IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cca/wchild/96.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Boys and Girls Perform Better at Math Just Studying More ?

Author

Listed:
  • Eleonora Matteazzi
  • Martina Menon
  • Federico Perali

Abstract

This paper investigates the role of effort on mathematics performance of boys and girls, an aspect that may contribute to our understanding of the gender gap in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields in college. We exploit a remarkably rich primary data set to estimate a simultaneous equations model of mathematics attainment and students’ effort. Our estimation strategy infers causal relations by relying on an instrumental variable approach validated using weak-instruments-robust confidence sets and partial identification techniques. The results show that study effort plays a different role in the math performance of girls and boys. If a boy dedicates one extra hour to study, his math grade increases by 1 point on a 10-point scale. Differently, an additional hour of home study does not have an effect on girls’ math performance, though, in our sample, on average, girls perform significantly better than boys in math. We also examine the role played by peers, the quality of the attended school, and family socio-economic background. These factors mainly affect math achievement only indirectly through student’s effort. Validity tests suggest that our results are not confounded by unobservable heterogeneity. Our findings suggest that asking girls for additional efforts may not be effective to bridge the gender gap in STEM.

Suggested Citation

  • Eleonora Matteazzi & Martina Menon & Federico Perali, 2021. "Do Boys and Girls Perform Better at Math Just Studying More ?," CHILD Working Papers Series 96 JEL Classification: I2, Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic Economics (CHILD) - CCA.
  • Handle: RePEc:cca:wchild:96
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.child.carloalberto.org/images/documenti/child96_2021.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lipscomb, Stephen, 2007. "Secondary school extracurricular involvement and academic achievement: a fixed effects approach," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 463-472, August.
    2. Erik Hanushek & Stephen Machin & Ludger Woessmann (ed.), 2011. "Handbook of the Economics of Education," Handbook of the Economics of Education, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 4, number 4, June.
    3. Sacerdote, Bruce, 2011. "Peer Effects in Education: How Might They Work, How Big Are They and How Much Do We Know Thus Far?," Handbook of the Economics of Education, in: Erik Hanushek & Stephen Machin & Ludger Woessmann (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 4, pages 249-277, Elsevier.
    4. Joseph G. Altonji & Todd E. Elder & Christopher R. Taber, 2005. "Selection on Observed and Unobserved Variables: Assessing the Effectiveness of Catholic Schools," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(1), pages 151-184, February.
    5. Maurizio Baussola & Chiara Mussida, 2014. "Transitions in the Labour Market: Discouragement Effect and Individual Characteristics," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 28(2), pages 209-232, June.
    6. Nirav Mehta & Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd Stinebrickner, 2019. "Time‐Use And Academic Peer Effects In College," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 57(1), pages 162-171, January.
    7. Stinebrickner Ralph & Stinebrickner Todd R., 2008. "The Causal Effect of Studying on Academic Performance," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-55, June.
    8. John E. Roemer & Alain Trannoy, 2016. "Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Measurement," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1288-1332, December.
    9. Victor Lavy & Analia Schlosser, 2011. "Mechanisms and Impacts of Gender Peer Effects at School," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 1-33, April.
    10. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "On the Relationship between Cognitive Ability and Risk Preference," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(2), pages 115-134, Spring.
    11. Speer, Jamin D., 2017. "The gender gap in college major: Revisiting the role of pre-college factors," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 69-88.
    12. Alex Bryson & Lorenzo Corsini & Irene Martelli, 2022. "Teacher allocation and school performance in Italy," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 36(4), pages 409-423, December.
    13. John M. Barron & Bradley T. Ewing & Glen R. Waddell, 2000. "The Effects Of High School Athletic Participation On Education And Labor Market Outcomes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(3), pages 409-421, August.
    14. Chadi, Adrian & de Pinto, Marco & Schultze, Gabriel, 2019. "Young, gifted and lazy? The role of ability and labor market prospects in student effort decisions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 66-79.
