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.
Health Care Opinion Research 1
Last registered on August 27, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Health Care Opinion Research 1
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0006169
Initial registration date
July 18, 2020
Last updated
August 27, 2020 1:53 PM EDT
Location(s)

This section is unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
IUPUI
Other Primary Investigator(s)
Additional Trial Information
Status
In development
Start date
2020-08-03
End date
2021-08-31
Secondary IDs
Abstract
The objective of this experiment is to investigate whether vignettes/stories about people suffering because of the Covid-19 pandemic can evoke (1) emotional reactions and (2) increase support for health polices to increase insurance coverage.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Ottoni-Wilhelm, Mark. 2020. "Health Care Opinion Research 1." AEA RCT Registry. August 27. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.6169-1.2000000000000002.
Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
The objective of this experiment is to investigate whether vignettes/stories about people suffering because of the Covid-19 pandemic can evoke (1) emotional reactions and (2) increase support for health polices to increase insurance coverage. Four stories will be investigated. Two emphasize the suffering of other people who do not have adequate health coverage. Two emphasize the risk to self if others people are not covered.
Intervention Start Date
2020-08-03
Intervention End Date
2020-11-30
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Empathic State
All participants will fill out the Emotional Response Scale (e.g., Batson, et al., 1988, 1989, 1991, 1997, 2007). This scale includes a six-item measure of Empathic State.

Distress/Negative State
The Emotional Response Scale also includes a 12-item measure of Distress and Negative State.

Health policy outcome
Ten items mostly drawn from Kaiser Family Foundation Health Tracking Polls [5, 6] that measure participant’s opinions about increasing health care coverage.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The Emotional Response Scale has been used in numerous experiments by Batson and colleagues to measure Empathic State and Distress-Negative State after providing participants with an emotionally evocative story. The scale is made up of 18 emotions (examples: sympathetic, compassionate, alarmed, sad). A participant self-rates (on a scale from 1 to 7) how much they experienced each emotion after reading the story.

The health policy outcome are eight items drawn directly from [5], one KFF item modified by us, and one item created by us. Examples:

a. “Do you favor or oppose having a national health plan, sometimes called Medicare-for-all, in which all Americans would get their insurance from a single government plan?”

b. “Please tell me if you have a positive or negative reaction to each term: National Health plan.”

c. “Generally speaking, do you favor or oppose the federal government doing more to help provide health insurance for more Americans?”

Response options are: strongly (favor/positive), somewhat (favor/positive), somewhat (oppose/negative), strongly (oppose/negative). The “don’t know” response forms the middle category.
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Principle of Care State
These is an eight-item scale intended to measure a state of thinking about moral principles to help other people. It parallels Bekkers and Ottoni-Wilhelm’s (2016) dispositional measure, and was created by Verkaik, Bekkers, and Ottoni-Wilhelm (2015).
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Principle of Care State
The conditions are not intended to increase thinking about moral principles to help other people, but the conditions may unintentionally do this. The PoC State scale is included to check this.
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
The experimental design is between-subjects, 5 x 1.

The participants will be Amazon Mechanical Turk workers invited to complete a “Human Intelligence Task” (HIT) called “Evaluating Messages”. The inclusion criteria are: (1) U.S. citizen, (2) 18 years or older, (3) done at least one previous HIT, and (4) have completed 95% or more of their previous HITs.

Approximately one-fifth of the participants will be randomly assigned to each of the five conditions: Control, Suffering of Others 1, 2 and Risk to Self 1, 2.

After reading the stories participants fill out the Emotional Response Scale, the Principle of Care state measurement, the health policy questions (the Attention-Check question is in the middle of the health policy questions), demographics, the Manipulation-Check question, and the political identity question.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
The randomization is by computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual (at the level of the individual MTurk worker).
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
n.a.
Sample size: planned number of observations
N = 525 MTurk workers (approximately). N = 105 per condition (approximately) is sufficient to detect a change of one-third of a standard deviation in the health policy scale and the Empathic State and Distress-Negative State scales. See “Power calculation” below.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
N = 105 (approximately) in each of the five conditions.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Based on previous measurements from an MTurk sample of the standard deviation of our (sES = 1.65), we are powered at 80% to detect a difference between conditions of 1/3 sES. We are also 80% powered to detect a 1/3 sDNS difference in Distress-Negative State. Based on a previous KFF Health Tracking Poll [5} we are powered at 80% to detect a difference between conditions of 1/3 of a standard deviation in the health policy outcome variable.
Supporting Documents and Materials
Documents
Document Name
Modification 01
Document Type
other
Document Description
We designed two additional conditions and a second "control" group. Details are in "chp01-Pre-reg-001B-v01a-AEA RCT Registry-PreTest01-MTurk-Modification01.pdf"
File
Modification 01

MD5: 9b984e5252127c007095d15a86e429dc

SHA1: bec1c313edf35b74b951ca2cc4ec53b4b99decc5

Uploaded At: August 27, 2020

IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Indiana University Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2020-07-20
IRB Approval Number
2004540189
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information