IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1810.04087.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

University rankings from the revealed preferences of the applicants

Author

Listed:
  • L'aszl'o Csat'o
  • Csaba T'oth

Abstract

A methodology is presented to rank universities on the basis of the lists of programmes the students applied for. We exploit a crucial feature of the centralised assignment system to higher education in Hungary: a student is admitted to the first programme where the score limit is achieved. This makes it possible to derive a partial preference order of each applicant. Our approach integrates the information from all students participating in the system, is free of multicollinearity among the indicators, and contains few ad hoc parameters. The procedure is implemented to rank faculties in the Hungarian higher education between 2001 and 2016. We demonstrate that the ranking given by the least squares method has favourable theoretical properties, is robust with respect to the aggregation of preferences, and performs well in practice. The suggested ranking is worth considering as a reasonable alternative to the standard composite indices.

Suggested Citation

  • L'aszl'o Csat'o & Csaba T'oth, 2018. "University rankings from the revealed preferences of the applicants," Papers 1810.04087, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2019.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1810.04087
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.04087
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caterina Calsamiglia & Guillaume Haeringer & Flip Klijn, 2010. "Constrained School Choice: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1860-1874, September.
    2. László Csató, 2013. "Ranking by pairwise comparisons for Swiss-system tournaments," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 21(4), pages 783-803, December.
    3. Pavel Yu. Chebotarev & Elena Shamis, 1998. "Characterizations of scoring methodsfor preference aggregation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 80(0), pages 299-332, January.
    4. Martin Ravallion, 2012. "Mashup Indices of Development," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 27(1), pages 1-32, February.
    5. Lundy, Michele & Siraj, Sajid & Greco, Salvatore, 2017. "The mathematical equivalence of the “spanning tree” and row geometric mean preference vectors and its implications for preference analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 197-208.
    6. Christopher N. Avery & Mark E. Glickman & Caroline M. Hoxby & Andrew Metrick, 2013. "A Revealed Preference Ranking of U.S. Colleges and Universities," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 128(1), pages 425-467.
    7. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Tayfun Sönmez, 2003. "School Choice: A Mechanism Design Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 729-747, June.
    8. Péter Biró & Sofya Kiselgof, 2015. "College admissions with stable score-limits," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(4), pages 727-741, December.
    9. Kolos Csaba Agoston & Peter Biro & Iain McBride, 2016. "Integer programming methods for special college admissions problems," IEHAS Discussion Papers 1632, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    10. Haeringer, Guillaume & Klijn, Flip, 2009. "Constrained school choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(5), pages 1921-1947, September.
    11. Julio González-Díaz & Ruud Hendrickx & Edwin Lohmann, 2014. "Paired comparisons analysis: an axiomatic approach to ranking methods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 139-169, January.
    12. András Telcs & Zsolt Tibor Kosztyán & Ádám Török, 2016. "Unbiased one-dimensional university ranking -- application-based preference ordering," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 212-228, January.
    13. Ignacio Palacios-Huerta & Oscar Volij, 2004. "The Measurement of Intellectual Influence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(3), pages 963-977, May.
    14. Saisana, Michaela & d'Hombres, Béatrice & Saltelli, Andrea, 2011. "Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 165-177, February.
    15. Laszlo A. Koczy & Martin Strobel, 2010. "The World Cup of Economics Journals: A Ranking by a Tournament Method," IEHAS Discussion Papers 1018, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    16. Čaklović, Lavoslav & Kurdija, Adrian Satja, 2017. "A universal voting system based on the Potential Method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(2), pages 677-688.
    17. repec:spr:sochwe:v:51:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s00355-018-1131-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. repec:eee:ejores:v:265:y:2018:i:1:p:239-247 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Bozóki, Sándor & Csató, László & Temesi, József, 2016. "An application of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices for ranking top tennis players," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(1), pages 211-218.
    20. Giora Slutzki & Oscar Volij, 2005. "Ranking participants in generalized tournaments," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 33(2), pages 255-270, June.
    21. Mitri Kitti, 2016. "Axioms for centrality scoring with principal eigenvectors," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(3), pages 639-653, March.
    22. László Csató, 2015. "A graph interpretation of the least squares ranking method," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 51-69, January.
    23. Chung-Piaw Teo & Jay Sethuraman & Wee-Peng Tan, 2001. "Gale-Shapley Stable Marriage Problem Revisited: Strategic Issues and Applications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(9), pages 1252-1267, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:1810.04087. 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: (arXiv administrators). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.