Experimentally testing the roots of poverty and violence: Changing preferences, behaviors, and outcomes

通过实验检验贫困和暴力的根源：改变偏好、行为和结果

• 批准号: 1317506
• 负责人: Christopher Blattman
• 金额: $ 10.49万
• 依托单位: Columbia University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2013
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2013-03-15 至 2014-02-28
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1317506&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Experimentally; testing; roots; poverty; violence

It is widely believed that poor and unemployed young men are more likely to fight, riot and rebel. In poor countries like Liberia, governments are especially fearful of the young, urban poor, who may be especially vulnerable to armed recruitment, rioting, or election violence. In addition to increased security, the most common policy recommendation is cash transfer and employment programs. This study uses a field experiment with high-risk young men in Liberia to answer four questions. First, is there a causal relationship between poverty and violence? While there are many theoretical rationales, microlevel evidence is sparse and inconclusive. Second, do poverty and violence have common behavioral roots? A growing literature argues that present bias, impulse control and lack of discipline can lead to poverty. But violent acts, both instrumental and emotional, may also be directly influenced by time preferences and self-control. If so, any poverty-violence correlation would be partly spurious. Third, can preferences like present bias and non-cognitive skills such as impulse control and conscientiousness be modified, thereby reducing poverty and social instability? Fourth, how do preferences and non-cognitive skills shape economic and political behavior, and how best to measure them?surveys, psychological tests, or incentivized games?This study builds on two prior experiments that show (a) a reduced-form relationship between employment programs and violence; and (b) correlation between time preferences and both poverty and violence. They cannot, however, conclusively answer our questions. To test these, this study examines two cross-cutting interventions with 1000 poor urban street youth: (i) an 8-week Transformation Program (TP) using group cognitive behavior therapy; and (ii) an unconditional cash transfer. A random 25% of youth receive each individual intervention and a further 25% receive both; 25% remain as an untreated control group. Short-term evidence from a 100-person pilot of this intervention bears out our predictions. While the small sample results are seldom statistically significant, the directions and magnitudes are promising. The TP increases patience, impulse control, and self-discipline (measured through incentivized games as well as surveys); it increases investment and reduces poverty; and it lowers crime, political violence and interpersonal aggression. The cash transfer reduces poverty as well as aggression, and provides cautious support for two of the main causal mechanisms linking poverty to violence. Intellectual merit: Patience, impulsivity and discipline are thought to be fixed in adults. We will provide experimental evidence of large and sustainable change through a real-world program. Second, in addition to showing these traits are malleable, their exogenous manipulation would provide clear evidence of a causal effect of time preferences on economic decision-making and poverty. The real-world nature of the experiment is important, as most aggression research is psychological, lab-based, and with US and European populations. Third, the psychological foundations of political violence are surprisingly weak or outdated, based largely on aggression research from the 1930s. The results will expand the psychological understanding of aggression, challenge conventional theories of political violence, and help initiate a field of behavioral politics, likely the first to examine violence. Fourth, there is little convincing evidence on the causal effect of poverty on violence, almost none of it experimental. This study tests this link directly, and compares interventions rooted in competing theories. Finally, there is little evidence comparing the performance of preference and non-cognitive skill measures from surveys, psychological tests, and incentivized games, and little comparison of neuropsychology and economics measures.Broader impacts: First, the study will have a large impact on the design and targeting of youth employment and stabilization programs worldwide, especially in Africa and fragile states. Evidence on the efficacy and efficiency of unconditional cash transfers to such a high-risk group is novel and important. The transformation program will be manualized and publicly available online for ease of replication elsewhere. The intervention is designed to be highly scalable and inexpensive, and is a candidate for scaling-up in Liberia?a plan already in discussion with the government and NGOs. Second, the study will be an opportunity to provide research training and field experience to two graduate students, pre-graduate students, Liberian university graduates and masters students, and several members of the government and non-profit sectors in Liberia. Third, the comparative analysis of neopsyhological and economic measures of preferences and non-cognitive skills, as well as the comparison of survey, psychological and incentived measures, will be a broad public good informing questionnaire design and measurement across the behavioral sciences.

