Collaborative Proposal: A Randomized Experiment on the Causal Effect of Recipients' Race and Social Circumstances on the Provision of Disaster Relief to Katrina Victims

该项目将研究国家对卡特里娜飓风受害者慷慨的决定因素。 虽然媒体报道充斥着指控，称如果这些受害者在很大程度上不是来自少数群体和经济上处于不利地位的背景，国家会做出更强烈的反应，但没有科学证据反驳或支持这些指控。 更一般地说，公众对卡特里娜飓风受害者的慷慨是否取决于这些受害者的需求、行为和特征？ 这项研究将回答这些问题，使用一个具有全国代表性的样本，其中个人对卡特里娜飓风受害者的慷慨是通过给他们一个机会，让他们自己和一个慈善组织帮助卡特里娜飓风受害者之间划分一笔钱来衡量的随机实验。 在测量他们对卡特里娜飓风受害者的慷慨程度之前，实验将通过询问一组有客观答案的问题来引出对卡特里娜飓风受害者的信念，例如受害者的种族构成，给予每个受害者的联邦援助金额，或者拥有汽车的受害者的比例，他们可以在风暴前撤离自己。 接下来，将提供这些问题的随机选择子集的正确答案，从而改变受试者的一些信念。 这些信念的变化使人们能够估计受害者的特点、需要或行为对慷慨支助的因果影响。 该项目的科学影响是根本性的，因为研究人员对全国代表性样本中实际再分配的决定因素只有有限的了解。 大多数已知的信息来自调查数据，其中包含自我报告的再分配偏好，投票行为或慈善活动。 然而，即使是最简单的客观问题（例如，在上次选举中如何投票）非常容易出现系统性错误。 为了解决这个问题，在实验室实验中进行了一些关于向真实的慈善机构和真实的穷人捐款的决定因素的研究。 然而，这些研究也有明显的局限性，例如它们不是在全国代表性样本上进行的。 拟议的研究也有很大的方法论价值，因为它将阐明当在全国代表性样本中测量真实的行为时，调查数据和实验室实验的结果如何复制。 最后，这项研究具有更广泛的影响。 随着恐怖主义威胁的增加，我国越来越关注如何应对灾害。 对这种威胁有两类反应：事前预防和准备以及事后反应。 这项研究将加深我们对美国人在人为或自然灾害袭击后如何以及为什么做出反应的理解。

This project will study determinants of the nation's generosity towards Hurricane Katrina victims. While media reports have been rife with allegations that the nation would have responded more strongly if these victims had not come to a large extent from minority groups and economically disadvantaged backgrounds, there is no scientific evidence to rebut or support these allegations. More generally, does the public's generosity towards Katrina victims depend on the needs, behaviors and characteristics of these victims? This study will answer these questions using a randomized experiment on a nationally representative sample in which individuals' generosity towards Katrina victims is measured by giving them the opportunity to divide a sum of money between themselves and a charitable organization helping Katrina victims. Prior to measuring their generosity to Katrina victims, the experiment will elicit beliefs about Katrina victims by asking a set of questions that have objective answers, such as the racial composition of the victims, the amount of federal aid given to each victim, or the fraction of victims who owned cars that they could have used to evacuate themselves before the storm. Next, the correct answers to a randomly selected subset of these questions will be provided, thus changing some of the subjects' beliefs. These changes in beliefs allow one to estimate the causal effect of the victims' characteristics, needs or behaviors on the generosity of support. The scientific impact of this project is fundamental because researchers only have a limited understanding of determinants of actual redistribution in a nationally representative sample. Most of what is known comes from survey data containing self-reported preferences for redistribution, voting behaviors or charitable activities. However, self-reported data on even the simplest objective questions (e.g., how one voted in the last election) are highly prone to systematic error. To address this, a handful of studies have been conducted on the determinants of giving to real charities and real poor people in laboratory experiments. However, these studies have obvious limitations as well such as the fact that they are not conducted on nationally representative samples. There is also great methodological value to the proposed study because it will illuminate how findings from survey data and laboratory experiments replicate when real behavior is measured in a nationally representative sample. Finally, this study has a broader impact. Our nation has become increasingly concerned about how to respond to disasters as threats of terrorism have increased. There are two classes of response to such threats: prevention and preparation beforehand and responses afterward. This study will deepen our understanding of how and why Americans respond after a man-made or natural disaster has struck.