Bounded Rationality in Study Time Allocation: Evidence Based on Risky Choice Framing Effects.

Abstract

When allocating study time for the English sections of the National College Entrance Examination or the Postgraduate Entrance Examination, learners often encounter value-test likelihood trade-offs, where questions of similar difficulty may have different points and different likelihoods of being tested. This research explored how individuals allocated study time and whether this process exhibited bounded rationality by examining the risky choice framing effects in study time allocation. The research set up two types of items: 1-point items with a 90% likelihood and 9-point items with a 10% likelihood. Each type of item had the same test likelihood but was expressed in different framings. For the 90% likelihood items, the test framing emphasized that they had a 90% likelihood of being tested. Meanwhile, the non-test framing emphasized that they had a 10% likelihood of not being tested. A total of 41 college students participated in the study, and they were allowed to self-regulate their study time for each type of item. The results showed that learners' study time allocation differed under the two equivalent framings. This indicates that the process of study time allocation is not completely rational, but is rather boundedly rational, which is inconsistent with the expected utility theory.