Please read the attached article that reports on research using "behavioral nudges" to encourage people to save (not spend) their income tax refund.The article describes two field experiments. As we discussed in the BEworks case, field experiments are inherently messier and have less controls than lab experiments. Here is your chance to think critically about the pros and cons of field experiments. Please respond to the following questions:

1. What is the causal relationship that each experiment sought to establish? In your opinion, is there enough evidence to establish this causal relationship for either of these experiments? How would one establish cause and effect relationships through research to help you craft your response.A good response will include a discussion of elements required to meet criteria for a causal link, whether or not the experiment met these requirements, and how.

2. Focusing onExperiment 2, what are some important details you think are missing from the description of the experiment? What do you wish you knew more about in order to evaluate the soundness of the design of this field experiment? Think about the experiment's design, and try to be as specific as you can.

Intro to Article: Tax-?ling season can be a time of great stress, but it can also be one of the best opportunities all year for individuals to build up their short-term savings. In 2016, 73% of tax ?lers received a tax refund, averaging $2,857. This can often be the largest single deposit many receive all year.

In 2006, the IRS introduced the Form 8888, which enables tax ?lers to easily split their tax refund into multiple accounts (up to three), thus making it possible for recipients to directly set aside a portion of their refund into a savings account.

Through the Robin Hood Foundation, we partnered with Ariva to run a ?eld experiment testing different interventions, with the goal of increasing savings rates through Form 8888 and increasing attendance at a tax preparation site.

Ariva operates nine tax sites in the Bronx and one tax site in Manhattan, serving over 10,000 tax ?lers each year. Their main location is in the Highbridge area of the Bronx and serves over 4,000 tax ?lers each year. Over 40% of the Highbridge residents live below the poverty line.

Behavioral Diagnosis and Key Insights

To understand the environment where ?lers are taking actions, we initiated site visits before tax season began. We conducted two full days of observation, along with ten hours of qualitative interviews with key staff members, preparers, greeters, and other volunteers.

Consolidating themes from the conversations led to these key insights on the tax preparation process:

There was a limited mention of saving. Although Ariva played a video in their waiting room subtly highlighting the Form 8888 and the importance of saving, few greeters, intake persons, or preparers actively discussed saving or the Form 8888 with the client. In addition, none of the forms explicitly asked ?lers if they wanted to save, and if so, how much they wanted to

Their base of volunteers is inconsistent (seasonal worker problems). Since most preparers at a VITA site are seasonal volunteers, consistency with some processes such as where to place the deposit form, how to introduce the Form 8888, and how to assist clients in opening savings accounts can be difficult.

Given these barriers, we focused our two experiments on deliberately asking the clients to someone plans to save. We changed the deposit form, asking filers to select, from a list of make an active choice about how much they wanted to save out of their tax refund. checkboxes, what percentage of their refund they wanted to save (0%, 10%, 20%, 25% 30% 40%). In total, we had six conditions: For the first experiment we added environmental cues to the filing experience, to test if making savings more salient could encourage usage of the Form 8888. We named this Sample Experimental Condition: 0% Highly not recommended condition experiment the "Environmental Cues Experiment." We created two conditions. In the experimental condition, Ariva employees would: 1. Hand out "checklist" flyers outlining each required item, including a savings account routing and checking account Most people save part of their tax refund. 2. Put up "desk tents" on each of the preparer's desks, reminding filers to save part of You should too. their taxes and reminding preparers to ask clients to save part of their taxes through he Form 8888. Plus, if you save part of your tax refund today, you can win up to $100 this week! " Experimental Condition: Checklists and desk tents Don't miss out on this opportunity. To help your tax preparer, fill out your bank account information: Welcome to Ariva! and save (Form 8888 We are happy to file your their tax refund If you get a tax refund, what percentage of your tax refund would Encourage the filer to split you like to save? Please check only one box. taxes for FREE Reminder! 40% While you wait, please check that you have: 30% 25% Government ID 20% ) Social Security Card land for al your 10% Income Documents (was, 1019, etc) 0% [highly NOT recommended) Proof of Health Insurance forms 1095.A. B. or or Health Insurance Exemption Centtest Savings Account Don't have a savings Account Number Reminder! i Recordatorio! SAVINGS ACCOUNT account? Tell an Artve Routing Number Save part of your Ahorre parte de Name of the bank: get you one fast! tax refund su reembolso de impuestos Account Number: Checking Account Routing Number: Account Number Authorized Signature: Date Routing Number ARIVA Authorized Signature (joint): _ Date: ARMA CHECKING ACCOUNT Those in the control condition experienced the pre-existing Ariva experience, without checklists or desk tents. Name of the bank: Account Number: Our second experiment, our "Deposit Form Experiment" focused on modifying the existing Routing Number: direct deposit form to increase savings. We were interested in testing how recommendations, Authorized Signature: Date: social proof and nudge disclosures would influence decision-making about the amounts Authorized Signature (joint): Date: 2/5 Page 5 of 5 1. Pre-existing Ariva forms from 2016 . In our "25% most people click this option + nudge disclosure" condition 7% of filers 2. Deposit form with check boxes only (our control) checked 25% versus 3% in the control (p=.015). 3. Deposit form with check boxes and 0% noted as "highly not recommended" Interestingly, there were no differences between the "25% most people clicked this 4. Deposit form with check boxes and 40% noted as "highly recommended" option" conditions and "25% most people clicked this option + nudge disclosure" 5. Deposit form with check boxes and 25% noted as "most people check this option" 5. Deposit form with check boxes and 25% noted as "most people check this option" and Impact a nudge disclosure explaining to clients that their form was behaviorally designed to help them save We are working with New York City's Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) to share our learnings broadly to all VITA sites in New York City. We have two webinars scheduled to Results VITA sites implement these tactics for the 2018 tax season. We first analyzed the results for our "Environmental Cues" experiment. At the end of the tax IN COLLABORATION WITH season, 54 out of 3,702 (1.46%) tax filers split part of their tax refund through the Form 8888. Our environmental cues had a marginally statistical significant effect (p=.076), increasing split rates by 26% from 1.3% in the control condition to 1.6% in the environmental cues ARIVA condition. In other words, clients who came in on our "environment days" were 1.8 times more likely to split their tax refund than those who came in on our control days. In general, split rates were low. And yet, in a pre-post analysis, we almost doubled Ariva's split rates year over year from 0.75% in 2015 to 1.46% in 2016 (p<.001 these experiments highlight just how difficult it is to get tax filers use the form one large hurdle we found was that many of preparers didn know about and if they did were hesitant add another step in process. then analyzed results for our experiment. unfortunately lost a number deposit forms collection process not able detect differences actual split rates by condition. however strong behavioral intentions what reported wanting save. collected forms. roughly left blank. answered wanted save part their refund. analysis showed compared control checkboxes-only condition all experimental conditions moved towards implicitly recommended option. . checked versus highly most people clicked this option>