IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/labeco/v90y2024ics0927537124000976.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can leagues mitigate the demoralization effect of rank feedback? A randomized controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, J.
  • Dobrescu, L.I.
  • Foster, G.
  • Motta, A.

Abstract

In a randomized controlled trial involving hundreds of university students, we provide relative performance feedback specifically designed to reduce low performers’ demoralization, by dynamically assigning students to small leaderboard groups that share a similar score in a semester-long online assignment. Treated students appear 2.6% more likely to go beyond the call-of-duty on their assignment by mid-semester. For low performers, this translates in 0.27 SDs higher exam grades, more stress, increased effort and lower procrastination. High performers are happier, procrastinate less and overachieve in the assignment on which they are ranked, but ultimately also score 0.25 SDs lower exam grades.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, J. & Dobrescu, L.I. & Foster, G. & Motta, A., 2024. "Can leagues mitigate the demoralization effect of rank feedback? A randomized controlled trial," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:labeco:v:90:y:2024:i:c:s0927537124000976
    DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2024.102602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927537124000976
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.labeco.2024.102602?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Azmat, Ghazala & Iriberri, Nagore, 2010. "The importance of relative performance feedback information: Evidence from a natural experiment using high school students," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(7-8), pages 435-452, August.
    2. Bhanot, Syon P., 2017. "Rank and response: A field experiment on peer information and water use behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 155-172.
    3. David Gill & Zdenka Kissová & Jaesun Lee & Victoria Prowse, 2019. "First-Place Loving and Last-Place Loathing: How Rank in the Distribution of Performance Affects Effort Provision," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 494-507, February.
    4. Brade, Raphael & Himmler, Oliver & Jäckle, Robert, 2022. "Relative performance feedback and the effects of being above average — field experiment and replication," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Goulas, Sofoklis & Megalokonomou, Rigissa, 2021. "Knowing who you actually are: The effect of feedback on short- and longer-term outcomes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 589-615.
    6. Gary Charness & David Masclet & Marie Claire Villeval, 2014. "The Dark Side of Competition for Status," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(1), pages 38-55, January.
    7. Oriana Bandiera & Iwan Barankay & Imran Rasul, 2013. "Team Incentives: Evidence From A Firm Level Experiment," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(5), pages 1079-1114, October.
    8. Eriksson, Tor & Poulsen, Anders & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2009. "Feedback and incentives: Experimental evidence," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 679-688, December.
    9. Richard Murphy & Felix Weinhardt, 2020. "Top of the Class: The Importance of Ordinal Rank," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(6), pages 2777-2826.
    10. Courtney A. Collins & Li Gan, 2013. "Does Sorting Students Improve Scores? An Analysis of Class Composition," NBER Working Papers 18848, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Tran, Anh & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2012. "Rank as an inherent incentive: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(9-10), pages 645-650.
    12. Bijan J. Borah & Anirban Basu, 2013. "Highlighting Differences Between Conditional And Unconditional Quantile Regression Approaches Through An Application To Assess Medication Adherence," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(9), pages 1052-1070, September.
    13. L I Dobrescu & M Faravelli & R Megalokonomou & A Motta, 2021. "Relative Performance Feedback in Education: Evidence from a Randomised Controlled Trial [‘Teachers and student achievement in the Chicago public high schools’]," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(640), pages 3145-3181.
    14. Jordi Blanes i Vidal & Mareike Nossol, 2011. "Tournaments Without Prizes: Evidence from Personnel Records," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(10), pages 1721-1736, October.
    15. Benjamin Elsner & Ingo E. Isphording, 2017. "A Big Fish in a Small Pond: Ability Rank and Human Capital Investment," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(3), pages 787-828.
    16. Sergio Firpo & Nicole M. Fortin & Thomas Lemieux, 2009. "Unconditional Quantile Regressions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(3), pages 953-973, May.
    17. Ghazala Azmat & Manuel Bagues & Antonio Cabrales & Nagore Iriberri, 2019. "What you don't know...Can't hurt you? A natural field experiment on relative performance feedback in higher education," Post-Print hal-03574128, HAL.
    18. Steven Blader & Claudine Gartenberg & Andrea Prat, 2020. "The Contingent Effect of Management Practices," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(2), pages 721-749.
    19. Sonja Lyubomirsky & Heidi Lepper, 1999. "A Measure of Subjective Happiness: Preliminary Reliability and Construct Validation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 137-155, February.
