Table 6.

Interaction between neighbor’s attendance and cash incentive.

Panel A: interaction with any incentive	All (1)	Females (2)	Males (3)
% within 0–0.5 km	0.152** [0.074]	0.061 [0.140]	0.208** [0.102]
Any incentive	0.341*** [0.058]	0.287*** [0.101]	0.371*** [0.087]
Any incentive * % within 0–0.5 km band	−0.064 [0.083]	0.000 [0.151]	−0.100 [0.122]
Observations	2767	1508	1259
R-squared	0.220	0.220	0.228
F-stata	115.887	57.287	37.607
Panel B: quantifying cash and neighbor effects	No neighbors (1)	No incentive (2)	Any incentive (3)
% Within 0–0.5 km		0.220** [0.089]	0.070 [0.056]
Any incentive	0.513*** [0.102]
Amount of incentive	0.126* [0.070]		0.119*** [0.016]
Observations	154	604	2163
R-squared	0.394	0.096	0.073
F-stata		84.88	189.71

Notes: The results present IV regressions, the instruments used are the percent of neighbors that received various amounts of the incentives that reside within a 500 m radius of the respondent. Robust standard errors are clustered by village. Additional controls not presented here but included in the regression include: age, age squared, HIV status, whether the individual got an incentive, as well as the amount of the incentive received (in USD), a simulated average distance to the HIV results center, a dummy variable indicating if the individual lives further than 1.5 km from the nearest VCT as well as district fixed effects. Asterisks denote the significance of the coefficients:

^***indicates significance at the 1% level;

^**significance at the 5% level; and

^*denotes significance at the 10% level.

^aThe F-test statistics reported are the Wald Weak Identification F-test statistic (Kleibergen-Paap).