x

Please fill out this short user survey of only 3 questions in order to help us improve the site. We appreciate your feedback!
Choice-set effects in fairness decisions
Last registered on January 19, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Choice-set effects in fairness decisions
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0007057
Initial registration date
January 16, 2021
Last updated
January 19, 2021 6:48 AM EST
Location(s)
Region
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
NHH
Other Primary Investigator(s)
Additional Trial Information
Status
In development
Start date
2021-01-18
End date
2021-01-22
Secondary IDs
Abstract
In the present study I conduct a controlled online experiment investigating choice-set effects in fairness decisions. Specifically, I look at range based choice-set effects. That is, the effects of expanding the range of one choice dimension. I use a spectator design with between-subject treatment to expand the range in one dimension of a fairness decision by adding a decoy alternative. Thus, I am able to causally infer how expanding the range of a choice dimension in a fairness decision affects the preference relation between the original alternatives in a choice set.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Madland, Kjetil. 2021. "Choice-set effects in fairness decisions." AEA RCT Registry. January 19. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.7057-1.1.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2021-01-18
Intervention End Date
2021-01-22
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcome is the share of spectators in each group who rank alternative 1 as more preferred than alternative 2.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
I study spectator decisions. This way, I can control the effect of choice-set structure on distributive preferences without having to factor in self interest.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization is done in the Qualtrics experiment
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
1400 individual spectators
Sample size: planned number of observations
1400 individual spectators
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
200 individual spectators in each treatment arm of the four choice scenarios.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
With N=200 in each treatment cell, alpha=0.05 and 90 percent statistical power, the smallest detectable effect size is 16 percent. This is about in line with the effect size from the pilot study.
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
NHH Internal Review Board by Lars Jacob Tynes Pedersen
IRB Approval Date
2020-12-09
IRB Approval Number
NHH-IRB 13/20
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information
Post-Trial
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Intervention
Is the intervention completed?
No
Is 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