Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Choosing to be Trained: Evidence from a Field Experiment

Contents:

Author Info

  • Utteeyo Dasgupta

    (Franklin and Marshall College)

  • Subha Mani

    (Fordham University)

  • Lata Gangadharan

    (Monash University)

  • Pushkar Maitra

    (Monash University)

  • Samyukta Subramanian

    (Pratham)

Abstract

This paper combines unique experimental and survey data to examine the determinants of self-selection into a training program. Women residing in selected disadvantaged areas in New Delhi, India were invited to apply for a six-month long subsidized training program in stitching and tailoring. A random subset of applicants and non-applicants to the training program were invited to participate in an artefactual field experiment and in a detailed socio-economic survey. We find that applicants and non-applicants differ both in terms of socio-economic characteristics (elicited through survey data), and behavioral traits (elicited using a field experiment). Identifying these characteristics can help policy-makers design and promote programs so as to make them more appealing to the target group, and thus improve take-up rates. Our results also suggest that as a methodology, there is valuable information to be gained by dissecting the black box of unobservables using behavioral data from experiments.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/economics/DP2012_01_Dasgupta_et.al.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Fordham University, Department of Economics in its series Fordham Economics Discussion Paper Series with number dp2012_01.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:frd:wpaper:dp2012_01

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.fordham.edu/economics/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Selection; Field Experiment; Household Survey; Risk; Competition;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & Melonie B. Williams, 2001. "Estimating Individual Discount Rates in Denmark: A Field Experiment," NCEE Working Paper Series 200102, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Nov 2001.
  2. Tor Eriksson & Sabrina Teyssier & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2006. "Self-Selection and the Efficiency of Tournaments," Working Papers 0603, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique (GATE), Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Université Lyon 2, Ecole Normale Supérieure.
  3. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2007. "Do Women Shy Away from Competition? Do Men Compete Too Much?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 122(3), pages 1067-1101, 08.
  4. Siwan Anderson, 2000. "The Economics of Roscas and Intra-Household Resource Allocation," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1323, Econometric Society.
  5. John List & David Reiley, 2008. "Field experiments," Artefactual Field Experiments 00091, The Field Experiments Website.
  6. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey Smith, 2003. "The Determinants of Participation in a Social Program: Evidence from a Prototypical Job Training Program," University of Western Ontario, CIBC Centre for Human Capital and Productivity Working Papers 20034, University of Western Ontario, CIBC Centre for Human Capital and Productivity.
  7. Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan & Nikos Nikiforakis, 2009. "Relative Earnings and Giving in a Real-Effort Experiment," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1067, The University of Melbourne.
  8. Koellinger, Philipp & Minniti, Maria & Schade, Christian, 2007. ""I think I can, I think I can": Overconfidence and entrepreneurial behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 502-527, August.
  9. Antonio Bernardo & Ivo Welch, 2001. "On the Evolution of Overconfidence and Entrepreneurs," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm211, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Nov 2003.
  10. David McKenzie & Steven Stillman & John Gibson, 2010. "How Important is Selection? Experimental VS. Non‐Experimental Measures of the Income Gains from Migration," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 913-945, 06.
  11. Sharon Barnhardt & Dean Karlan & Stuti Khemani, 2009. "Participation in a School Incentive Programme in India," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 369-390.
  12. Jeffery Carpenter & Juan Camilo Cardenas, 2006. "Behavioural Development Economics: Lessons from field labs in the developing world," Middlebury College Working Paper Series 0616, Middlebury College, Department of Economics.
  13. Utteeyo Dasgupta, 2011. "Do procedures matter in fairness allocations? Experimental evidence in mixed gender pairings," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 31(1), pages 820-829.
  14. Fang, Hanming & Moscarini, Giuseppe, 2005. "Morale hazard," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 749-777, May.
  15. Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & Elisabet Rutstrom & Melonie Williams, 2002. "Estimating individual discount rates in denmark: A field experiment," Artefactual Field Experiments 00062, The Field Experiments Website.
  16. Banerjee, Abhijit & Duflo, Esther, 2008. "The Experimental Approach to Development Economics," CEPR Discussion Papers 7037, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  17. Oriana Bandiera & Robin Burgess & Markus Goldstein & Selim Gulesci & Imran Rasul & Munshi Sulaiman, 2010. "Intentions to Participate in Adolescent Training Programs: Evidence from Uganda," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(2-3), pages 548-560, 04-05.
  18. Uri Gneezy & Kenneth L. Leonard & John A. List, 2009. "Gender Differences in Competition: Evidence From a Matrilineal and a Patriarchal Society," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1637-1664, 09.
  19. Dan Lovallo & Colin Camerer, 1999. "Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 306-318, March.
  20. Bruno Biais & Denis Hilton & Karine Mazurier & Sébastien Pouget, 2005. "Judgemental Overconfidence, Self-Monitoring, and Trading Performance in an Experimental Financial Market," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(2), pages 287-312.
  21. Cooper, Arnold C. & Woo, Carolyn Y. & Dunkelberg, William C., 1988. "Entrepreneurs' perceived chances for success," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 97-108.
  22. Filippin, Antonio & Paccagnella, Marco, 2011. "Family Background, Self-Confidence and Economic Outcomes," IZA Discussion Papers 6117, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  23. Orazio Attanasio & Adriana Kugler & Costas Meghir, 2011. "Subsidizing Vocational Training for Disadvantaged Youth in Colombia: Evidence from a Randomized Trial," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 188-220, July.
  24. Marco Castillo & Ragan Petrie & Maximo Torero, 2007. "On The Preferences of Principals and Agents," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2007-12, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
  25. Botond Köszegi, 2006. "Ego Utility, Overconfidence, and Task Choice," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(4), pages 673-707, 06.
  26. Steffen Andersen & Seda Ertac & Uri Gneezy & John A. List & Sandra Maximiano, 2013. "Gender, Competitiveness, and Socialization at a Young Age: Evidence From a Matrilineal and a Patriarchal Society," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(4), pages 1438-1443, October.
  27. Pushkar Maitra & Subha Mani, 2013. "Learning and Earning: Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation in India," Fordham Economics Discussion Paper Series dp2013-02, Fordham University, Department of Economics.
  28. David Card & Pablo Ibarraran & Ferdinando Regalia & David Rosas & Yuri Soares, 2007. "The Labor Market Impacts of Youth Training in the Dominican Republic: Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 12883, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  29. Malani, Anup, 2008. "Patient enrollment in medical trials: Selection bias in a randomized experiment," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 341-351, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:frd:wpaper:dp2012_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Fordham Economics).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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