人们普遍认为，贫穷和失业的年轻人更容易打架、暴动和反叛。在像利比里亚这样的贫穷国家，政府特别害怕年轻的城市贫民，他们可能特别容易受到武装招募、骚乱或选举暴力的伤害。除了增加安全性，最常见的政策建议是现金转移和就业计划。这项研究使用了一个在利比里亚的高风险年轻人的现场实验来回答四个问题。第一，贫穷与暴力之间是否存在因果关系？虽然有许多理论依据，微观层面的证据是稀疏和不确定的。第二，贫穷和暴力是否有共同的行为根源？越来越多的文献认为，当前的偏见、冲动控制和缺乏纪律会导致贫困。但是，暴力行为，无论是工具性的还是情感性的，也可能直接受到时间偏好和自我控制的影响。如果是这样，任何贫困与暴力的相关性在一定程度上都是虚假的。第三，偏好（如当前的偏见）和非认知技能（如冲动控制和谨慎）是否可以改变，从而减少贫困和社会不稳定？第四，偏好和非认知技能如何塑造经济和政治行为，以及如何最好地衡量它们？调查，心理测试，还是激励游戏？这项研究建立在两个先前的实验，表明（a）就业计划和暴力之间的关系简化形式;和（B）时间偏好和贫困和暴力之间的相关性。然而，它们不能决定性地回答我们的问题。为了检验这些，本研究探讨了两个横向干预与1000贫困城市街头青年：（一）一个8周的转型计划（TP）使用群体认知行为疗法;（二）无条件的现金转移。随机抽取25%的青少年接受每种干预措施，另外25%的青少年接受两种干预措施; 25%的青少年作为未经治疗的对照组。来自一个100人的干预试点的短期证据证实了我们的预测。虽然小样本的结果很少有统计意义，但方向和幅度是有希望的。TP增加了耐心，冲动控制和自律（通过激励游戏和调查来衡量）;它增加了投资，减少了贫困;它降低了犯罪，政治暴力和人际侵略。现金转移减少了贫穷和侵犯行为，并为将贫穷与暴力联系起来的两个主要因果机制提供了谨慎的支持。智力优点：耐心、冲动和纪律被认为是成年人的固有品质。我们将通过一个真实世界的计划提供大规模和可持续变化的实验证据。其次，除了显示这些特征是可塑性的，它们的外生操纵将提供明确的证据，证明时间偏好对经济决策和贫困的因果影响。实验的真实世界性质很重要，因为大多数攻击性研究都是心理学的，基于实验室的，并且是针对美国和欧洲人群的。第三，政治暴力的心理学基础非常薄弱或过时，主要基于20世纪30年代的攻击性研究。研究结果将扩大对攻击性的心理理解，挑战传统的政治暴力理论，并有助于开创一个行为政治学领域，这可能是第一个研究暴力的领域。第四，关于贫穷对暴力的因果影响，几乎没有令人信服的证据，几乎没有一个是实验性的。本研究直接测试了这种联系，并比较了植根于竞争理论的干预措施。最后，几乎没有证据比较偏好和非认知技能措施的表现，从调查，心理测试和激励游戏，和神经心理学和经济学的措施比较少。更广泛的影响：首先，这项研究将有很大的影响，在世界各地的青年就业和稳定计划的设计和针对性，特别是在非洲和脆弱的国家。关于向这样一个高风险群体无条件现金转移的效力和效率的证据是新的和重要的。转型计划将采用手工操作，并在网上公开，以便于其他地方复制。干预措施的设计是高度可扩展和廉价的，是一个候选人扩大在利比里亚？该计划已在与政府和非政府组织讨论。第二，这项研究将提供一个机会，为两名研究生、研究生预科生、利比里亚大学毕业生和硕士生以及利比里亚政府和非营利部门的若干成员提供研究培训和实地经验。第三，对偏好和非认知技能的新心理学和经济学测量的比较分析，以及对调查、心理学和激励措施的比较，将成为一个广泛的公共利益，为整个行为科学的问卷设计和测量提供信息。