Do Monetary Incentives Matter in Classroom Experiments? Effects on Course Performance

Rousu, Matthew C.; Corrigan, Jay R.; Harris, David A.; Hayter, Jill K.; Houser, Scott; Lafrancois, Becky A.; Onafowora, Olugbenga A.; Colson, Gregory; Hoffer, Adam J.

doi:10.1080/00220485.2015.1071214

Cited by 23 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another reason is that laboratory auctions may require higher participant fees, which have shown to positively affect valuations, a phenomenon known as an income endowment effect . Such monetary incentives may be of particular relevance when considering students rather than adults, despite the fact that both types of respondents, commonly targeted in WTP research, are not expected to bid significantly differently …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…39 Another reason is that laboratory auctions may require higher participant fees, which have shown to positively affect valuations, [40][41][42] a phenomenon known as an income endowment effect. 43 Such monetary incentives may be of particular relevance when considering students rather than adults, 44 despite the fact that both types of respondents, commonly targeted in WTP research, are not expected to bid significantly differently. 45 Finally, alongside the measurement of WTP for a food product, researchers often provide specific information on product or process attributes, either at once or during different information treatments, often distributed to different subsamples.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Methods matter: a meta‐regression on the determinants of willingness‐to‐pay studies on biofortified foods

Steur

Wesana

Blancquaert

et al. 2016

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the growing evidence on biofortification as a cost-effective micronutrient strategy, various researchers have elicited consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) for biofortified crops in an effort to justify and determine their adoption. This review presents a meta-analysis of WTP studies on biofortified foods, either developed through conventional breeding or using genetic modification technology. On the basis of 122 estimates from 23 studies (9507 respondents), consumers are generally willing to pay 21.3% more for biofortified crops. Because WTP estimates are often determined through different valuation methods and procedures, a meta-regression was carried out to examine the role of potential determinants. Aside from contextual factors, such as type of food crop, target nutrient, and region (but not breeding technique), various methodological factors significantly influence premiums, including the type of respondent, nature of the study, study environment, participation fee, and provided information. The findings allow researchers to better anticipate potential methodological biases when examining WTP for (biofortified) foods, while it gives policy makers a broad understanding of the potential demand for different biofortified crops in various settings.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods matter: a meta‐regression on the determinants of willingness‐to‐pay studies on biofortified foods

Steur

Wesana

Blancquaert

et al. 2016

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All three studies documented that students participating in the experiments perform significantly better in the examinations than those in the non-participating group. More recently, Rousu et al (2015) examine whether or not providing monetary incentives will enhance students' examination performance. They find strong evidence that students who played a classroom experiment game with real monetary consequences eventually performed better in the examination than those who played a hypothetical game and those who did not play at all.…”

Section: Previous Studies On Experimental Learning In Economicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching Them before We Teach: The Effectiveness of Conducting Classroom Experiments before Teaching the Underlying Theory

Li¹,

Wong

2018

IJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the effectiveness of classroom experiments conducted before the relevant theories were taught. The experiments were used to provide students with first-hand experience of decision-making under various rivalry settings and to demonstrate several key predictions of oligopoly models. Statistical methods were used to analyze the effectiveness of these experiments in helping students master the concepts covered by the experiments. In general, students had a positive experience in the process and they found the experiments useful in stimulating their interest and helping improve their understanding of the relevant theories. Statistically, students who took part in the experiments performed significantly better in an exam question on oligopoly markets.

show abstract

“…Las decisiones en los ordenadores se acompañan del debate continuo y reflexivo, en el que se cuestiona y discute a medida que se está viviendo la experiencia (Stodder, 1998). Segundo, no se garantiza el valor inducido; en su lugar, se hace explícito un sistema de puntos acorde con las decisiones, sin pagos monetarios, como mecanismo de incentivo a la participación de los estudiantes en las diferentes etapas del juego (Rousu et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Conflicto 2x2: una lección de teoría de juegos en el laboratorio

García

Aguilar

2020

CICE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Los experimentos en el aula son una estrategia pedagógica que complementa las lecciones magistrales y los talleres de ejercicios, lo que los consolida como una alternativa práctica e interactiva que propicia la discusión de los conceptos y el fortalecimiento de habilidades transversales. En particular, en este artículo se presenta un protocolo que permite modelar diferentes niveles de conflicto en el laboratorio, donde dilemas clásicos como cazar ciervo, la gallina y el dilema del prisionero se consideran casos particulares. Las preguntas que se discuten a la luz de la experiencia son: ¿Los estudiantes están dispuestos a cooperar en función del nivel de conflicto al que se enfrenten? ¿Es mayor la cooperación en el juego secuencial en comparación al juego simultáneo? Los resultados muestran que el nivel de conflicto afecta la decisión de cooperar. Además, los incentivos para actuar agresivamente aumentan entre mayor sea el conflicto. Con respecto al protocolo secuencial, no hay evidencia de cambios significativos en el comportamiento con respecto al juego simultáneo.

show abstract

Do Monetary Incentives Matter in Classroom Experiments? Effects on Course Performance

Cited by 23 publications

References 23 publications

Methods matter: a meta‐regression on the determinants of willingness‐to‐pay studies on biofortified foods

Methods matter: a meta‐regression on the determinants of willingness‐to‐pay studies on biofortified foods

Teaching Them before We Teach: The Effectiveness of Conducting Classroom Experiments before Teaching the Underlying Theory

Conflicto 2x2: una lección de teoría de juegos en el laboratorio

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About