Belief Elicitation without Reduction

Last registered on July 09, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Belief Elicitation without Reduction
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0007939
Initial registration date
July 08, 2021
Last updated
July 09, 2021, 12:45 PM EDT

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Vanderbilt University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Vanderbilt University
PI Affiliation
Vanderbilt University

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2021-07-09
End date
2021-07-31
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Beliefs are important in a wide range of decision-making scenarios and accurately eliciting them is critical to studying those decisions. In recent years, belief elicitation work has focused on developing procedures that are theoretically incentive-compatible (expected utility is maximized by truth-telling) for increasingly varied types of preferences. The Binarized Scoring Rule (BSR), generalized by Hossain & Okui (2013), is widely recognized as state-of-the-art in this literature; however, other papers raise concerns about applications of the BSR yielding relatively low rates of truth-telling Danz et al. (2020). We propose to test one explanation for the BSR's failure to produce higher rates of truth-telling through comparing its performance to an alternative procedure.

While not explicitly stated in Hossain & Okui (2013), the reduction of compound lotteries is necessary to incentivize the truthful revelation of beliefs under the BSR. The Rank-Ordered Elicitation (ROE) procedure we introduce does not require the reduction of compound lotteries for incentive compatibility, but rather a weaker statewise monotonicity requirement Azrieli et al. (2018). We aim to test 1) whether the ROE outperforms the BSR in truth-telling, and 2) whether non-reducers of compound lotteries account for the difference in performance.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Dustan, Andrew, Kristine Koutout and Greg Leo. 2021. "Belief Elicitation without Reduction." AEA RCT Registry. July 09. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.7939-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Eliciting beliefs with the Binarized Quadratic Scoring Rule versus the Rank-Ordered Elicitation method.
Intervention Start Date
2021-07-09
Intervention End Date
2021-07-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Accuracy of reported beliefs; choices between compound lotteries.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
See pre-analysis plan.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization using oTree.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
600 individuals
Sample size: planned number of observations
600 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
See pre-analysis plan.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
See pre-analysis plan.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2021-03-10
IRB Approval Number
210231
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

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

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
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