    20. Leonardo Bursztyn & Robert Jensen, 2015. "How Does Peer Pressure Affect Educational Investments?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(3), pages 1329-1367.
    21. Leonie Gerhards & Neele Siemer, 2014. "Private versus Public Feedback - The Incentive Effects of Symbolic Awards," Economics Working Papers 2014-01, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    22. Foster, Gigi, 2012. "The impact of international students on measured learning and standards in Australian higher education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 587-600.
    23. Ghazala Azmat & Nagore Iriberri, 2016. "The Provision of Relative Performance Feedback: An Analysis of Performance and Satisfaction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 77-110, March.
    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. Brade, Raphael & Himmler, Oliver & Jäckle, Robert, 2022. "Relative performance feedback and the effects of being above average — field experiment and replication," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. David Gill & Zdenka Kissová & Jaesun Lee & Victoria Prowse, 2019. "First-Place Loving and Last-Place Loathing: How Rank in the Distribution of Performance Affects Effort Provision," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 494-507, February.
    3. Dobrescu, Isabella & Faravelli, Marco & Megalokonomou, Rigissa & Motta, Alberto, 2019. "Rank Incentives and Social Learning: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial," IZA Discussion Papers 12437, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Collins, Matthew & Lundstedt, Jonas, 2024. "The effects of more informative grading on student outcomes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 514-549.
    5. Fischer, Mira & Wagner, Valentin, 2018. "Effects of timing and reference frame of feedback: Evidence from a field experiment," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2018-206, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    6. Gwen-Jiro Clochard & Guillaume Hollard & Julia Wirtz, 2022. "More effort or better technologies? On the effect of relative performance feedback," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 22/767, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    7. Vanessa, Mertins & Jeworrek, Sabrina & Vlassopoulos, Michael, 2018. ""The Good News about Bad News": Feedback about Past Organisational Failure Bad ist Impact in Worker Productivity," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181644, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    8. Fischer, Mira & Wagner, Valentin, 2019. "Effects of Timing and Reference Frame of Feedback," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 150, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    9. Delavallade, Clara, 2021. "Motivating teams: Private feedback and public recognition at work," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    10. Ertac, Seda & Gümren, Mert & Koçkesen, Levent, 2019. "Strategic feedback in teams: Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1-23.
    11. Zou, Wenbo & Gao, Wenzheng, 2023. "Measuring the welfare and spillover effects of rank information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 187-220.
    12. Delavallade,Clara Anne, 2021. "Motivating Teams : Private Feedback and Public Recognition at Work," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9621, The World Bank.
    13. Raphael Brade & Oliver Himmler & Robert Jaeckle, 2023. "Relative Performance Feedback and Long-Term Tasks – Experimental Evidence from Higher Education," CESifo Working Paper Series 10346, CESifo.
    14. Jeworrek, Sabrina & Mertins, Vanessa & Vlassopoulos, Michael, 2018. ""The good news about bad news": Feedback about past organisational failure and its impact on worker productivity," IWH Discussion Papers 1/2018, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    15. Tim Klausmann, 2021. "Feedback in Homogeneous Ability Groups: A Field Experiment," Working Papers 2114, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    16. Hermes, Henning & Huschens, Martin & Rothlauf, Franz & Schunk, Daniel, 2021. "Motivating low-achievers—Relative performance feedback in primary schools," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 45-59.
    17. Azmat, Ghazala & Iriberri, Nagore & Bagues, Manuel, 2016. "What you don't know... Can't hurt you? A field experiment on relative performance feedback in higher education," CEPR Discussion Papers 11201, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Ghazala Azmat & Manuel Bagues & Antonio Cabrales & Nagore Iriberri, 2019. "What You Don’t Know…Can’t Hurt You? A Natural Field Experiment on Relative Performance Feedback in Higher Education," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3714-3736, August.
    19. Brade, Raphael & Himmler, Oliver & Jäckle, Robert, 2018. "Normatively Framed Relative Performance Feedback – Field Experiment and Replication," MPRA Paper 88830, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Azmat, Ghazala & Bagues, Manuel & Cabrales, Antonio & Iriberri, Nagore, 2016. "What You Don't Know... Can't Hurt You? A Field Experiment on Relative Performance Feedback in Higher Education," IZA Discussion Papers 9853, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Relative performance information; Milestones; Higher education; Randomized controlled trial;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • J18 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Public Policy

    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:eee:labeco:v:90:y:2024:i:c:s0927537124000976. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/labeco .

    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.