Citizen Valuation of Police Services

Last registered on August 22, 2022

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

Citizen Valuation of Police Services

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0009597

Initial registration date

June 20, 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 26, 2022, 5:21 AM EDT

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

Last updated

August 22, 2022, 4:47 PM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Country

United States of America

Region

Primary Investigator

Name

Taeho Kim

Affiliation

University of Chicago

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Justin Holz

PI Affiliation

PI Name

Andrew Jordan

PI Affiliation

Washington University in St Louis

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

In development

Start date

2022-08-20

End date

2024-06-24

Keywords

Crime, Violence, & Conflict

Additional Keywords

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.

Abstract

This experiment aims to measure the willingness to pay for several local amenities. We will also investigate how information about body cameras affects these results.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Holz, Justin, Andrew Jordan and Taeho Kim. 2022. "Citizen Valuation of Police Services." AEA RCT Registry. August 22. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.9597-1.1

Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

See PAP

Intervention Start Date

2022-08-20

Intervention End Date

2022-10-20

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Outcomes of interest are willingness to pay for reductions in use of force and crime. We are also interested in whether information provision regarding body cameras affect these willingness to pay measures.

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Willingness to pay for reductions in use of force and crime will be calculated by comparing the effect of these factors on home selections to the effect of price. The willingness to pay for a reduction of e.g. one use of force per 10,000 people is the difference in rent required to make respondents indifferent between a home with some baseline use of force and a home with one fewer uses of force.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

We are interested in how the willingness to pay measures depend on various crime conditions (high and low crime) and demographic characteristics (e.g., minority status, education levels, and income levels)

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

See PAP

Experimental Design Details

The hypothetical homes are given the following characteristics: monthly rent, violent crime per 10,000 people, police use of force per 10,000 people, square footage, and quartile of school quality. Respondents are asked to assume that all other characteristics are identical across the choices. Square footage and monthly rent are selected within a range that accords with the respondent's choice of bedrooms and rent.

In each of the 14 choice sets, only monthly rent and one other randomly selected characteristic vary. For example, the first choice set will present 5 homes with different rents and different square footage but other identical features identical. Then the second choice set presents 5 homes with different rents and different violent crime rates but other identical features.

In order to ensure data quality, we will use the first two choice sets to serve as data quality checks. In each of these two choice sets, there is a dominating option -- an apartment that is cheapest among the five options and also has the lowest crime rates. We will remove participants that do not pass either of these attention checks.

After filtering out participants, we will have participants consider police use of force as another feature of their decision-making. To treatment participants, we will say that police officers may fail to activate body cameras and give a low activation rate.

Prior to viewing the choice sets, respondents are shown detailed descriptions of our violent crime, police force, and school quality measures. They may also access reminder text while in the choice sets.

The 8th choice set will again serve as an attention check, where one option dominates the others.

Randomization Method

Randomization of the neighborhood features to vary and treatment into information provision will be done through Qualtrics' random number generator.

Randomization Unit

Randomization unit for neighborhood features are at the individual-by-choice level. Information provision will be given to half of study participants.

Was the treatment clustered?

Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

We will recruit 1000 individuals.

Sample size: planned number of observations

We will recruit 1000 individuals. Each participant will be asked to complete 11 rounds of choices (this excludes 3 rounds that will be used for data checks), which gives us 11,000 observations.

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

Half of 1000 individuals will be treated into information provision regarding body cameras.

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Supporting Documents and Materials

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

Request Information

IRB