IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nas/journl/v117y2020p8794-8803.html

The impact of penalties for wrong answers on the gender gap in test scores

Author

Listed:
  • Katherine B. Coffman

    (Negotiations, Organizations, and Markets, Harvard Business School, Boston, MA 02163)

  • David Klinowski

    (Santiago Centre for Experimental Social Sciences, Nuffield College, University of Oxford, Santiago 8340599, Chile; Department of Economics, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago 8340599, Chile)

Abstract

Multiple-choice examinations play a critical role in university admissions across the world. A key question is whether imposing penalties for wrong answers on these examinations deters guessing from women more than men, disadvantaging female test-takers. We consider data from a large-scale, high-stakes policy change that removed penalties for wrong answers on the national college entry examination in Chile. The policy change reduced a large gender gap in questions skipped. It also narrowed gender gaps in performance, primarily among high-performing test-takers, and in the fields of math, social science, and chemistry.

Suggested Citation

  • Katherine B. Coffman & David Klinowski, 2020. "The impact of penalties for wrong answers on the gender gap in test scores," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(16), pages 8794-8803, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:nas:journl:v:117:y:2020:p:8794-8803
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.pnas.org/content/117/16/8794.full
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Díez-Rituerto, Marina & Gardeazabal, Javier & Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro, 2026. "Gender differences in willingness to guess revisited: Heterogeneity in a high stakes professional setting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    2. Montolio, Daniel & Taberner, Pere A., 2021. "Gender differences under test pressure and their impact on academic performance: A quasi-experimental design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 1065-1090.
    3. Maddalena Davoli, 2023. "A, B, or C? Question Format and the Gender Gap in Financial Literacy," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0206, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    4. Pau Balart & Lara Ezquerra & Iñigo Hernandez-Arenaz, 2022. "Framing effects on risk-taking behavior: evidence from a field experiment in multiple-choice tests," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1268-1297, September.
    5. Griselda, Silvia, 2024. "Gender gap in standardized tests: What are we measuring?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 191-229.
    6. Jónas Oddur Jónasson & Kamalini Ramdas & Alp Sungu, 2022. "Social impact operations at the global base of the pyramid," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(12), pages 4364-4378, December.
    7. Silvia Griselda, 2020. "Different Questions, Different Gender Gap: Can the Format of Questions Explain the Gender Gap in Mathematics?," 2020 Papers pgr710, Job Market Papers.
    8. Santiago Pereda-Fernandez, 2026. "Assessing the effectiveness of workers' selection exams: the case of Banca d'Italia," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1515, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    9. Delaney, Judith M. & Devereux, Paul J., 2021. "Gender and Educational Achievement: Stylized Facts and Causal Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 14074, IZA Network @ LISER.
    10. Fu, Jingcheng & Zhang, Xing & Zhong, Songfa, 2025. "Hedging-based scoring rules for multiple-choice questions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    11. Saygin, Perihan O. & Atwater, Ann, 2021. "Gender differences in leaving questions blank on high-stakes standardized tests," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    12. Ballis, Briana & Lusher, Lester & Martorell, Paco, 2022. "The effects of exam frames on student effort and performance," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    13. Anaya, Lina & Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro & Zamarro, Gema, 2022. "Understanding performance in test taking: The role of question difficulty order," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    14. Charness, Gary & Dao, Lien & Shurchkov, Olga, 2022. "Competing now and then: The effects of delay on competitiveness across gender," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 612-630.
    15. Hospido, Laura & Iriberri, Nagore & Machelett, Margarita, 2023. "Gender Gaps in Financial Literacy: A Multi-Arm RCT to Break the Response Bias in Surveys," IZA Discussion Papers 16628, IZA Network @ LISER.
    16. Heiko Karle & Dirk Engelmann & Martin Peitz, 2022. "Student performance and loss aversion," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(2), pages 420-456, April.
    17. Samuel D. Hirshman & Alexander Willén, 2025. "Does Increasing the Riskiness of Choices Widen Gender Gaps?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(8), pages 6880-6901, August.
    18. Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro, 2021. "Brave boys and play-it-safe girls: Gender differences in willingness to guess in a large scale natural field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:nas:journl:v:117:y:2020:p:8794-8803. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: PNAS Product Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.pnas.org/ .

    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.