| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Trial Status | Before in_development | After completed |
| Field Abstract | Before Empathy is said to be the antidote to in-group bias. In this study we evaluate the causal effects of empathy training on elite civil servants in collaboration with the civil service administration and assess its impact on social preferences, bureaucratic performance, and thought leadership. Recent research suggests that emphasizing malleability of empathy as being key to behavioral change. In a factorial design, we also assess the impacts of emotional intelligence training, the impact of reading material whose content application is assessed via social emotional learning exercises. We also randomize econometrics book (mastering metrics) across the civil servants subject to their selection of the metrics book, where book on empathy serves as a placebo. | After Empathy is said to be the antidote to in-group bias. In this study we evaluate the causal effects of empathy training on elite civil servants in collaboration with the civil service administration and assess its impact on social preferences, bureaucratic performance, and thought leadership. Recent research suggests that emphasizing malleability of empathy as being key to behavioral change. In a factorial design, we also assess the impacts of emotional intelligence training, the impact of reading material whose content application is assessed via social emotional learning exercises. We also randomize econometrics book (mastering metrics) across the civil servants subject to their selection of the metrics book, where book on empathy serves as a placebo. Update March 13, 2023: We now also are collecting data on the universe of spending decisions by the civil servants and evaluating the impact of the training workshop on empathy in Pakistan on policy outcomes in year 1 and year 2 post-workshop as they perform their official duties. Specifically, we will use government audit documents to investigate the spending decisions of treated versus placebo ministers across 12 government departments (which represent the universe of their spending choices). Our main hypothesis is that altruism training will increase spending on social policies (i.e. will raise ministers’ budgetary recommendations to education and health) and reduce spending on self-oriented policies (i.e. budgetary recommendations for personal security and office maintenance). |
| Field Last Published | Before May 08, 2021 10:42 PM | After March 13, 2023 09:41 AM |
| Field Primary Outcomes (End Points) | Before Job performance | After Job performance Update March 13, 2023: We are collecting data on the universe of spending decisions by the civil servants as they have now spent about 2 years in the field post-intervention. This data will become available through performance audits of deputy ministers which contain information on their spending on various government departments. There are 12 government departments on which they can choose to recommend a budgetary allocation. These 12 policy outcomes are: 1) health, 2) education, 3) personal security, 4) office budget, 5) IT, 6) development, 7) horticulture, 8) sports, 9) entertainment, 10) law and order, 11) climate encroachment, 12) disaster. |
| Field Primary Outcomes (Explanation) | Before Quality of civil service | After Main Hypotheses. —In our pre-analysis, we outline two main categories of policies that are most likely to be impacted by altruism training. For instance, we expect social policies, i.e. spending on health and education departments, to be positively impacted and selfish (self-oriented) policies, i.e. personal security and office budget, to be negatively affected (as they potentially crowd-out government funds) or unaffected (if government budget is not binding and there is no crowd-out). In the case of crowd-out, these selfish policies would be negatively impacted by increased value of altruism. Our main hypothesis, therefore, is that spending on social policies will increase and spending on selfish policies will decrease, while the other 8 policies will be unaffected. Main Hypotheses. —In our pre-analysis, we outline two main categories of policies that are most likely to be impacted by altruism training. For instance, we expect social policies, i.e. spending on health and education departments, to be positively impacted and selfish (self-oriented) policies, i.e. personal security and office budget, to be negatively affected (as they potentially crowd-out government funds) or unaffected (if government budget is not binding and there is no crowd-out). In the case of crowd-out, these selfish policies would be negatively impacted by increased value of altruism. Our main hypothesis, therefore, is that spending on social policies will increase and spending on selfish policies will decrease, while the other 8 policies will be unaffected. |
| Field Experimental Design (Public) | Before Lectures are delivered over zoom and randomized at the individual level. Factorial design: empathy malleable vs. empathy utilitarian vs. both vs. control (focusing on leadership) in online lectures. Class-wide lectures will also be randomized, focusing on emotional intelligence vs. macro-economics lectures | After Lectures are delivered over zoom and randomized at the individual level. Factorial design: empathy malleable vs. empathy utilitarian vs. both vs. control (focusing on leadership) in online lectures. Class-wide lectures will also be randomized, focusing on emotional intelligence vs. macro-economics lectures. Update March 13, 2023: We now also are collecting data on universe of spending decisions by the civil servants. Specificially, the study experimentally evaluates three methods of cultivating prosocial behaviour (i) Utilitarian Value of Empathy (ii) Malleability of Empathy (iii) Joint Utilitarian and Malleability Treatment (iv) Placebo training. We outline two main categories of policies that are most likely to be impacted by altruism training. For instance, we expect social policies, i.e. spending on health and education departments, to be positively impacted and self-oriented policies, i.e. personal security and office budget, to be negatively affected (as they potentially crowd-out government funds). Our main hypothesis, therefore, is that spending on social policies will increase and spending on selfish policies will decrease, while the other 8 policies will be unaffected. For more details, see the pre-analysis plan. |
| Field Public analysis plan | Before No | After Yes |
| Field Secondary Outcomes (End Points) | Before Social preference measurements | After |
| Field Building on Existing Work | Before | After No |
| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Document | Before |
After
PAP Pre-Analysis Plan Policy Altruism.pdf
MD5:
efb31c63032430711568462a08707231
SHA1:
a918d85bba4d6a57ed9aaa373189afdf01cb5283
|
| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Affiliation | Before Aix-Marseille University | After New Economic School |