The competitive side of evaluations

Last registered on February 14, 2024

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

The competitive side of evaluations

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0012881

Initial registration date

February 07, 2024

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published

February 14, 2024, 11:56 AM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Country

Netherlands

Region

Primary Investigator

Name

Katharina Bruett

Affiliation

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Klarita Gërxhani

PI Affiliation

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Giuseppe Greco

PI Affiliation

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

In development

Start date

2024-02-08

End date

2024-04-30

Keywords

Behavior, Education, Gender, Labor

Additional Keywords

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.

Abstract

Using a field experiment, we study the competitive consequences of peer evaluations on gender differences.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Bruett, Katharina, Giuseppe Greco and Klarita Gërxhani. 2024. "The competitive side of evaluations." AEA RCT Registry. February 14. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.12881-1.0

Sponsors & Partners

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

Intervention Start Date

2024-02-11

Intervention End Date

2024-04-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Peer evaluations

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Performances in later assignments within the same course and potentially in other courses

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

The experiment uses different types of peer evaluations to determine the grade for a group assignment in a Bachelor course.

Experimental Design Details

We conduct a field experiment in a Bachelor course at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. In the course, students have to evaluate the contribution of other students to the preparation, structuring and leading of a debate. The peer evaluations adjust the group grade that the students receive from the tutorial teacher for this task. In the field experiment, we have two treatments. These treatments vary along two dimensions (1) whom are students evaluating, and (2) whether evaluations are relative or absolute.

In the treatment 'External absolute', students are evaluating members of another group. The evaluations are absolute, meaning that higher evaluations translate to higher grades, irrespective of the evaluations that other team members receive.

In the treatment 'Internal relative', students are evaluating members of their own group. The evaluations are relative, meaning that the evaluations one team member receives are compared to the average evaluations of other team members. Grades for individuals who receive higher than average evaluations are increased, while they are decreased for individuals with lower than average evaluations.

Randomization Method

Randomization done by a computer

Randomization Unit

Tutorial group

Was the treatment clustered?

Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

Sample size: planned number of observations

2760 (690 students, from whom we get an average of 4 observations.) Note that these numbers may still change slightly, due to changes in course registrations

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

13 clusters per treatment arm

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB