Credit Card Statements: Effects of simplification, anchoring and salience on understanding and on repayment decisions.
Last registered on June 03, 2021


Trial Information
General Information
Credit Card Statements: Effects of simplification, anchoring and salience on understanding and on repayment decisions.
Initial registration date
June 02, 2021
Last updated
June 03, 2021 12:00 PM EDT

This section is unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
Primary Investigator
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
PI Affiliation
PI Affiliation
The Fletcher School | Tufts University
PI Affiliation
Plano CDE
Additional Trial Information
In development
Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
This laboratory RCT will investigate how simplifying language and reorganizing information in Credit Card Statements affects the understanding of selected information about credit limits and costs associated to repayment and credit card usage. It will also research how anchoring and salience could play a key role in determining individual repayment decisions.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Barlach, Breno et al. 2021. "Credit Card Statements: Effects of simplification, anchoring and salience on understanding and on repayment decisions. ." AEA RCT Registry. June 03.
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
The experiment will test if using credit card statements with simplified language and design helps individuals make better financial decisions. The idea is that information conveyed by credit card statements tends to be presented in a technical and confusing way, which limits individuals understanding. Therefore, by simplifying the statements, one expects people understand better the use and risk of utilizing this particular financial product.

To assess this hypothesis individuals will be randomly allocated to a control group or one of two treatment groups. The control group will be shown a statement that is similar to those currently available for a local credit card. Treatment group 1, will view an improved statement that changes the design and wording of the document trying to convey better financial information related to repayment options, costs and fees of credit cards. Treatment 2 incorporates the changes in the improved statement as T1, but highlights the lowest interest payment options (salience). All statements are based on the same information and the same hypothetical fees and charges.

Aside from the main intervention related to credit card statements, we want to test if anchoring can affect financial decision making when paying financial obligations. For this purpose we will randomly allocate half of the participants of the control and treatment groups to different payment screens. The control group for this intervention will see a blank form when deciding the amount of the payment they are willing to make, and the treated group will see a prefilled payment form that shows the total amount.

This second intervention is focused on anchoring and pre-filled payment screens. The idea is that pre-filling amounts to pay can nudge individuals to paying the statement in a way it reduces fees and interests associated with the use of the financial product.

Given this design, the experiment will consist of one pure treatment group and 5 treatment branches as follows:
Intervention 1 - Different credit card statements:
- Control (T0)
- Improved statement design and clearer language (T1)
- Improved statement T1 with focus on low interests (T2).

Intervention 2 - Prefilled payment form:
- Control: blank form (Pure Control - T0.0), Prefilled form (T0.1)
- T1: blank form (T1.0), Prefilled form (T1.1)
- T2: blank form (T2.0), Prefilled form (T2.1)
Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
1. Survey measures of understanding
2. Time to answer
3. Experimental measures of repayment decisions
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
1. Survey measures of understanding: number of correct answers to factual questions
2. Time to answer
3. Experimental measures of repayment decisions:
- Continuous variable indicating the percentage of the payment amount over the statement total amount (the higher the better)
- Continuous variable indicating the total amount of repayment chosen
- Categorical variable indicating frequency of categories of repayment options deemed correct: “total”, “minimum”, “4x installment”, “6x”, etc.
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Survey measures of financial literacy
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Participants will be randomly allocated into one of the following treatment arms: Pure control(T0.0), Control anchored at total value (T0.1), T1 anchored at zero (T1.0), T1 anchored at total (T1.1), T2 anchored at zero (T2.0) and T2 anchored at total (T2.1). Based on the statement presented, participants will be asked to decide on repayment of the credit card and then proceed to respond to a series of survey questions to test their understanding regarding credit card limits, consequences for each repayment option and card costs.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Respondents will be randomly assigned to view Control, Treatment 1 and Treatment 2 statements by the panel software. Within each group, participant will also be randomly assigned to one of the anchoring effects screens (Pure Control, T0.1, T1.0, T1.1, T2.0, T2.1).
Randomization Unit
Was the treatment clustered?
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
No clusters
Sample size: planned number of observations
3,000 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
500 observations for each treatment arm will be collected, totaling 3,000 respondents.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
The study will consist of an online lab experiment targeting a total of at least 3,000 participants (500 participants per treatment arm). This sample size assumes an 85% statistical power, 95% of significance level and 10% effect size on right answers to the questions about understanding and decision making.
IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number