Experimental online surveys on normative preferences and judgements, and perceptions about wellbeing

Last registered on September 12, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Experimental online surveys on normative preferences and judgements, and perceptions about wellbeing
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0008089
Initial registration date
September 09, 2021
Last updated
September 12, 2021, 10:53 PM EDT

Locations

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Exeter Business School

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2021-08-30
End date
2021-09-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This project involves a series of online surveys (with an experimental component) on representative population samples in the UK, Brazil and China to study normative preferences and perceptions about wellbeing. Preferences related to well-being/welfare/life satisfaction, their relationship to death and non-existence, one's understanding of other's (goal directed agents') wellbeing in relationship to their own, tradeoffs between money, health, social standing, etc., and ethical preferences related to the existence of future and current populations are all idiosyncratic and don’t necessarily have an objective right answer. We try to measure these by asking people directly using a stated preference survey that will allow us to determine median valuations and tradeoffs for key variables; variations by individual background characteristics; differences across the countries; and importantly, the effects of debiasing interventions on these answers.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Jamison, Julian and Radhanjali Shukla. 2021. "Experimental online surveys on normative preferences and judgements, and perceptions about wellbeing ." AEA RCT Registry. September 12. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.8089-1.0
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)
Intervention 1: 'Explain your reasons'
The first intervention is two levelled; those assigned to level one will be told that they will be asked to give a brief explanation in one or two lines as to why they provided the values that they did. Those assigned to level two will be told that they will be asked to provide a detailed explanation with the exact reasoning process from first step to last step that helped them arrive at their answer. Those assigned to control will not be told anything.

Intervention 2: 'Consider arguments on both sides'
The second intervention will ask participants who are assigned to treatment to consider the listed arguments on both sides before providing their answer. Those assigned to control will not be asked to consider any arguments.
Intervention Start Date
2021-08-30
Intervention End Date
2021-09-17

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
1. Wellbeing values corresponding to Death and Non-existence
2. The extent of one's understanding of the wellbeing of 12 independent goal-directed agents
3. Tradeoffs between money and longevity
4. Population ethics related preferences
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The 'explain your reasons' intervention will occur in two questions, and the 'consider alternative arguments' intervention will occur in one. This will be done by randomising the sample of 600 in each country across the two intervention groups.

For the first intervention which is two levelled, the randomisation will be done in such a way that a participant who received either of the explanation tasks in the first 'explain your reasons' question group will necessarily get control in the second 'explain your reasons' question group.

The second intervention for the population ethics question group will simply ask participants assigned to the treatment to consider the listed arguments on both sides before providing their answer (the question is boolean). Those assigned to control will not see those arguments.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Online through the survey platform; Qualtrics
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
0
Sample size: planned number of observations
1800
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
1800 across 3 countries
600 - UK
600 - Brazil
600 - China
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials

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

Request Information
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Exeter Business School Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2020-06-06
IRB Approval Number
eUEBS003288 v5.0
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