Anchor management: a field experiment to encourage families to meet critical programme deadlines

IF 1.9 2区社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Journal of Public Policy Pub Date : 2022-09-19 DOI:10.1017/S0143814X21000131

Ryan T. Moore, Katherine Gan, Karissa Minnich, D. Yokum

{"title":"Anchor management: a field experiment to encourage families to meet critical programme deadlines","authors":"Ryan T. Moore, Katherine Gan, Karissa Minnich, D. Yokum","doi":"10.1017/S0143814X21000131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many families, despite need and eligibility, struggle to meet programme deadlines to retain critical benefits. When families fail to complete programme recertification on time, they lose needed support. While scholars have tested behavioural theories like chunking, implementation intention, and loss framing to promote programme uptake, less is known about how well-designed communications can promote continuity through successful recertification, especially where recertification entails a significant administrative burden. Further, scant evidence guides how best to frame recertification deadlines. In a randomised trial with government partners (n = 3,539), we find that sending a reminder letter informed by these behavioural theories increased the number of families maintaining participation by 14 per cent. Further, anchoring people to a deadline month may suffice to thread the motivational needle: overcoming procrastination without lowering self-efficacy by anchoring them to a specific day. Adopting the most effective letter in Washington, DC, would lead 766 more families to participate uninterrupted each year.","PeriodicalId":47578,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X21000131","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Many families, despite need and eligibility, struggle to meet programme deadlines to retain critical benefits. When families fail to complete programme recertification on time, they lose needed support. While scholars have tested behavioural theories like chunking, implementation intention, and loss framing to promote programme uptake, less is known about how well-designed communications can promote continuity through successful recertification, especially where recertification entails a significant administrative burden. Further, scant evidence guides how best to frame recertification deadlines. In a randomised trial with government partners (n = 3,539), we find that sending a reminder letter informed by these behavioural theories increased the number of families maintaining participation by 14 per cent. Further, anchoring people to a deadline month may suffice to thread the motivational needle: overcoming procrastination without lowering self-efficacy by anchoring them to a specific day. Adopting the most effective letter in Washington, DC, would lead 766 more families to participate uninterrupted each year.

查看原文本刊更多论文

锚点管理:一项实地试验，鼓励家庭按时完成关键的方案

摘要许多家庭，尽管有需求和资格，仍难以在计划截止日期前保留关键福利。当家庭未能按时完成课程重新认证时，他们将失去所需的支持。虽然学者们已经测试了分块、实施意图和损失框架等行为理论，以促进计划的接受，但人们对精心设计的沟通如何通过成功的重新认证来促进连续性知之甚少，尤其是在重新认证带来重大行政负担的情况下。此外，很少有证据指导如何最好地确定重新认证的最后期限。在一项与政府合作伙伴（n=3539）的随机试验中，我们发现，根据这些行为理论发送提醒信会使保持参与的家庭数量增加14%。此外，将人们固定在最后期限的月份可能足以穿透激励针：通过将他们固定在特定的一天，在不降低自我效能的情况下克服拖延症。采用华盛顿特区最有效的信件，每年将有766多个家庭不间断地参与。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Public Policy Multiple-

CiteScore

4.40

自引率

8.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Public Policy applies social science theories and concepts to significant political, economic and social issues and to the ways in which public policies are made. Its articles deal with topics of concern to public policy scholars in America, Europe, Japan and other advanced industrial nations. The journal often publishes articles that cut across disciplines, such as environmental issues, international political economy, regulatory policy and European Union processes. Its peer reviewers come from up to a dozen social science disciplines and countries across three continents, thus ensuring both analytic rigour and accuracy in reference to national and policy context.