Can information, contact and perspective-taking reduce prejudices towards individuals with visual disabilities?

Last registered on March 24, 2022

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Can information, contact and perspective-taking reduce prejudices towards individuals with visual disabilities?
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0009131
Initial registration date
March 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
March 24, 2022, 4:56 PM EDT

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

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
FBK-IRVAPP

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2022-02-07
End date
2022-04-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.
Abstract
The study tests the impact of a brief intervention combining an information treatment, a perspective-taking experience ("snack in the dark") and an inter-group contact (visually impaired waiters), on discrimination towards individuals with visual disabilities. Participants are about 200 upper secondary school students from 3 schools in the region of Trentino. Students are randomized to the treatment within class. Other 6 classes serve as an additional pure control group to investigate the potential role of spillovers.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Burlacu, Sergiu Constantin. 2022. "Can information, contact and perspective-taking reduce prejudices towards individuals with visual disabilities?." AEA RCT Registry. March 24. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.9131-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2022-03-03
Intervention End Date
2022-03-18

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Money passed in the dictator game to another visually impaired student
Willingness to pay to interact socially with a person with visual disabilities
Beliefs on performance of individuals with visual disabilities in various tasks: memory, math, 400 meter sprinting
Beliefs on life satisfaction of individuals with visual disabilities
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary outcomes
Money passed in the dictator game to another generic student and to a student with a physical disability - does the intervention increase giving in general and does it have spillovers towards other disadvantaged groups?
Choices in a simplified social value orientation task (share of altruistic, share of prosocial)

Mechanisms
Perspective-taking and empathy score
IAT score
Explicit attitudes measured through the MAS scale and the ATDP
Knowledge of visual disability measured through a quiz (all items scored equally)

Experimental validity tests: Brief social desirability scale
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
A baseline survey was conducted with 18 classes in February. Students from 12 of these classes are assigned to the treatment group: a two-hour intervention, about two weeks after the baseline, structured as follows: 1-hour information session, 1-hour experiential session: "snack in the dark" severed by visually impaired waiters. The control students remain in class with the teacher. The remaining 6 classes will be used to assess the potential for within-class spillovers in the 12 classes.

The baseline survey included: the Implicit Association Test applied to visual disability (Greenwald, Nosek and Banaji, 2003), the Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scales 15 items shortened scale, applied to visual disability (Yuker 1970) and Multidimensional Attitudes Scale Toward Persons With Disabilities (Findler, Vilchinsky and Werner, 2007), a quiz on knowledge of visual disabilities, and demographic variables: age, gender, parental education, language spoken at home, previous contact with visually impaired individuals, prior experience with this type of intervention.

After two weeks from the intervention, students complete the enline survey: all the tests and scales presented above, plus several incentivized games: Dictator task with 3 round, a simplified Social value orientation task, willingness to pay for social interaction and an incentivized belief elicitation task. In addition, a perspective-taking empathy concern scale is included

Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
randomization done in office by a computer
Randomization Unit
Student
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
aprox. 220 students
Sample size: planned number of observations
aprox. 220 students
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
110 treated students, 110 control students
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number

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