| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Study Withdrawn | Before | After No |
| Field Intervention Completion Date | Before | After April 29, 2022 |
| Field Data Collection Complete | Before | After Yes |
| Field Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization) | Before | After 895 subjects |
| Field Was attrition correlated with treatment status? | Before | After No |
| Field Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations | Before | After Same: 895 subjects |
| Field Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms | Before | After 254 control, 300 photo, 341 contact |
| Field Is there a restricted access data set available on request? | Before | After No |
| Field Program Files | Before | After No |
| Field Data Collection Completion Date | Before | After April 29, 2022 |
| Field Is data available for public use? | Before | After No |
| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Paper Abstract | Before | After The contact hypothesis posits that interacting with outgroup members can reduce prejudice and improve intergroup relations. While the overall effects of contact have been found to be positive, some studies have found null or even negative effects. We aim to contribute to the understanding of the determinants of contact interventions, by unbundling the bundle represented by contact interventions and testing for the effects of a common component of all existing contact interventions, namely bilateral discussions. We take advantage of the controlled environment of lab-in-the-field experiments and implement a ``fast-friends'' intervention, which aims to create interpersonal closeness quickly, and can be implemented in a wide variety of situations. We run our experiment with a diverse sample from northern Senegal. Our intervention is found to be effective in increasing interethnic trust toward the specific individuals the individual meets. However, we find a backlash effect at the collective level, with contact increasing interethnic prejudice. We analyze the heterogeneity of treatment effects with respect to a predetermined dimension - previous contacts - and using machine learning techniques for dimension selection to avoid overfitting. We find no evidence of heterogeneity in either individual-level trust or outgroup prejudice. |
| Field Paper Citation | Before | After Clochard, G.-J., G. Hollard, and O. Sene (2023). Bringing contact interventions to the lab: Effects of bilateral discussions on interethnic trust in senegal. CREST Working Paper |
| Field Paper URL | Before | After https://drive.google.com/file/d/1n77K8gQSzdVStOzIpNzRkfSbwirGH0vX/view?usp=sharing |