Search Papers

Omar Al-Ubaydli, Uri Gneezy, John A List, Min Sok Lee

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 2

A stylized fact is that agents respond more acutely to negative than positive stimuli. Such findings have generated insights on mechanism-design, have been featured prominently in policymaking, and more generally have led to discussions of whether preferences are defined over consumption levels or changes in consumption. This study reconsiders this stylized fact. In doing so, it provides insights into an important domain wherein positive stimuli induce a greater response than negative stimuli: a principal-agent game with reputational considerations and with the agent on the market's short end. This common setting represents an important feature of labor markets with involuntary unemployment.

Omar Al-Ubaydli, John A List, Claire Mackevicius, Min Sok Lee, Dana L Suskind

Cited by*: None Downloads*: None

Policymakers are increasingly turning to insights gained from the experimental method as a means to inform large scale public policies. Critics view this increased usage as premature, pointing to the fact that many experimentally-tested programs fail to deliver their promise at scale. Under this view, the experimental approach drives too much public policy. Yet, if policymakers could be more confident that the original research findings would be delivered at scale, even the staunchest critics would carve out a larger role for experiments to inform policy. Leveraging the economic framework of Al-Ubaydli et al. (2019), we put forward 12 simple proposals, spanning researchers, policymakers, funders, and stakeholders, which together tackle the most vexing scalability threats. The framework highlights that only after we deepen our understanding of the scale up problem will we be on solid ground to argue that scientific experiments should hold a more prominent place in the policymaker's quiver.

Uditi Karna, Min Sok Lee, John A. List, Andrew Simon, Haruka Uchida

Cited by*: Downloads*:

Educational disparities remain a key contributor to increasing social and wealth inequalities. To address this, researchers and policymakers have focused on average differences between racial groups or differences among students who are falling behind. This focus potentially leads to educational triage, diverting resources away from high-achieving students, including those from racial minorities. Here we focus on the "racial excellence gap" - the difference in the likelihood that students from racial minorities (Black and Hispanic) reach the highest levels of academic achievement compared with their non-minority (white and Asian) peers. There is a shortage of evidence that systematically measures the magnitude of the excellence gap and how it evolves. Using longitudinal, statewide, administrative data, we document eight facts regarding the excellence gap from third grade (typically ages 8-9) to high school (typically ages 14-18), link the stability of excellence gaps and student backgrounds, and assess the efficacy of public policies. We show that excellence gaps in maths and reading are evident by the third grade and grow slightly over time, especially for female students. About one third of the gap is explained by a student's socioeconomic status, and about one tenth is explained by the school environment. Top-achieving racial minority students are also less likely to persist in excellence as they progress through school. Moreover, state accountability policies that direct additional resources to reduce non-race-based inequality had minimal effects on the racial excellence gaps. Documenting these patterns is an important step towards eliminating excellence gaps and removing the "racial glass ceiling".

Michael G. Cuna, Lenka Fiala, Min Sok Lee, John A. List, Sutanuka Roy

Cited by*: Downloads*:

This study examines how mothers' risk and ambiguity preferences affect early childhood investments and outcomes by assessing over 6,000 mothers in Rajasthan, India. Results show that more risk and ambiguity averse mothers make greater investments in their children's nutrition between ages 0-6. These investments correlate with superior cognitive and non-cognitive skills in children, even after controlling for socioeconomic factors. Notably, higher maternal risk and ambiguity aversion can mitigate negative impacts of socioeconomic disadvantages (maternal illiteracy, belonging to historically discriminated groups, limited media access) on all measures of early-life skills, highlighting the importance of understanding preferences in addressing inequities.