Academic achievement in sciences: the role of preferences and educative assets

This paper provides new evidence on the effect of pupil’s self-motivation and academic assets allocation on the academic achievement in sciences across countries. By using the Programme for International Student Assessment 2006 (PISA 2006) test we find that both explanatory variables have a positive effect on student’s performance. Self-motivation is measured through an instrument that allows us to avoid possible endogeneity problems. Quantile regression is used for analyzing the existence of different estimated coefficients over the distribution. It is found that both variables have different effect on academic performance depending on the pupil’s score. These findings support the importance of designing focalized programs for different populations, especially in terms of access to information and communication technologies such as internet.

Does uncertainty cause inertia in decision making? An experimental study of the role of regret aversion and indecisiveness

Previous research has shown that often there is clear inertia in individual decision making---that is, a tendency for decision makers to choose a status quo option. I conduct a laboratory experiment to investigate two potential determinants of inertia in uncertain environments: (i) regret aversion and (ii) ambiguity-driven indecisiveness. I use a between-subjects design with varying conditions to identify the effects of these two mechanisms on choice behavior. In each condition, participants choose between two simple real gambles, one of which is the status quo option. I find that inertia is quite large and that both mechanisms are equally important.

Risk, ambiguity, and diversification

Attitudes toward risk influence the decision to diversify among uncertain options. Yet, because in most situations the options are ambiguous, attitudes toward ambiguity may also play an important role. I conduct a laboratory experiment to investigate the effect of ambiguity on the decision to diversify. I find that diversification is more prevalent and more persistent under ambiguity than under risk. Moreover, excess diversification under ambiguity is driven by participants who stick with a status quo gamble when diversification among gambles is not feasible. This behavioral pattern cannot be accommodated by major theories of choice under ambiguity.