Narrowly Rational

Last registered on January 25, 2022

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Narrowly Rational
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0008857
Initial registration date
January 23, 2022

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
January 25, 2022, 3:21 PM EST

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
National University of Singapore

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
National University of Singapore
PI Affiliation
Renmin University of China

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2022-01-26
End date
2022-06-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study aims to understand the heuristics for decision making under risk. We examine the choice consistency within and between different frames in budgetary decisions. Our hypothesis is that choice consistency is high within a frame and relatively low between frames, and several heuristics underpin the observations.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Miao, Bin, Shuangyu Yang and Songfa Zhong. 2022. "Narrowly Rational." AEA RCT Registry. January 25. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.8857
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2022-01-26
Intervention End Date
2022-06-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Our hypothesis is that choice consistency is high within a frame and relatively low between frames.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Heuristics underpin choice consistency in different frames.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This is a within-subject experimental design. The computer will generate random orders of experimental parts, and in each part, random orders of budgetary choices for all subjects.

Subjects will be presented with standard budgetary choices with two Arrow securities to measure their risk preference and rationality. This experimental design was first introduced by Choi et al. (2007) and used in many previous studies in revealed preference analysis.

Subjects will be presented with risk elicitation tasks corresponding to the budgetary choices part. The method is originated in Gneezy and Potters (1997) and is among the more popular ones to elicit risk attitudes.

The results will be used to check subjects’ consistency and to understand the mechanisms across tasks.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization done by a computer.
This is a within-subject experimental design. We have random orders of experimental parts, and in each part, the budgetary choices are also random.
Randomization Unit
Individual. The computer will generate a random order of experimental parts and a random order of decisions within each part for all subjects independently.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

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

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
NUS Department of Economics Ethics Review Committee
IRB Approval Date
2021-09-07
IRB Approval Number
N/A