IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/26028.html

Too Close to Use: Social visibility, stigma, and the paradox of learning support programs

Author

Listed:
  • Shinsuke ASAKAWA
  • Mayuko ABE
  • Fumio OHTAKE
  • Shinpei SANO
  • Kazuko NAKATA

Abstract

This study identified a paradoxical phenomenon in learning support programs for low-income household children: while these programs effectively enhance skills, proximity to home hinders participation. Using an administrative panel dataset from Amagasaki City, Japan, we estimated a probit model to analyze participatory behavior, and employed a treatment effect model to evaluate the program's impact on skill development and its underlying mechanisms. Our findings are twofold. First, locating classrooms within a student’s own school district significantly reduces the probability of participation. This is not due to physical distance but rather “welfare stigma,” as children fear their socioeconomic status becoming known to classmates. Second, while no average effect was found across all participants, students with high attendance and long-term participation showed significant increases in arithmetic/mathematics and Japanese language scores, driven by an increase of study hours. These results reveal a critical policy trade-off: accessibility can inadvertently increase social visibility and discourage uptake.

Suggested Citation

  • Shinsuke ASAKAWA & Mayuko ABE & Fumio OHTAKE & Shinpei SANO & Kazuko NAKATA, 2026. "Too Close to Use: Social visibility, stigma, and the paradox of learning support programs," Discussion papers 26028, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:26028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/26e028.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kautz, Tim & Heckman, James J. & Diris, Ron & ter Weel, Bas & Borghans, Lex, 2014. "Fostering and Measuring Skills: Improving Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Skills to Promote Lifetime Success," IZA Discussion Papers 8696, IZA Network @ LISER.
    2. Keane, Michael P & Wolpin, Kenneth I, 1997. "The Career Decisions of Young Men," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(3), pages 473-522, June.
    3. Will Dobbie & Roland G. Fryer, 2011. "Are High-Quality Schools Enough to Increase Achievement among the Poor? Evidence from the Harlem Children's Zone," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 158-187, July.
    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. Elizabeth M. Caucutt & Lance Lochner & Youngmin Park, 2017. "Correlation, Consumption, Confusion, or Constraints: Why Do Poor Children Perform so Poorly?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 119(1), pages 102-147, January.
    2. Roland G. Fryer, Jr, 2016. "The Production of Human Capital in Developed Countries: Evidence from 196 Randomized Field Experiments," NBER Working Papers 22130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Pedro S. Martins, 2017. "(How) Do Non-Cognitive Skills Programs Improve Adolescent School Achievement? Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 81, Queen Mary, University of London, School of Business and Management, Centre for Globalisation Research.
    4. Lutz Hendricks & Oksana Leukhina, 2017. "How Risky is College Investment?," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 26, pages 140-163, October.
    5. Francesconi, Marco & Heckman, James J, 2015. "Symposium on Child Development and Parental Investment: Introduction," Economics Discussion Papers 16868, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    6. Roland G. Fryer, Jr. & Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2015. "Parental Incentives and Early Childhood Achievement: A Field Experiment in Chicago Heights," NBER Working Papers 21477, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Yamaguchi, Shintaro, 2010. "The effect of match quality and specific experience on career decisions and wage growth," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 407-423, April.
    8. Kemptner, Daniel & Tolan, Songül, 2018. "The role of time preferences in educational decision making," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 25-39.
    9. Michelle Sheran Sylvester, 2007. "The Career and Family Choices of Women: A Dynamic Analysis of Labor Force Participation, Schooling, Marriage and Fertility Decisions," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 10(3), pages 367-399, July.
    10. Maria Casanova-Rivas, 2008. "Dynamic Complementarities: A Computational and Empirical Analysis of Couples' Retirement Decisions," 2008 Meeting Papers 1073, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    11. Johannes Abeler & Armin Falk & Fabian Kosse, 2025. "Malleability of Preferences for Honesty," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 135(667), pages 982-998.
    12. Denis Fougère & Julien Pouget, 2003. "Les déterminants économiques de l'entrée dans la fonction publique," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 369(1), pages 15-48.
    13. Brown, Alessio J.G. & Merkl, Christian & Snower, Dennis J., 2011. "Comparing the effectiveness of employment subsidies," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 168-179, April.
    14. Josten, Cecily & Lordan, Grace, 2019. "Robots at Work: Automatable and Non Automatable Jobs," IZA Discussion Papers 12520, IZA Network @ LISER.
    15. Richard M. H. Suen, 2014. "Time Preference And The Distributions Of Wealth And Income," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(1), pages 364-381, January.
    16. Gan, Li & Huang, Feng & Mayer, Adalbert, 2015. "A simple test for private information in insurance markets with heterogeneous insurance demand," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 197-200.
    17. Heckman, James J. & Urzúa, Sergio, 2010. "Comparing IV with structural models: What simple IV can and cannot identify," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 27-37, May.
    18. Fali Huang & Myoung-Jae Lee, 2010. "Dynamic treatment effect analysis of TV effects on child cognitive development," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 392-419.
    19. Fossen, Frank M. & Glocker, Daniela, 2017. "Stated and revealed heterogeneous risk preferences in educational choice," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-25.
    20. Nicola Pavoni & G. L. Violante, 2007. "Optimal Welfare-to-Work Programs," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 74(1), pages 283-318.

    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:eti:dpaper:26028. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.