Government employee and beneficiary preferences about redistribution
Last registered on March 24, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Government employee and beneficiary preferences about redistribution
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0007010
Initial registration date
February 04, 2021
Last updated
March 24, 2021 12:15 AM 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
MIT
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
University of Arkansas
PI Affiliation
Harvard University
Additional Trial Information
Status
On going
Start date
2020-09-28
End date
2024-12-31
Secondary IDs
IGI-1461
Abstract
This study is a survey experiment among conditional cash transfer program facilitators and beneficiaries in Indonesia to gauge how attitudes towards social protection programs are influenced by programmatic factors and how opinions on how rigidly the conditionality of cash transfers should be enforced may be affected by considering the enforcement of conditionality in one’s own community. This study is embedded in a larger survey of beneficiaries and facilitators of Indonesia’s PKH conditional cash transfer program which gathers information on the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on Indonesia’s poorest households and communities. PKH is one of Indonesia’s principal social protection programs, serving 10 million of Indonesia’s poorest, nation-wide. We send online surveys to all PKH facilitators (approximately 36,000 facilitators) via WhatsApp and SMS and use dynamic random sampling to each facilitator to distribute surveys to up to 5 randomly selected beneficiaries.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Gaduh, Arya, Rema Hanna and Benjamin Olken. 2021. "Government employee and beneficiary preferences about redistribution." AEA RCT Registry. March 24. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.7010-2.0.
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)
This survey experiment contains two randomized questions:
1) We randomly present respondents with one of seven hypothetical social protection programs with different budget usage and beneficiary satisfaction characteristics and then ask them to assess program success.
2) We randomly ask respondents to consider the tradeoff between rigidity and leniency in the enforcement of cash transfer conditionality, either before or after asking about the enforcement of conditionality in their communities.
Intervention Start Date
2020-10-06
Intervention End Date
2020-12-12
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
1) Perceived success of the hypothetical social protection program
2) Belief of the extent to which conditionality should be enforced rigidly or leniently
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
1) Perceived success of the hypothetical social protection program is measured by a 10-pt ordinal scale (1-unsuccessful to 10-successful)
2) Belief of the extent to which conditionality should be enforced rigidly or leniently is measured by a 10-pt ordinal scale (1- rigidly enforcing conditions to 10-being more lenient)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Information on the impact of Covid-19 in Indonesia
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
This survey experiment is embedded in a longer survey which also collects information such as:
- How social protection programs are delivered
- Knowledge and prevalence of Covid-19
- Impacts of the pandemic to agriculture, employment, migration, food price, and food security
- Coping strategies of families during the pandemic
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
This study is embedded in a larger survey of beneficiaries and facilitators of Indonesia’s PKH conditional cash transfer program which gathers information on the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on Indonesia’s poorest households and communities. We send online surveys to all PKH facilitators (approximately 36,000 facilitators) via WhatsApp and SMS and use dynamic random sampling to each facilitator to distribute surveys to up to 5 randomly selected beneficiaries. Each survey contains two experimental questions:
1) Each respondent is asked to evaluate the success of one hypothetical social program characterized by a set of quantifiable program characteristics. This hypothetical scenario is randomized such that each respondent receives only one of seven possible versions. Respondents are then asked to assess the success of the program. The levels of each program characteristics in each of the seven scenarios are designed to facilitate an analysis of how these characteristics influence perceptions of program success.
2) Each respondent is asked to consider the tradeoff between rigidity and leniency in the enforcement of cash transfer conditionality. This question is asked either randomly before or after asking how many beneficiaries in the respondent’s community have had conditional cash transfer payments reduced or suspended in the last 2 years due to failure to meet conditionality requirements.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Participant selection:
For the facilitators, we send out the survey to all facilitators on the official program roster.
Beneficiaries are randomly sampled using a dynamic algorithm within the facilitator survey which randomly selects up to 5 beneficiaries per facilitator, among all of a facilitator’s beneficiaries who have smartphones (necessary for completion of the online survey).
Question randomization:
All experimental questions are randomized automatically by the survey platform.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
N/A
Sample size: planned number of observations
48,214 individuals: - Facilitators: 28,460 complete responses (95% could be matched to an official facilitator roster) - Beneficiaries: 19,754 complete responses (85% could be matched to an official facilitator survey)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Sample size by treatment arms for complete responses:

1. Hypothetical social programs
A. Facilitators
Scenario 1 4.047
Scenario 2 4.069
Scenario 3 4.092
Scenario 4 4.073
Scenario 5 4.073
Scenario 6 4.036
Scenario 7 4.070

B. Beneficiaries
Scenario 1 2.830
Scenario 2 2.819
Scenario 3 2.822
Scenario 4 2.801
Scenario 5 2.823
Scenario 6 2.828
Scenario 7 2.831

2. Rigidity vs. leniency conditionality enforcement (asked before or after asking how many beneficiaries in the respondent’s community have had conditional payments reduced or suspended)
A. Facilitators
Before 14.251
After 14.209

B. Beneficiaries
Before 9.858
After 9.896
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
COUHES Committee on the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
IRB Approval Date
2020-09-28
IRB Approval Number
2009000235