    15. C. Kirabo Jackson, 2018. "What Do Test Scores Miss? The Importance of Teacher Effects on Non–Test Score Outcomes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(5), pages 2072-2107.
    16. Carneiro, Pedro & Heckman, James J., 2003. "Human Capital Policy," IZA Discussion Papers 821, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & Melonie B. Williams, 2002. "Estimating Individual Discount Rates in Denmark: A Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1606-1617, December.
    18. Eren, Ozkan & Henderson, Daniel J., 2011. "Are we wasting our children's time by giving them more homework?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 950-961, October.
    19. Donna Ginther & Robert Pollak, 2004. "Family structure and children’s educational outcomes: Blended families, stylized facts, and descriptive regressions," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 41(4), pages 671-696, November.
    20. List, John A., 2009. "An introduction to field experiments in economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 439-442, June.
    21. Delaney, Judith M. & Devereux, Paul J., 2021. "High School Rank in Math and English and the Gender Gap in STEM," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    22. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    23. Sebastian Kripfganz & Jan F. Kiviet, 2021. "kinkyreg: Instrument-free inference for linear regression models with endogenous regressors," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 21(3), pages 772-813, September.
    24. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    25. Donald W. K. Andrews & Marcelo J. Moreira & James H. Stock, 2006. "Optimal Two-Sided Invariant Similar Tests for Instrumental Variables Regression," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(3), pages 715-752, May.
    26. Edward P. Lazear, 2001. "Educational Production," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(3), pages 777-803.
    27. Petra E. Todd & Kenneth I. Wolpin, 2003. "On The Specification and Estimation of The Production Function for Cognitive Achievement," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(485), pages 3-33, February.
    28. Kalenkoski, Charlene Marie & Pabilonia, Sabrina Wulff, 2012. "Time to work or time to play: The effect of student employment on homework, sleep, and screen time," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 211-221.
    29. Kiviet, Jan F., 2020. "Testing the impossible: Identifying exclusion restrictions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 294-316.
    30. Andrew J. Hill, 2015. "The Girl Next Door: The Effect of Opposite Gender Friends on High School Achievement," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 147-177, July.
    31. Uri Simonsohn, 2010. "Weather To Go To College," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(543), pages 270-280, March.
    32. repec:feb:artefa:0089 is not listed on IDEAS
    33. Jiang, Xuan, 2021. "Women in STEM: Ability, preference, and value," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    34. David Card & A. Abigail Payne, 2021. "High School Choices And The Gender Gap In Stem," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(1), pages 9-28, January.
    35. Delaney, Judith M. & Devereux, Paul J., 2019. "Understanding gender differences in STEM: Evidence from college applications✰," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 219-238.
    36. Alberto, Ivan Carlo & Jiao, Yang & Zhang, Xiaohan, 2021. "Too hot or too cold to study? The effect of temperature on student time allocation," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    37. Cunha, Flavio & Heckman, James J. & Lochner, Lance, 2006. "Interpreting the Evidence on Life Cycle Skill Formation," Handbook of the Economics of Education, in: Erik Hanushek & F. Welch (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 12, pages 697-812, Elsevier.
    38. Joshua Graff Zivin & Solomon M. Hsiang & Matthew Neidell, 2018. "Temperature and Human Capital in the Short and Long Run," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 77-105.
    39. Charles F. Manski, 1993. "Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 60(3), pages 531-542.
    40. Kuehn Zoë & Landeras Pedro, 2014. "The Effect of Family Background on Student Effort," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 14(4), pages 1-67, October.
    41. repec:feb:artefa:0087 is not listed on IDEAS
    42. Caroline Hoxby, 2000. "Peer Effects in the Classroom: Learning from Gender and Race Variation," NBER Working Papers 7867, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    43. Levitt, Steven D. & List, John A., 2009. "Field experiments in economics: The past, the present, and the future," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, January.
