IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/has/discpr/2218.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

No evidence of direct peer influence in upper-secondary track choice—Evidence from Hungary

Author

Listed:
  • Tamás Keller

    (Computational Social Science - Research Center for Educational and Network Studies, Centre for Social Sciences, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies)

Abstract

This paper investigates direct peer influence in upper-secondary track choice in the stratified and selective Hungarian educational system and makes two contributions to the literature. First, it tests both peer-contrasting and peer-conforming influences by considering peers’ GPA and endogenous educational choices. Second, the paper investigates mechanisms behind peer-conforming educational choices (such as peers’ normative pressure and information potential), with a focus on two structurally different peer relationships: self-selected friends and randomly assigned deskmates. The study uses a unique dataset that merges administrative data with randomized field experiment data. The results show no evidence of peer influence, after accounting for unobserved classroom homogeneity. Within the classroom, peers’ ability did not decrease, and peers’ ambitious endogenous educational choices did not increase students’ own choice of the academic upper-secondary track. Concerning the mechanisms of peer-conforming educational choices, the results reveal that peers’ informational potential (but not their normative pressure) might be the mechanism that drives students to conform to peers’ choices. This paper interprets the absence of peer influence in upper-secondary track choices as evidence that peer influence cannot derail students’ socially determined educational choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Tamás Keller, 2022. "No evidence of direct peer influence in upper-secondary track choice—Evidence from Hungary," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2218, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:has:discpr:2218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://kti.krtk.hu/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/CERSIEWP202218.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kerr, Sari Pekkala & Pekkarinen, Tuomas & Sarvimäki, Matti & Uusitalo, Roope, 2020. "Post-secondary education and information on labor market prospects: A randomized field experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    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. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Nielsen, Helena Skyt, 2018. "Nudging in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 313-342.
    2. Adam Altmejd & Andrés Barrios-Fernández & Marin Drlje & Joshua Goodman & Michael Hurwitz & Dejan Kovac & Christine Mulhern & Christopher Neilson & Jonathan Smith, 2021. "O Brother, Where Start Thou? Sibling Spillovers on College and Major Choice in Four Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(3), pages 1831-1886.
    3. Christopher Neilson & Adam Altmejd & Andres Barrios-Fernandez & Marin Drlje & Dejan Kovac, 2019. "Siblings' Effects on College and Major Choices: Evidence from Chile, Croatia and Sweden," Working Papers 633, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    4. Hassani-Nezhad, Lena & Anderberg, Dan & Chevalier, Arnaud & Lührmann, Melanie & Pavan, Ronni, 2021. "Higher education financing and the educational aspirations of teenagers and their parents," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    5. Peter, Frauke H. & Zambre, Vaishali, 2017. "Intended college enrollment and educational inequality: Do students lack information?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 125-141.
    6. Cattaneo, Maria A. & Wolter, Stefan C., 2022. "“Against all odds” Does awareness of the risk of failure matter for educational choices?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    7. Hermes, Henning & Lergetporer, Philipp & Peter, Frauke & Wiederhold, Simon, 2021. "Behavioral Barriers and the Socioeconomic Gap in Child Care Enrollment," IZA Discussion Papers 14698, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Peter, Frauke & Spiess, C. Katharina & Zambre, Vaishali, 2021. "Informing students about college: Increasing enrollment using a behavioral intervention?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 524-549.
    9. Cheng Yuan & Xiaoxiao Wang & Li Lin, 2023. "Why Do Financially Illiterate Students Perceive Lower Education Returns? Evidence From a Survey in Rural China," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(2), pages 21582440231, June.
    10. Bonilla-Mejía, Leonardo & Bottan, Nicolas L. & Ham, Andrés, 2019. "Information policies and higher education choices experimental evidence from Colombia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    11. Teodora Boneva & Christopher Rauh, 2017. "Socio-Economic Gaps in University Enrollment: The Role of Perceived Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Returns," Working Papers 2017-080, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    12. Cavalletti, Barbara & Corsi, Matteo & Persico, Luca & di Bella, Enrico, 2021. "Public university orientation for high-school students. A quasi-experimental assessment of the efficiency gains from nudging better career choices," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    13. Katharina Werner, 2019. "The Role of Information for Public Preferences on Education – Evidence from Representative Survey Experiments," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 82.
    14. Sandra McNally, 2016. "How important is career information and advice?," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 317-317, December.
    15. Yanqing Ding & Wei Li & Xin Li & Yinduo Wu & Jin Yang & Xiaoyang Ye, 2021. "Heterogeneous Major Preferences for Extrinsic Incentives: The Effects of Wage Information on the Gender Gap in STEM Major Choice," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 62(8), pages 1113-1145, December.
    16. Jan Berkes & Frauke Peter & C. Katharina Spiess & Felix Weinhardt, 2022. "Information Provision and Postgraduate Studies," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(355), pages 627-646, July.
    17. Ballarino, Gabriele & Filippin, Antonio & Abbiati, Giovanni & Argentin, Gianluca & Barone, Carlo & Schizzerotto, Antonio, 2022. "The effects of an information campaign beyond university enrolment: A large-scale field experiment on the choices of high school students," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    18. Esther Gehrke & Friederike Lenel & Claudia Schupp, 2023. "Occupational Aspirations and Investments in Education: Experimental Evidence from Cambodia," CESifo Working Paper Series 10608, CESifo.
    19. Yuta Kuroda, 2023. "What do high-achieving graduates bring to nonacademic track high schools?," DSSR Discussion Papers 138, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Tohoku University.
    20. Anja Deelen & Sonny Kuijpers, 2016. "The Effects of Additional Study Choice Activities: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial," CPB Discussion Paper 338.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    upper-secondary track choice; peer influence; application behavior; social contrast and conformity; deskmates; educational choice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    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:has:discpr:2218. 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: Nora Horvath (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iehashu.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.