Understanding Students’ Perceptions of Option Value in China’s Centralized College Application System

Last registered on July 27, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Understanding Students’ Perceptions of Option Value in China’s Centralized College Application System
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0019250
Initial registration date
July 26, 2026

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
July 27, 2026, 7:09 AM EDT

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

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Name
Ao Wang
Affiliation
National University of Singapore
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Shaoda Wang
PI Affiliation
University of Chicago
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Xiaoyang Ye
PI Affiliation
Amazon, PXT Central Science
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-08-01
End date
2027-12-31
Keywords
Behavior, Education
Additional Keywords
option value; college admissions; school choice; centralized college application system; risk taking
JEL code(s)
C93, D91, I21, I24
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This randomized survey study examines high-school students' perceptions of option value in China's centralized college application system: the value available from lower-ranked choices if a student's score does not reach a higher-ranked college's cutoff. Each participant is shown college names generated from the score range they report and completes rank-list college-choice questions. The study asks whether students' college-application choices and risk-taking behavior reflect their perceptions of option value. The control condition presents the college choices, admission probabilities, and payment consequences. The treatment condition presents the same information and additionally states the calculated average amount available if the student's score does not reach the focal college's cutoff. The study will enroll 2,000 high-school students in China through online sessions or pre-randomized paper booklets.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Wang, Shaoda, Ao Wang and Xiaoyang Ye. 2026. "Understanding Students’ Perceptions of Option Value in China’s Centralized College Application System." AEA RCT Registry. July 27. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.19250-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Control participants see college names selected from their reported score range, the colleges' placement on a rank list, stated admission probabilities, and payment consequences, then choose between two colleges. Treatment participants see the same college names, rank-list placement, probabilities, payments, and choice consequences, plus a concise statement of the calculated average amount available if the student's score does not reach the focal college's cutoff. This amount represents the option value of lower-ranked choices. The treatment does not alter payments, probabilities, or the application process.
Intervention Start Date
2026-08-01
Intervention End Date
2027-12-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Students' perceptions and understanding of option value in college admission—the value available from lower-ranked choices if a student's score does not reach a higher-ranked college's cutoff—and their college-application choices and risk-taking behavior on rank lists. The study will examine how the treatment affects these measures.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
We will use students' responses to the college-choice questions and related questions about the consequences of not reaching a college's cutoff to assess their perceptions and understanding of option value and college-application decision-making. We will compare these measures between the control and treatment conditions.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Individual-level, two-arm randomized survey experiment among high-school students in China. Each participant sees college names selected from the score range they report and completes rank-list college-choice questions and related questions about the option value available if a student's score does not reach a college's cutoff. The online version randomizes question order; pre-randomized paper booklets use balanced question orders.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Computer-generated 1:1 assignment to control or treatment for online sessions. Paper booklets are pre-randomized in balanced control and treatment forms.
Randomization Unit
Individual student.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Not applicable; randomization is at the individual-student level.
Sample size: planned number of observations
2,000 students.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Control: 1,000 students. Treatment: 1,000 students.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of California, Berkeley Committee for Protection of Human Subjects (CPHS)
IRB Approval Date
2019-05-31
IRB Approval Number
2019-02-11806
Analysis Plan