    44. Devereux, Paul J. & Delaney, Judith, 2019. "Understanding Gender Differences in STEM: Evidence from College Applications," CEPR Discussion Papers 13558, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    45. Liyang Sun, 2018. "Implementing valid two-step identification-robust confidence sets for linear instrumental-variables models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 18(4), pages 803-825, December.
    46. Victor Lavy & Analía Schlosser, 2011. "Corrigendum: Mechanisms and Impacts of Gender Peer Effects at School," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 268-268, July.
    47. Isaiah Andrews, 2018. "Valid Two-Step Identification-Robust Confidence Sets for GMM," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(2), pages 337-348, May.
    48. Maribeth Coller & Melonie Williams, 1999. "Eliciting Individual Discount Rates," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(2), pages 107-127, December.
    49. Gianni De Fraja & Tania Oliveira & Luisa Zanchi, 2010. "Must Try Harder: Evaluating the Role of Effort in Educational Attainment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(3), pages 577-597, August.
    50. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    51. Chris Ryan, 2017. "Measurement of Peer Effects," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 50(1), pages 121-129, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexandra de Gendre & Nicolás Salamanca, 2020. "On the Mechanisms of Ability Peer Effects," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2020n19, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    2. Fruehwirth, Jane Cooley & Gagete-Miranda, Jessica, 2019. "Your peers’ parents: Spillovers from parental education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Delaney, Judith M. & Devereux, Paul J., 2021. "Gender and Educational Achievement: Stylized Facts and Causal Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 14074, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Claudia Olivetti & Eleonora Patacchini & Yves Zenou, 2020. "Mothers, Peers, and Gender-Role Identity," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(1), pages 266-301.
    5. Shure, Nikki, 2021. "Non-cognitive peer effects in secondary education," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    6. Briole, Simon, 2021. "Are girls always good for boys? Short and long term effects of school peers’ gender," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    7. Lépine, Andrea & Estevan, Fernanda, 2021. "Do ability peer effects matter for academic and labor market outcomes?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Laura Pagani & Giovanni Pica, 2021. "A Peer Like Me? Early Exposure to High Achievers in Math and Later Educational Outcomes," Development Working Papers 476, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano.
    9. Dustmann, Christian & Ku, Hyejin & Kwak, Do Won, 2018. "Why Are Single-Sex Schools Successful?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 79-99.
    10. Auestad, May Linn, 2018. "The effect of low-achieving peers," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 178-214.
    11. Wennberg, Karl & Norgren, Axel, 2021. "Models of Peer Effects in Education," Working Papers 21/3, Stockholm School of Economics, Center for Educational Leadership and Excellence.
    12. Dinarte Diaz,Lelys Ileana, 2020. "Peer Effects on Violence : Experimental Evidence from El Salvador," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9187, The World Bank.
    13. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.
    14. Judith M. Delaney & Paul J. Devereux, 2022. "Gender Differences in STEM Persistence after Graduation," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(356), pages 862-883, October.
    15. Bietenbeck, Jan, 2020. "Own Motivation, Peer Motivation, and Educational Success," IZA Discussion Papers 13872, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Zhang, Hongliang, 2016. "The role of testing noise in the estimation of achievement-based peer effects," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 113-123.
    17. Humlum, Maria Knoth & Thorsager, Mette, 2021. "The Importance of Peer Quality for Completion of Higher Education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    18. Luo, Yiyang & Yang, Songtao, 2023. "Gender peer effects on students’ educational and occupational expectations," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    19. Feng, Han & Li, Jiayao, 2016. "Head teachers, peer effects, and student achievement," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 268-283.
    20. Duncan McVicar & Julie Moschion & Chris Ryan, 2013. "Right Peer, Right Now? Endogenous Peer Effects and Achievement in Victorian Primary Schools," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2013n22, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mathematics; effort; gender inequality; peer effects; school quality;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cca:wchild:96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Giovanni Bert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/chccait.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.