Do non-financial incentives work better for women? Two classroom experiments on calibration

This paper reports the results of two experiments exploring the effects of monetary and non-monetary incentives on overconfidence and underconfidence. It additionally explores the moderating effects of gender. The participants of both experiments are university students taking their academic tests. Right before the tests, they predict weather their score will be higher or lower than the average in their class group. Overplacement is defined as expecting a better-than-average score but actually getting a below-average score. Similarly, underplacement occurs when a subject expects a below-average score but ends up above the average. Half of the subjects are incentivized: some receive money and others a handmade gift conditional on predicting correctly. Experiment 1 is conducted weekly for nine tests and involves students of one course. Experiment 2 involves students of four different courses, and the grade predictions are made on the final exam only. While Experiment 2 shows no significant results, the main finding from Experiment 1 is that the handmade gift reduces the likelihood of overplacement and underplacement for women, making them significantly better calibrated than men. Experiment 1 also shows that overplacement, but not underplacement, is more likely when the stakes are high (midterm and final tests compared to the weekly quizzes). Finally, there is limited support for the Dunning-Kruger effect.