Back to History

Fields Changed

Registration

Field Before After
Trial Status in_development on_going
Abstract While the significance of narrative thinking has become increasingly recognized by social scientists, very little empirical research has documented its consequences for economically significant outcomes. We address this gap in one important domain: valuations. In an online experiment, participants selected and uploaded pictures of an item they owned (hat) without knowing why. They were then asked to either tell the story of their item, list its characteristics, or neither (counting zeros filler task or no task at all. Finally, participants were given the opportunity to sell their items to us via an incentive-compatible procedure (Multiple Price List). That is, they decided whether to accept or reject a series of prices (between $1-300), knowing that one of their decisions might be randomly selected to be executed. Finally, participants answer a questionnaire to allow for mechanism analysis. We manipulate the likelihood of narrative thinking in a randomized field experiment to estimate the effect of narrative (compared to analytical) thinking on valuations.
Trial Start Date September 29, 2022 November 28, 2022
Trial End Date October 01, 2022 December 10, 2022
Last Published September 28, 2022 02:29 PM November 28, 2022 07:02 AM
Intervention (Public) Self-constructed stimuli - Participants were randomized to describe the item they chose in different ways or not at all. Self-constructed stimuli - Participants are randomized to describe their pre-owned item differently or write an unrelated paragraph.
Intervention Start Date September 29, 2022 November 28, 2022
Intervention End Date October 01, 2022 December 10, 2022
Experimental Design (Public) Participants choose a hat they already owned (not knowing why) and are then randomized to describe and think about it differently. Finally, participants are offered to sell their items to the experimenter, and their willingness to accept (WTA) is elicited through incentivized multiple price lists (where one decision might be randomly selected to count). Finally, participants answer 14 questions regarding their hat. People wearing a hat are approached on campus (not knowing why) and offered to participate in a short survey. Once consent is given, participants fill out a demographics questionnaire and are randomized to describe their items differently. Finally, participants are surprisingly offered to sell their items to the experimenter, and their willingness to accept (WTA) is elicited through incentivized multiple price lists (where one decision might be randomly selected to count). Finally, participants answer 15 questions regarding their hats.
Randomization Unit The individual is the randomized unit of treatment and control, and individual-decision touple (e.g., subject 104, decision 32) is the randomized unit for the lottery. The individual is the randomized unit for treatment, and the decision number (e.g., decision 20 regarding $10) is the randomized unit for the MPL lottery per participant.
Planned Number of Clusters 1000 participants 300 participants
Planned Number of Observations 1000 participants 300 participants
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms 250 narrative, 250 list, 250 blank baseline, and 250 filler task baseline. 100 narrative, 100 list, and 100 no description.
Keyword(s) Behavior Agriculture, Behavior
Intervention (Hidden) The different conditions are - narrative, list, blank baseline (no task), and filler task baseline (counting zeros). The different conditions are - item narrative, item list of attributes, and no description.
Secondary Outcomes (End Points) Fourteen post-MPL questions 15 post-MPL questions
Secondary Outcomes (Explanation) After submitting their MPL choices, participants answer a set of questions regarding their item and their selling process After submitting their MPL choices, participants answer a set of questions regarding their item and their selling process. Participants' self-constructed texts are used in a language analysis to study correlations with WTA. If participants indicate that they knew they will be offered to sell their hat (on the question regarding why they chose this hat today), they are excluded.
Back to top