IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/27496.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Messages on COVID-19 Prevention in India Increased Symptoms Reporting and Adherence to Preventive Behaviors Among 25 Million Recipients with Similar Effects on Non-recipient Members of Their Communities

Author

Listed:
  • Abhijit Banerjee
  • Marcella Alsan
  • Emily Breza
  • Arun G. Chandrasekhar
  • Abhijit Chowdhury
  • Esther Duflo
  • Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham
  • Benjamin A. Olken

Abstract

During health crises, like COVID-19, individuals are inundated with messages promoting health-preserving behavior. Does additional light-touch messaging by a credible individual change behavior? Do the features of the message matter? To answer this, we conducted a large-scale messaging campaign in West Bengal, India. Twenty-five million individuals were sent an SMS containing a 2.5-minute clip, delivered by West Bengal native and 2019 Nobel laureate Abhijit Banerjee. All messages encouraged reporting symptoms to the local public health worker. In addition, each message emphasizes one health-preserving behavior (distancing or hygiene) and one motivation for action (effects on everyone or just on self). Further, some messages addressed concerns about ostracism of the infected. Messages were randomized at the PIN code level. As control, three million individuals received a message pointing them to government information. The campaign (i) doubled the reporting of health symptoms to the community health workers (p = 0.001 for fever, p = 0.024 for respiratory symptoms); (ii) decreased travel beyond one’s village in the last two days by 20% (p = 0.026) (on a basis of 37% in control) and increased estimated hand-washing when returning home by 7% (p = 0.044) (67.5% in control); (iii) spilled over to behaviors not mentioned in the message – mask-wearing was never mentioned but increased 2% (p = 0.042), while distancing and hygiene both increased in the sample where they were not mentioned by similar amounts as where they were mentioned; (iv) spilled over onto nonrecipients within the same community, with effects similar to those for individuals who received the messages.

Suggested Citation

  • Abhijit Banerjee & Marcella Alsan & Emily Breza & Arun G. Chandrasekhar & Abhijit Chowdhury & Esther Duflo & Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham & Benjamin A. Olken, 2020. "Messages on COVID-19 Prevention in India Increased Symptoms Reporting and Adherence to Preventive Behaviors Among 25 Million Recipients with Similar Effects on Non-recipient Members of Their Communiti," NBER Working Papers 27496, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:27496
    Note: DEV EH LS PE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w27496.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2013. "Simplification and saving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 130-145.
    2. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2011. "Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1180-1210, June.
    3. Vivi Alatas & Arun G. Chandrasekhar & Markus Mobius & Benjamin A. Olken & Cindy Paladines, 2019. "When Celebrities Speak: A Nationwide Twitter Experiment Promoting Vaccination In Indonesia," NBER Working Papers 25589, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Leandro Carvalho & Dan Silverman, 2019. "Complexity and Sophistication," NBER Working Papers 26036, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    2. Goldin, Jacob & Homonoff, Tatiana & Patterson, Richard & Skimmyhorn, William, 2020. "How much to save? Decision costs and retirement plan participation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    3. McConnell, Margaret, 2013. "Behavioral economics and aging," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 1, pages 83-89.
    4. Margaret Miller & Julia Reichelstein & Christian Salas & Bilal Zia, 2015. "Can You Help Someone Become Financially Capable? A Meta-Analysis of the Literature," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 30(2), pages 220-246.
    5. Tal Gross & Timothy J. Layton & Daniel Prinz, 2022. "The Liquidity Sensitivity of Healthcare Consumption: Evidence from Social Security Payments," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 175-190, June.
    6. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    7. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2011. "Behavioral economics perspectives on public sector pension plans," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 315-336, April.
    8. Goda, Gopi Shah & Levy, Matthew R. & Flaherty Manchester, Colleen & Sojourner, Aaron & Tasoff, Joshua & Xiao, Jiusi, 2023. "Are retirement planning tools substitutes or complements to financial capability?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 561-573.
    9. Kesternich, Iris & Heiss, Florian & McFadden, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2013. "Suit the action to the word, the word to the action: Hypothetical choices and real decisions in Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1313-1324.
    10. Dean Karlan & John A List, 2012. "How Can Bill and Melinda Gates Increase Other People’s Donations to Fund Public Goods?," Working Papers id:4880, eSocialSciences.
    11. Changkuk Im & John Rehbeck, 2021. "Non-rationalizable Individuals, Stochastic Rationalizability, and Sampling," Papers 2102.03436, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    12. Liran Einav & Amy Finkelstein & Maria Polyakova, 2018. "Private Provision of Social Insurance: Drug-Specific Price Elasticities and Cost Sharing in Medicare Part D," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 122-153, August.
    13. Mayank Aggarwal & Anindya S. Chakrabarti & Chirantan Chatterjee, 2023. "Movies, stigma and choice: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(5), pages 1019-1039, May.
    14. Van Der Weide,Roy, 2022. "Inferring COVID-19 Vaccine Attitudes from Twitter Data : An Application to the ArabicSpeaking World," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10165, The World Bank.
    15. Michele Fioretti & Hongming Wang, 2020. "Performance Pay in Insurance Markets: Evidence from Medicare," Working Papers 2020.03, International Network for Economic Research - INFER.
    16. Padmaja Ayyagari & Daifeng He, 2017. "The Role of Medical Expenditure Risk in Portfolio Allocation Decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(11), pages 1447-1458, November.
    17. Keith M. Marzilli Ericson, 2014. "Consumer Inertia and Firm Pricing in the Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Insurance Exchange," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 38-64, February.
    18. Kenneth T. Gillingham & Sébastien Houde & Arthur A. van Benthem, 2021. "Consumer Myopia in Vehicle Purchases: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 207-238, August.
    19. Colleen Carey, 2017. "Technological Change and Risk Adjustment: Benefit Design Incentives in Medicare Part D," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 38-73, February.
    20. Huse, Cristian & Lucinda, Claudio & Cardoso, Andre Ribeiro, 2020. "Consumer response to energy label policies: Evidence from the Brazilian energy label program," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • I15 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health and Economic Development
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:27496. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.