高风险与低风险测试中的差异表现:来自GRE测试的证据

Analía Schlosser, Z. Neeman, Y. Attali
{"title":"高风险与低风险测试中的差异表现:来自GRE测试的证据","authors":"Analía Schlosser, Z. Neeman, Y. Attali","doi":"10.1093/EJ/UEZ015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n We study how different demographic groups respond to incentives by comparing their performance in ‘high’ and ‘low’ stakes situations. The high stakes situation is the Graduate Record Examination (GRE), and the low stakes situation is a voluntary experimental section of the GRE. We find that males exhibit a larger drop in performance between the high and low stakes examinations than females, and that whites exhibit a larger drop in performance than minorities. Differences between high and low stakes tests are partly explained by the fact that males and whites exert lower effort in low stakes tests compared with females and minorities.","PeriodicalId":121231,"journal":{"name":"CEPR Discussion Paper Series","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differential Performance in High vs. Low Stakes Tests: Evidence from the GRE Test\",\"authors\":\"Analía Schlosser, Z. Neeman, Y. Attali\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/EJ/UEZ015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n We study how different demographic groups respond to incentives by comparing their performance in ‘high’ and ‘low’ stakes situations. The high stakes situation is the Graduate Record Examination (GRE), and the low stakes situation is a voluntary experimental section of the GRE. We find that males exhibit a larger drop in performance between the high and low stakes examinations than females, and that whites exhibit a larger drop in performance than minorities. Differences between high and low stakes tests are partly explained by the fact that males and whites exert lower effort in low stakes tests compared with females and minorities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":121231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CEPR Discussion Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"82 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CEPR Discussion Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/EJ/UEZ015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CEPR Discussion Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/EJ/UEZ015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

我们通过比较不同人口群体在“高”和“低”风险情况下的表现,研究他们对激励的反应。高风险的情况是研究生入学考试(GRE),低风险的情况是GRE的自愿实验部分。我们发现,男性在高风险和低风险考试中表现出比女性更大的成绩下降,白人表现出比少数族裔更大的成绩下降。与女性和少数族裔相比,男性和白人在低风险测试中付出的努力更少,这在一定程度上解释了高风险和低风险测试之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Differential Performance in High vs. Low Stakes Tests: Evidence from the GRE Test
We study how different demographic groups respond to incentives by comparing their performance in ‘high’ and ‘low’ stakes situations. The high stakes situation is the Graduate Record Examination (GRE), and the low stakes situation is a voluntary experimental section of the GRE. We find that males exhibit a larger drop in performance between the high and low stakes examinations than females, and that whites exhibit a larger drop in performance than minorities. Differences between high and low stakes tests are partly explained by the fact that males and whites exert lower effort in low stakes tests compared with females and minorities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Friday Morning Fever. Evidence from a Randomized Experiment on Sick Leave Monitoring in the Public Sector Trade, Jobs, and Worker Welfare Fiscal Policy Challenges for Latin America During the Next Stages of the Pandemic: The Need for a Fiscal Pact Bayesian Estimation of Epidemiological Models: Methods, Causality, and Policy Trade-Offs Evaluating Deliberative Competence: A Simple Method with an Application to Financial Choice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1