We examine three core questions: what influences takeup of commitment devices among middle school students, can the provision of commitment devices improve middle school student behavior, what students benefit most from the takeup of commitment devices.
External Link(s)
Citation
Duckworth, Angela and Todd Rogers. 2015. "Commitment Devices and Student Self-Control." AEA RCT Registry. April 08. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.687-1.0.
Students are randomly assigned to one of three conditions: opt-in to enroll in a commitment device, opt-out to enroll in a commitment device, and control. The commitment device pertains to behavior assessments delivered weekly.
Intervention Start Date
2014-11-04
Intervention End Date
2015-04-09
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Scores on weekly behavior assessments
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Three conditions, as described above.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Computer
Randomization Unit
Student-level
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Sample size: planned number of clusters
5 schools, but individual-level randomization
Sample size: planned number of observations
~1,300
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
~430 per condition
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)