<mark>materials were read aloud in the participant’s desired language (Haoussa or Djerma). Enumerators were blind to the hypotheses.</mark> <mark>An endline survey was conducted approximately one year later among the full sample. Female enumerators were blind to condition assignment and administered the survey to female respondents in a private space in their homes or near their homes. Enumerators asked respondents a series of economic, psychological, social, and program-related outcome measures in the participant’s desired language.</mark> _Post-intervention Survey Measures._ Responses to self-reported psychosocial measures and hypothetical economic scenarios were collected among those in intervention conditions only. Details on the wording and construction of each measure can be found on the AEA pre-registration: <u>https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/3570.</u> Note that many of these measures were original, meaning that they were developed to be specific to this economic and cultural context. Given time constraints, we were unable to assess the properties of these measures before the survey, and several were found post-hoc to have poor properties (e.g., low internal reliability, low variation, frequent ceiling effects). While we preregistered a split sample analytic approach due to the exploratory nature of these measures and to help control the rate of false discovery (Anderson & Magruder, 2017), we ultimately found no significant effect on any outcome measure and thus present analyses on the full sample.

**_Economic outcomes._** Three composite variables ( _approach behaviors_ , _approach feelings_ , and _budget allocation_ ) comprise an ‘economic composite index’, which relates to business intentions and investment behaviors. _Approach behaviors_ and _approach feelings_ assess response to four hypothetical business decisions that relate to: reinvesting in a profitable activity following an intrahousehold disagreement, becoming a traveling saleswoman, seeking information on business development, and asking trainers for advice on their business. Different options were given for each scenario but approach behaviors were classified into binary indicators (approach/avoid). For each scenario, respondents were asked how they would feel on a 4-point scale for 4 _feelings_ : confident vs. uncertain, proud vs. ashamed, generous vs. selfish, and harmonious vs. conflictual. A hypothetical _budget allocation_ asked respondents about a scenario in which they had 6,500 CFA in surplus business profits and asked them how much they would invest in savings and in her business (as compared to food, school fees, community projects or other self-described purchases).

_Optimistic program expectations_ asked respondents 4 prediction questions on how many out of 10 program participants would increase their profits under different scenarios and how many would attend all life skills and business training sessions.

**_Social outcomes._** Five composite variables ( _social standing, social norms, social support, anticipation of negative reputation, and trust_ ) comprise a ‘social composite index.’ _Social standing_ uses a 10-point ladder for 5 questions about women’s current subjective social status, how well-regarded they are in their community, how much their opinion is followed and whether that will increase or decrease in the future or stay the same in the future, and how much they feel they are a person who models good moral character. _Social norms_ relate to women’s business activities and ask them to estimate out of 10 women how many would be supported by their

39