Brave Boys and Play-it-Safe Girls: Gender Differences in Willingness to Guess in a Large Scale Natural Field Experiment
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
- Ş. Pelin Akyol & James Key & Kala Krishna, 2016. "Hit or Miss? Test Taking Behavior in Multiple Choice Exams," NBER Working Papers 22401, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2001. "Boys will be Boys: Gender, Overconfidence, and Common Stock Investment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(1), pages 261-292.
- María Paz Espinosa & Javier Gardeazabal, 2013.
"Do Students Behave Rationally in Multiple Choice Tests? Evidence from a Field Experiment,"
Journal of Economics and Management, College of Business, Feng Chia University, Taiwan, vol. 9(2), pages 107-135, July.
- Maria Espinosa & Javier Gardeazabal, 2005. "Do students behave rationally in multiple-choice tests? Evidence from a field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00237, The Field Experiments Website.
- Funk, Patricia & Perrone, Helena, 2016. "Gender Differences in Academic Performance: The Role of Negative Marking in Multiple-Choice Exams," CEPR Discussion Papers 11716, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Katherine Baldiga, 2014. "Gender Differences in Willingness to Guess," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(2), pages 434-448, February.
- Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
CitationsCitations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Espinosa Maria Paz & Gardeazabal Javier, 2020. "The Gender-bias Effect of Test Scoring and Framing: A Concern for Personnel Selection and College Admission," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(3), pages 1-23, July.
More about this item
Keywordsconfidence; gender differences; natural field experiment; perceived ability in math; risk preferences; willingness to guess;
- C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
- D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
- I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
- J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
NEP fieldsThis paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-EXP-2019-03-04 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-GEN-2019-03-04 (Gender)
- NEP-UPT-2019-03-04 (Utility Models & Prospect Theory)
StatisticsAccess and download statistics
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:cpr:ceprdp:13541. 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: (). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.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 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.