Allen James, Mahumane Arlete, Riddell James, Rosenblat Tanya, Yang Dean, Yu Hang
Department of Economics, University of Michigan.
Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan.
Econ Educ Rev. 2022 Dec;91. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2022.102317. Epub 2022 Oct 10.
Interventions to promote learning are often categorized into supply- and demand-side approaches. In a randomized experiment to promote learning about COVID-19 among Mozambican adults, we study the interaction between a supply and a demand intervention, respectively: teaching via targeted feedback, and providing financial incentives to learners. In theory, teaching and learner-incentives may be substitutes (crowding out one another) or complements (enhancing one another). Experts surveyed in advance predicted a high degree of substitutability between the two treatments. In contrast, we find substantially more complementarity than experts predicted. Combining teaching and incentive treatments raises COVID-19 knowledge test scores by 0.5 standard deviations, though the standalone teaching treatment is the most cost-effective. The complementarity between teaching and incentives persists in the longer run, over nine months post-treatment.
促进学习的干预措施通常分为供给侧和需求侧方法。在一项旨在促进莫桑比克成年人对新冠病毒了解的随机试验中,我们分别研究了一种供给干预和一种需求干预之间的相互作用:通过有针对性的反馈进行教学,以及向学习者提供经济激励。从理论上讲,教学和学习者激励可能是替代品(相互排挤)或互补品(相互增强)。预先接受调查的专家预测这两种治疗方法之间具有高度的替代性。相比之下,我们发现互补性比专家预测的要多得多。将教学和激励治疗相结合可使新冠病毒知识测试分数提高0.5个标准差,不过单独的教学治疗是最具成本效益的。教学和激励之间的互补性在更长时期内持续存在,即在治疗后九个月以上。