Meritocrats as Workers

Last registered on December 03, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Meritocrats as Workers
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0008650
Initial registration date
December 01, 2021

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
December 03, 2021, 7:13 PM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
George Mason University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2021-12-02
End date
2022-01-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study separately collects and analysis the data from the Workers in the who are matched to the Spectators in the Study "Why Meritocrat? The Role of Pure Fairness Preferences" (AEARCTR-0008495). Workers are asked questions to categorize them as having meritocratic elements in their fairness preferences, or not. Thereafter they conduct a task under different information structures (knowing, or not knowing, about the payment structure in advance of conducting the task), and under different payment schemes (relevant if they know about the payment structure in advance). At the end of the experiment they are asked to guess according to what payment scheme payment was actually determined (relevant if they were not informed).
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Mollerstrom, Johanna. 2021. "Meritocrats as Workers." AEA RCT Registry. December 03. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.8650
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
This study separately collects and analysis the data from the Workers in the who are matched to the Spectators in the Study "Why Meritocrat? The Role of Pure Fairness Preferences" (AEARCTR-0008495). Workers are asked questions to categorize them as having meritocratic elements in their fairness preferences, or not. Thereafter they conduct a task under different information structures (knowing, or not knowing, about the payment structure in advance of conducting the task), and under different payment schemes (relevant if they know about the payment structure in advance). At the end of the experiment they are asked to guess according to what payment scheme payment was actually determined (relevant if they were not informed).
Intervention Start Date
2021-12-02
Intervention End Date
2022-01-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Performance in task (number of correctly solved tasks)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This study separately collects and analysis the data from the Workers in the who are matched to the Spectators in the Study "Why Meritocrat? The Role of Pure Fairness Preferences" (AEARCTR-0008495). Workers are asked questions to categorize them as having meritocratic elements in their fairness preferences, or not. Thereafter they conduct a task under different information structures (knowing, or not knowing, about the payment structure in advance of conducting the task), and under different payment schemes (relevant if they know about the payment structure in advance). At the end of the experiment they are asked to guess according to what payment scheme payment was actually determined (relevant if they were not informed).
Experimental Design Details
This study separately collects and analysis the data from the Workers in the who are matched to the Spectators in the Study "Why Meritocrat? The Role of Pure Fairness Preferences" (AEARCTR-0008495). Workers are asked questions to categorize them as having meritocratic elements in their fairness preferences, or not. Thereafter they conduct a task under different information structures (knowing, or not knowing, about the payment structure in advance of conducting the task), and under different payment schemes (relevant if they know about the payment structure in advance). At the end of the experiment they are asked to guess according to what payment scheme payment was actually determined (relevant if they were not informed).
Randomization Method
Randomization done by the computer program
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
3000 individuals
Sample size: planned number of observations
3000 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
2000 in the "no info treatment", 1000 in the "info" treatment
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Institutional Review Board at George Mason University
IRB Approval Date
2021-10-08
IRB Approval Number
1820066-1

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

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