Sexual objectification of women in media and economic decision-making

Last registered on December 07, 2020
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Sexual objectification of women in media and economic decision-making
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0006562
Initial registration date
October 06, 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
October 06, 2020, 7:27 AM EDT

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

Last updated
December 07, 2020, 5:03 AM EST

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

Locations

Country
Sweden
Region
Gothenburg

Primary Investigator

Name
Fredrik Carlsson
Affiliation
University of Gothenburg
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Mitesh Kataria
PI Affiliation
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Elina Lampi
PI Affiliation
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2020-12-14
End date
2020-12-21
Keywords
Behavior, Gender
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Abstract
In a laboratory experiment we investigate the role of sexual objectification in media on economic decision-making. In the experiment subjects are asked to evaluate advertisements from women’s magazines. In the treatment groups these images are sexually objectifying, while they are neutral in the control group. The primary hypothesis is that sexual objectifying makes women self-objectifying and as a result their perceived power in economic decision-making context will be weaker. We will measure this through a required minimum compensation to participate in an additional study following directly after the experiment.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Carlsson, Fredrik, Mitesh Kataria and Elina Lampi. 2020. "Sexual objectification of women in media and economic decision-making." AEA RCT Registry. December 07. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.6562-1.1
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
In all groups subjects are asked to look at a number of advertisements from women’s magazines. For each advertisement we ask them if they think that it is an effective way to catch their attention. In the treatment groups the advertisement are sexually objectifying, while in the control group they are neutral. All the ads have the same models and brand names. Treatment 2 differs to treatment 1 in that an additional warning label is printed on the advertisements saying that “photo shopped images can create unrealistic body ideals”.
Intervention Start Date
2020-12-14
Intervention End Date
2020-12-21

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Required minimum compensation for participating in an additional experiment
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Finally, we inform them that there is another study that they can participate in. This study is more demanding and focus on decision-making and requires cognitive effort. Selection into this study will based on their required minimum compensation for participating in this study. This compensation will be elicited in an incentive compatible way using a Becker-Marschack-DeGroot Mechanism.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Extent of self-objectification
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Measured through open statements how they feel right now, and set of pre-defined items that they can pick

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
In a laboratory experiment we investigate the role of sexual objectification. There is one control group and two treatments groups. In the two treatment groups, there is an explicit sexual objectification of women, while not in the control group.
Experimental Design Details
Experimental design
In a laboratory experiment we investigate the role of sexual objectification. There is one control group and two treatments groups. In the two treatment groups, there is an explicit sexual objectification of women, while not in the control group. In all groups subjects are asked to look at a number of advertisements from women’s magazines. For each advertisement we ask them if they think that it is an effective way to catch their attention. In the treatment groups the advertisement are sexually objectifying, while in the control group they are neutral. All the ads have the same models and brand names. Treatment 2 differs to treatment 1 in that an additional warning label is printed on the advertisements saying that “photo shopped images can create unrealistic body ideals”.
After subjects have looked at 6 images we ask a set of follow-up questions aimed at measuring their degree of sexual self-objectification. Finally, we inform them that there is another study that they can participate in. This study is more demanding and focus on decision-making and requires cognitive effort. Selection into this study will based on their required minimum compensation for participating in this study. This compensation will be elicited in an incentive compatible way using a Becker-Marschack-DeGroot Mechanism. This stated compensation will be the primary outcome of the study.
The main hypothesis is that subjects in the treatment group 1 will have a lower required minimum compensation because of the sexual self-objectification compared to the control group. A second hypothesis is that treatment group 1 will have an lower required minimum compensation compared to treatment group 2 because of the warning label. This concerns our main subject group which will be women. The subject pool includes men as well, and similar tests will be conducted on this subject group, but that part is exploratory since we do not have any prior about the direction of the effect.
Randomization Method
By computer
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
0
Sample size: planned number of observations
2000
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
500 per treatment and subject group
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Swedish Ethical Review Authority
IRB Approval Date
2020-06-01
IRB Approval Number
2019-05655
Analysis Plan

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
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