Enhancing the Efficacy of Teacher Incentives through Loss Aversion: A Field Experiment. NBER Working Paper No. 18237.

By Roland G. Fryer, Steven D. Levitt, John A. List, Sally Sadoff. 2012

141 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9f46bb66c626847002123eb559e4941cd2cc3c56

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Improving Educational Outcomes in Developing Countries: Lessons from Rigorous Evaluations (2014, background): “The only exception to these null findings is a study that capitalizes on the potential influence of loss aversion in Chicago (Fryer et al., 2012).”
Incentives, Selection, and Teacher Performance: Evidence from IMPACT. (2015, unknown): “…fourth teacher-incentive study set in nine schools outside of Chicago found no effects from conventional individual or group-based incentives of as much as $8,000, but substantial gains in student performance when the incentives were instead framed as a loss rather than a gain (Fryer et al., 2012).”
Teacher quality policy when supply matters (2012, unknown): “…have examined the short-term effects of perfor- mance bonuses, with generally disappointing results (Goodman and Turner, Forthcoming; Fryer, 2011; Springer et al., 2010; though see Fryer et al., 2012).3 These studies were designed to detect teacher effort responses, which may be the wrong margin.”
The Production of Human Capital in Developed Countries: Evidence from 196 Randomized Field Experiments (2016, unknown): “[105] Fryer, Roland, Steven Levitt, John List, and Sally Sadoff.”
Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment (2012, unknown): “For example, Fryer et al. (2012), Levitt et al. (2012), and Hossain and List (forthcoming) find that teachers, students, and factory workers, respectively, exert more effort when they are given monetary incentives framed as losses, rather than gains—a finding that is consistent with loss aversion. L”
Behavioral Economics of Education (2015, unknown): “Levitt et al. (2012) also find that, contrary to their initial hypothesis, it does not matter whether the reward is framed as a gain (you get $10) or a loss (you start with $10 that you need to repay if performance is substandard).”