The Hawthorne Effect in community trials in developing countries

Abstract

The Hawthorne Effect is relatively common in community intervention trials. Yet, very little is known about it in developing countries where poverty may play an important role in how and why people participate in studies. A quasi‐experimental trial with a comparison group designed to evaluate the effectiveness of an indoor air pollution intervention showed evidence of reactivity in rural South Africa. By drawing on post‐trial focus group discussions with members of the comparison group (n = 30), this paper explores the reasons why participants improved their behaviours despite not having received the intervention. Results suggest that participants changed their behaviours for three reasons: expectations of gain, misunderstandings of the data collection equipment and a learning effect. In addition to highlighting the role of poverty and miscommunication in influencing reactivity, this paper also offers recommendations to reduce the Hawthorne Effect in impoverished contexts.