 900 observations in total.

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

Approx. 450 individual respondents in each of the two treatment arms.

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

Under the assumption of 450 valid responses and balanced groups, the study is powered to enable detecting of effects of f > .11 with high statistical power (Power = .90; alpha = .05, one-way ANOVA).

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB