 Okay, thank you everyone for staying that long during this session in the last one of the conference and the last one in presenting. This is an honor to present to you these results. This is a very ambitious project and it's the first time that has an economic audience of economists and people interested in development mainly. It's also joint work with people in the University of Adriana here in Bogota, Angela Fonseca is here and Santiago and Andres from Javediana and Emil Bruno who was based at the University of Pennsylvania and passed two years after tomorrow, right. So the main, well we have been during these days, these couple of days in the conference, the experts, I mean our senior economists have mentioned the word convincing people, motivating people as crucial actually key for the solution of reducing inequality, how to promote behavior and in particular we focused with this project. We started in 2019 to draft and the design for this project motivated by the fact that this motivation or this convincing people was related to increasing prosociality and there is already literature that shows how in theory is very beneficial for especially in the global south when we have plenty of situations of incomplete contracts and also there is also key for development. We have already very well documented evidence on how prosociality is very important and in particular there is also now a growing literature on empathy and how empathy is key to increase prosociality. Here by prosociality I mean this willingness to sacrifice some of your well-being not only to improve others but also yours, maybe a common good, it could be that too. So in a way when we're thinking about reducing inequality we're asking people to be prosocial, sacrifice a bit of their well-being in order to improve will be enough others for the whole society as well being in general. So one example of the of how relevant is empathy and prosociality is intergroup conflict and what we have actually is very descriptive experimental evidence on it unfortunately well or fortunately we have social psychology alone in terms of measuring prosociality in intergroup conflict. We also have prosociality alone towards migrants in Europe and there is evidence on that and prosociality within groups in ex combatants here in Colombia and in Afghanistan but in particular for this dimension of prosociality that I want to focus on this presentation today that is preference for the distribution. We have the classic, the literature built on the classic determinants of these preferences measured by surveys only and these are position income, the position in the ladder as very important is the determinants ideology and the presence of the outgroup members in active presence in the community. However, now recently for moving towards measuring perceptions and attitudes towards how welcoming are the in-group members towards the outgroup members. There is a nice initiative by the United Nations recent and they just one month ago they launched the results for a large study in Latin America capturing perceptions and attitudes towards the willingness to receive openly or integration by outgroup members. Unfortunately these measures are not very well, they don't produce what we want in terms of the results and it has to do with the ability to capture these perceptions or attitudes and also there is no relation in terms of how these perceptions are related towards other kinds of prosociality like trust or generosity which is actually very important when we're talking about preference for redistribution. So one particular case in terms of what the literature shows is that despite of what the efforts by governments and other organizations to implement interventions that reduce exclusion and promotes integration there is no causal evidence on which interventions work and there is not much actually very very little and there is some in terms of media interventions, media interventions capturing information about the outgroup members hoping that when the in-group members are informed about the characteristics of the outgroup members of the point in common or the willingness of these outgroup members to integrate there will be an improvement in terms of prosociality but it's not the case necessarily and there is effective evidence on that but unfortunately it's not in the medium term it's not permanent so we need something that will change this structural change that everyone is talking about in terms of motivating or convincing people but we want them convinced for a long time we don't want them to change their mind in the medium term. So what we have also is mixed results in terms of casual evidence and there are several cases that I will describe to you because it's not a it's not a complete nice picture but it's still the efforts of many academics that are trying to fill the gap in terms of in terms of measurement and finding the cause of relationships so we have reconciliation in Rwanda information information in the intervention and prosociality towards Germany refugees in Germany we also have labels forcing interaction like this contact with the outgroup members and empathy in Israel and Palestine and media interventions towards XFARC which actually was very effective and is part of this project and I will explain that later and role models and information with migrants in Latin America with mixed results and not very not very not convincing totally. So what we have here is a multi-disciplinary approach to how to design an intervention that will work always but we well I will show you that it actually works and is the mechanism so we went a step back what is the mechanism we want to use to improve empathy and prosociality and what we do is to stand on the shoulders of the large evidence in social psychology on how to tangle empathy. So empathy is I mean it's still I mean it's still recently researched in economics and used in economics for designing behavioral informed interventions but still economies we fail in terms of what are the structural theoretical dimensions of empathy that we need to tackle and empathy is not emotions so the even as economies we may we can easily upset social psychologists with the way you approach to empathy. So what we do is just let's talk to the social psychologists and they will tell us what do we have here in order to obtain a very well-informed socially a psychological informed intervention tailor-made design that means that is for the particular group for the particular community that will work and it will work in the sense that we use the same the dimensions that we that they already know that are the dimensions that work and that those dimensions are for this hard for some of you will be new and the humanization prejudice warmth and that is actually the closest that we have to emotions in psychology and social psychology um malleability uh blame and and so on and if we have time it will explain that to you but the this intervention in particular tackle three three main dimensions which are prejudice the humanization unwillingness to integrate by the in-group members or malleability also the ability to integrate if I'm an in-group member and I see that um that or perceive that this group is not actually able to integrate I will reject integration so that's why this is very important in psychology we also well with this a mechanism that we know this informed intervention aims to improve empathy and we are sure that it will it does what we want to see is is actually improves prosociality and also preferences for redistribution there are not the the aim of the psychologists so that's why we work together our intervention is a five-minute mid-intervention that is it's made from interviews we conducted with XFARC in Colombia and with Venezuelan migrants and it has the same structure the videos the two videos or there are two different videos we use the same producer the film producer the paper with XFARC is already published in nature so we're in a safe ground in terms of the results are very consolidated there for ex-combatants but not for migrants and it follows the same structure in the sense of the dimensions that I just meant just mentions but also um how is crafted for the video of the ex-combatants for in the study nature they compete the the researchers put different kinds of videos with different structures to compete so we have a long work behind in terms of what was the best intervention to use for the case of the migrants we played safe using the same structure that means the same number of Venezuelan migrants interviewed the same numbers of Colombian civilians that were interviewed though also men women the number of men and women in the video the order how what was the message conveyed by each one of the answers in the characters interviewed and also authorities interviewed that were worked directly with the with the outgroup members in this case the Venezuelans and I think that's in general the the structure we also do it well we do that and check pro-sociality with a lab in the field experiment and also social biases this is one of the another contribution because we have a link with neuroscience how we can we guarantee that we have medium term results if we don't have money to conduct the medium term evaluation for this and it turns out that we can use movement tracking to have to capture the cognitive processing of the decisions that the participants make that means that if the I find changes in the movement tracking of their decisions there that is already a signal given the evidence in neuroscience that there are some processes behind that doesn't have to do with emotions and they don't also have to do with immediate responses but actually cognitive and more stable methods of processing in our brains which is optimistic and our specific way of looking at this intervention so what is that is significance of this research well yesterday was very well explained how critical is the situation in Colombia about the migrant the migrants crisis and also well we have in the internally displaced people and the XFARC we also have well I had updated the data for the for actually compared to what we saw before yesterday which is even more alarming to the numbers that were shown yesterday so I won't go through that well what I could say is for example the IDPs the internally displaced people is critical in Colombia we're talking about a million that cumulative from 1985 so it's been there all the time in my in my lifetime for example and for this combatants despite that they are not much only 27,000 have completed their integration process so it's a still a critical topic now and in terms of what we do for the contribution we test this intervention using a representative sample of Colombians and we use a internally displaced people and the poor as control group comparison groups also you had the pool and a post game survey on social psychology measures to guarantee that actually the video worked in terms of what we knew already that it was supposed to work in social psychology and measures on pro-sociality using games or behavioral incentivized measures of pro-sociality like trust generosity and preferences for the distribution so not service and we find an effect a positive effect on all of them not only empathy as each we should because that's the mechanism but also pro-sociality and the cognitive process that was behind the movement tracking that we captured with the movement of the our thing of the finger of the participant when the participant was making the decisions and they won't talk much more about this here finally we also connected this data with this world value survey waves in Colombia that have plenty of information that we want to exploit for later and COVID perceptions so it's a very complete data set these are our treatments so we have the control no video this is another one passive control this is very important because mainly most of the interventions in economics don't have a passive video and that's very critical for social psychologists when they try to compare the results so we actually use this and this is a video that talks about the tourist attraction in Colombia that is a coffee region is very special and it was used for the paper publishing nature so we also play safe there we have the video with x combatants that is the same one used in the paper before in the paper that is published already and we also use them but in this paper they don't have they don't have behavioral measures that's part of the contribution to and also with migrants that is a video that we actually produced I won't show the video because we don't have time and this is our main tool hypothesis that I just mentioned in the preview of the results so these are the findings and it's my last and best slide and I would hope to have spent some time here we find not only in terms of pro-sociality for generosity that is a dictator game we have an 11 an increased in all the groups with this is very interesting because the exposure to the video of the migrants it was directed to improve empathy towards migrants only but it turns out that migrants are most of them and in the interview they are the poor and they are also very close to very similar to us they're also displaced so what actually find is that all these effects are significant and rob us to manage rob us this checks that we have already performed these and these are percentages in terms of what the the changes in the in the impact that they have but it's mainly between point three and point six standard deviations for all the cases which is a sizable effect for experimental measures so we have 11 percent for the poor seven percent for internal displaced for ex combatants 24 percent so actually participants gave more to the ex combatants when they saw the video the migrants video and for the venezuelans migrants and the 42 percent in terms of trust it also was an increase in all the groups for the slower than generosity but is he but is him it's very important trust because in this sense the person that sends that sense the money is weighing some money back so it's not only in terms of trust but transworthiness and risk preferences so it gave us also in some information about that in terms to these attitudes towards migrants so we have 26 percent of increase preference for redistribution in case of merit because we have two treatments when it was unlawfully patricio explained what does meant movement to be and it's the same design just that we didn't change the cost it was a fixed cost that was zero so there was no cost for the expectator to allocate the money between no it was there was a quantity between zero and five tokens that decided to reallocate from one to another so in the case when they they want the another one which was for example in case of many that is a venezuelan that didn't get them that did the job but didn't get the salary so we have a change with this a very small change which is interesting is because both in this case it was poor and it's so there was some relocation this is a this is internal validity for those for the experimentalist this is a lovely result having a one percent change for the control group but in this case for venezuelans was 17 percent only for venezuelans when it was with the the migrants period and with luck it was venezuelans are also and also ex-combatants for luck it was it was a random assignation of the payment so in the case of luck well they redistribute more which is consistent and we also have empirical expectations in terms of generosity this is important because we this is this informs us about social norms and for what we call first-order beliefs in these cases empirical expectations are the first step to change when we want to have a structural cultural change and that is in generosity and trust in general was 14 and 10 percent for cognitive biases we the velocity improved so that means that actually it's wrong it's decreased that means that I have to think better so when they with the video the person took the velocity was lower so the finger took more longer that means that my cognitive process behind was taking more time and I mean was I was thinking better if I should help the migrant or not which is very important because when I'm fed of xenophobic narrow xenophobic run narrative I just don't think and empathy and I won't show it here unfortunately we had the same results and support for inclusive policies so just to close I will this is a the main result for the migrants video which was the is a novelty we confirm the results when we had the expert video with the paper of nature but also including the prosociality measures is this is basically the same trust but it trust increases only for and for ex combatants and we have also increasing the in preferences for the distribution confirming what it was found in the previous paper by the psychologist this is I will keep this because this was what patricio helped me to explain and just to close and we have lessons on how to actually address and this and no yes I motivating people to for the integration and to receive the odd group members in our societies these are robust results we control I mean we need a tons of not tons but several I mean the key ones collaborative work is very important because it helps us to fill the gaps that the efforts already made by international organizations in terms of motivating or promoting integration are trying to are doing and it's using the right measures which in this case we are very sure has improved we have improved that in terms of what the literature has done so far and behavioral measures are key and that's why also now in psychology psychologists have to use experiments to and to enlighten their enhance their results and the mechanisms continue being empathy properly measured please keep in touch with what is coming in terms of this project because we have results on ideology and income level and attitudes towards a world value survey and for the medium term effects if you have a spare money please call me and and join us to support that it will be great thank you