Tag
program_takeup
4 findings
Labour & employmentPrice Penalty and Financial Incentive Asymmetry in Program Take-UpApplication rates decreased significantly when charging a price fee, but showed no statistically significant increase when offering a positive cash incentive relative to free enrollment.RCTLabour & employmentStigma Salience versus Mitigation Dual DynamicMerely mentioning social stigma reduced job fair attendance by 1.4 percentage points overall and by 12.0 percentage points for the bottom predicted response group (p = 0.022). Adding testimonials attenuated this negative effect to -0.044 percentage points (statistically insignificant), demonstrating that salience forces can offset mitigation efforts.RCTDevelopmentSocial Restriction-Driven Program Take-Up HeterogeneityOverall program take-up exceeded 70%, but Scheduled Caste women (the least restricted group) were nearly 33% more likely to attend training sessions than Muslim and Upper Caste Hindu women, demonstrating that baseline social mobility dictates intervention take-up.RCTEconomics (general)Welfare Stigma Neutrality in Developing EconomiesExplicit financial hardship framing caused no statistically significant change in application rates (-2.3 percentage points, SE = 0.030) or Lasso-based demographic composition relative to standard subsidized control.RCT