Self-Selection of Peers and Performance

Abstract

This paper studies how the presence of peers and different peer assignment rules—self-selection versus random assignment—affect individual performance. Using a framed field experiment, we find that the presence of a randomly assigned peer improves performance by 28% of a standard deviation (SD), whereas self-selecting peers induces an additional 15%–18% SD improvement in performance. Our results document peer effects in multiple characteristics and show that self-selection changes these characteristics. However, a decomposition reveals that variations in the peer composition contribute only little to the performance differences across peer assignment rules. Rather, we find that self-selection has a direct effect on performance. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, decision analysis.

Performance, Knowledge Gain, Cooperation and Satisfaction in Endogenous Groups: Evidence from a Classroom Field Experiment

“…They find that self-selected groups perform significantly better than randomly formed groups in a competition. Kiessling, Radbruch, and Schaube (2022) show that students perform significantly better in a running task when they can self-select their running partner. They show that the group formation process itself affects running performance, i.e., individuals increase effort if they can choose their teammates.…”

“…5 This paper adds to the literature on group formation and performance by conducting a field experiment in a data analysis course that involved high-stakes and cognitively challenging tasks. The most related studies to ours are from Fischer, Rilke, and Yurtoglu (2023), Fenoll and Zaccagni (2022), and Kiessling, Radbruch, and Schaube (2022), who also conduct classroom field experiments to compare the performance of self-selected and randomly formed groups. 6 Fischer, Rilke, and Yurtoglu (2023) examine how the group formation process affects the skill composition and performance of groups.…”

“…Their task was low-stakes (15% of student grade) for a team of two, while ours was high-stakes (70% of final grade) for a group of three. While Fischer, Rilke, and Yurtoglu (2023) find evidence that self-selected groups perform worse in a classroom setting, Fenoll and Zaccagni (2022) and Kiessling, Radbruch, and Schaube (2022) find evidence that the opposite is the case. 7 In Fenoll and Zaccagni (2022), high school students are randomly or self-selected into groups of six students during a mathematics summer camp.…”

When, and why, do teams benefit from self-selection?

“…Instead, they can search for a like-minded dishonest partner who is willing to violate rules for mutual profit (Charroin et al, 2022;Gross et al, 2018). On a different note, in a framed field experiment in schools, Kiessling et al (2021) study the question of how self-selection versus random assignment influences individual performance in a running task and find that students run faster when they are allowed to self-select a peer to run against.…”

Which Peer Group to Choose? The Effects of Relative Performance Information on Employee Self-Selection and Performance

“…Relatedly, the field study ofKiessling et al [2021] demonstrates that, in the presence of relative performance feedback, granting autonomy to self-select one's peer has a direct positive influence on performance due to a psychological effect that enhances intrinsic motivation Ryan [1985, 2000]).…”