THE IMPACT OF INCENTIVES FOR VACCINATION: INFORMATION PROVISION SWEDEN

Last registered on June 15, 2022

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
THE IMPACT OF INCENTIVES FOR VACCINATION: INFORMATION PROVISION SWEDEN
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0009584
Initial registration date
June 14, 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
June 15, 2022, 10:00 AM EDT

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Zurich

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
University of Lausanne
PI Affiliation
University of Copenhagen
PI Affiliation
Columbia University
PI Affiliation
Lund University
PI Affiliation
University of Chicago

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2022-06-15
End date
2023-08-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study consists of an information provision experiment to study whether people react differently when a governmental agency pays for COVID-19 vaccination as opposed to researchers paying. The new study exploits the fact that i) most people in Sweden are not aware of a Swedish RCT that paid people for COVID-19 vaccination and ii) the previous RCT was implemented in collaboration with a governmental organization.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Campos-Mercade, Pol et al. 2022. "THE IMPACT OF INCENTIVES FOR VACCINATION: INFORMATION PROVISION SWEDEN." AEA RCT Registry. June 15. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.9584
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2022-06-15
Intervention End Date
2022-06-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Suppose that there would be a new outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 6 months and the Swedish authorities would recommend people to take an additional COVID-19 vaccine shot (regardless of the number of shots they got in the past). What is your best guess, would you take an additional shot? (Yes / No)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
i) Perceived safety and efficacy: Average answer to the following 3 items (Scales: 5-point Likert scale):
- In general, COVID-19 vaccines are safe
- I am worried about the side effects from COVID-19 vaccines (reverse coded)
- In general, COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective at protecting my health

ii) Moral values and norms: Average answer to the following 3 items (Scales: 5-point Likert scale):
- I would be willing to take the personal costs of getting an additional COVID-19 vaccine (e.g., time, discomfort, mild side effects) for the greater good of society
- I think people would have a civic duty or a moral obligation to get an additional COVID-19 vaccine
- Not taking the COVID-19 vaccine would be generally viewed as socially inappropriate in this situation
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Some randomly selected participants in this new study will be told that researchers participated in the implementation of the incentive program. Other participants will be told that the Public Health Agency of Sweden participated in the implementation of the incentive program.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization is done by a computer
Randomization Unit
Randomization is done at the individual level
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
1000 individuals
Sample size: planned number of observations
1000 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
500 individuals in each of the two treatment arms
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Our power calculations show that 1,000 participants would give us 80% power to detect an effect size of 0.2 standard deviations on whether there is a difference between researchers and governmental organizations being involved in offering payments.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Human Subjects Committee of the Faculty of Economics, Business Administration, and Information Technology at University of Zurich
IRB Approval Date
2022-06-08
IRB Approval Number
2022-045