Implementation Details ---------------------- This page describes how our lab implemented the procedures required by the official protocol for the RRR. It also describes and justifies any additions to or departures from that protocol. You can view the official protocol and the main project page for this RRR using these links: - Official Protocol: [https://osf.io/ypd78/][1] - Main RRR project page: [https://osf.io/scu2f/][2] ---------- #### Experimenters #### Pagà, Roger. 4th year Ph.D. student at Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain. Specialized in consumer behavior. As part of his doctoral thesis, has conducted experiments on the effect of ego-depletion (and hence intuitive judgments) on moral behavior. Cornelissen, Gert (Ph.D.) Associate professor at Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain. Has ample experience designing and running experimental studies in the area of consumer behavior and social psychology. Has studied the effects of cognitive load on pro-sociality in zero-sum games (Cornelissen et al., 2011) Navarro-Martinez, Daniel (PhD). Assistant Professor at Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain. Has a wide experience designing, conducting and analyzing a variety of experiments, especially in the areas of judgment and decision making and behavioral economics (including experiments using dictator, ultimatum, trust, and public goods games). The study will be entirely and exclusively conducted by the researchers above, so familiarizing reserarch assistants with the protocol will not be necessary. ---------- #### Setting/Lab/Equipment #### The study will take place in a dedicated research laboratory in which studies on behavioral economics and social psychology are regularly conducted. The laboratory includes 28 computer work-stations in separate cubicles. This arrangement ensures that subjects can be tested in groups of at least 12 people and that their answers cannot be easily observed by fellow participants or experimenters. All computers have Internet access. ![enter image description here][3] ![enter image description here][4] ![enter image description here][5] ---------- #### Sample, subjects, and randomization #### **Target sample size:** 168 participants (84 per condition). **Target sample demographics:** Participants will be obtained via our university's own subject pool. Our subject pool contains 5131 participants, 62% of whom are female. The vast majority of participants (92.8%) are undergraduate students. Among them, the most common nationality is Spanish (>85%) and the most common educational backgrounds are management (23.4%), economics (14.2%) and law (10.1%). On average, participants are 21 years old. For the present study, we will only invite participants who: A) are Spanish (since there are not enough English participants), B) are undergraduate students under the age of 35, C) are not studying an economics or a psychology degree (since such individuals are more likely to know about public goods games and experiments that involve deceptive cover stories), and D) have not previously participated in any experiment. We will also ensure that participants' gender distribution is roughly even. Participants will be compensated via a €3.5 show-up fee and an endowment of €2.5. These figures take into account the euro-dollar exchange rate as well as the fact that Spain's purchase power is 26.5% lower than that of United States according to Numbeo. **Minimum sample size after exclusions:** 152 participants (76 per condition). **Stopping rule(s):** We intend to run six experimental sessions in our laboratory, with 28 participants per session. Assuming no participant needs to be excluded, this should be enough to meet our target sample size (168 participants) and to exceed our minimum sample size by 16 participants. If participants need to be excluded, we will look at the reamaining number of participants per condition before deciding whether we need to recruit more or not. If both conditions include at least 76 participants after exclusions, no more data will be collected. Else, an extra session will be conducted to ensure that each condition has 76 participants or more. **Randomization to conditions:** Participants will be randomly assigned to conditions by the provided Qualtrics Script. **Blinding to conditions:** As seen in the pictures above, the laboratory chosen to conduct the experiment is set up in such a way that each computer remains inside its own cubicle. This makes it possible to conduct several experimental conditions simulataneously without alerting the participants of any differences in the instructions or tasks. **Exclusion rules:** We will be using the same exclusion rules that are described in the official protocol. Exclusion decisions will be made by somebody who is blind to the condition each participant belongs to. Also, excluded participants will not be removed from the data set. **Procedures for handling testing sessions for which the number of participants is not a multiple of 4:** Although participants from our subject pool are generally very committed (75% of them never missed an experiment in which they had decided to participate) our laboratory is certainly familiar with participant absentism and has developed its own procedures to minimize its impact on data collection. What we do is we recruit more participants than we need in order to ensure that the lab can still work at full capacity even if some participants do not show up. For the present study, we plan to recruit 35 people per session: 28 to participate in the study and seven that would act as substitues if the need arises. The first 28 pepple to arrive will participate. The rest will be given a small fee for their troubles and will be sent back home. We believe that seven substitutes should be enough to avoid running sessions with less than 28 participants. If that wasn't the case, we would make participants leave the lab until those that remained were a multiple of four. Participant's tardiness would be used to decide which participants have to leave. All participants who had to leave would receive a compensation fee for their troubles. ---------- #### Software/Code #### We confirm that we will use the provided materials, including the Qualtrics scripts, and that we have verified that they work in our laboratory. ---------- #### Differences from the official protocol #### **Currency changes:** Our participants will receive a show-up fee of €3.5 and be given an endowment of €2.5. The scale where participants decide how much to contribute to the common pool will use increments of €0.25. These values have been chosen instead of the original ones to account for the euro-dollar exchange rate and the fact that Spain's local purchasing power is 26.5% lower than that of the United States according to Numbeo. **Translation:** Given that our participants will all be Spanish, we needed the experimental materials translated in order to run the study. Since our research team includes researchers with a close-to-native English level, we preferred to translate the materials ourselves intead of relying on professional translators. We thought that our condition as researchers who are familiar with the topic at hand would leave us in a better position to translate the text while keeping its spirit intact. This may be especially important in the different questionnaires included in the materials, where a more literal translation may be more correct (and hence preferred by a professional translator), but it may also carry different connotations. The materials were first transalted into Spanish by one of the team members (Roger Pagà) and then back-translated into English by a different team member (Daniel Navarro). The member in charge of the back-translation was not exposed to the original materials in English until after completing the back-translation. Then, the back-translation was compared to the original materials as a test to verify how accurate the Spanish translation was. When a discrepancy between the back-translation and the original materials was encountered, the Spanish translation was reexamined and, if appropriate, modified. All modifications had the approval of both translators. In the particular case of the Individualism-Collectivism scale, most of the translation was not performed by our team members since an official Spanish translation was already available (Laca et al., 2006). The official translation was used in all but one of the items of the scale (item#1: 'I often do my own things'). For that item, the group believed that the official translation ('Con frecuencia hago "mis propias cosas") did not capture the spirit of the original statement faithfully enough. The translation we chose was: 'Frecuentemente hago las cosas a mi modo, siguiendo mis propias reglas' (I frequently do things in my own way, following my own rules). The translated version of the final qualtrics script can be found here: [https://osf.io/3952v/][7] [1]: https://osf.io/ypd78/ [2]: https://osf.io/scu2f/ [3]: http://s12.postimg.org/vmur3gklp/Lab1.jpg [4]: http://s9.postimg.org/jd8gxr0hr/Lab2.jpg [5]: http://s21.postimg.org/6ekprcsxz/Lab4.jpg [6]: https://osf.io/5rsdm/ [7]: https://osf.io/3952v/