Improvement of academic performance by studying in pairs: an analysis under incomplete information about academic skills

This paper focuses on analysing the process of partnership formation and its effects on academic performance. We model the formation of studying partnerships as a Bayesian game. Students utility functions are in the spirit of firms' profit functions where the time they devote to study is the input to produce human capital. Academic skills are uniformly distributed, and every student is assumed to know her academic skills. We find that a student decides to study with a classmate because she believes that the classmate has better academics skills. We also find that, in equilibrium, the time a student is willing to spend studying with a classmate increases with the mean and the variance of the distribution of the academic skills. Therefore, under incomplete information, we expect students to devote more time studying with a classmate regardless whether they are studying in a high standard school.

Academic performance, incomplete information, study partnership formation, human capital, applied Bayesian games

Banerjee, S.; H. Konishi & T. Snmez (2001). "Core in a simple coalition formation game". Social Choice and Welfare, 18 (1), 135-153.

Barro, R. J. (2013). "Education and economic growth". Annals of Economics and Finance, 14(2), 301-328.

Carman, K. G. & L. Zhang (2012). "Classroom peer effects and academic achievement: Evidence from a Chinese middle school". China Economic Review, 23 (2), 223-237.

Corgnet, B. (2010). "Team Formation and Self-serving Biases", Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 19 (1), 117-135.

Crede, M. & N. Kuncel (2008). "Study Habits, Skills, and Attitudes: The Third Pillar Supporting Collegiate Academic Performance". Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3 (6), 425-453.

De Fraja, G. & P. Landeras (2006). "Could do better: the effectiveness of incentives and competition in schools". Journal of Public Economics, 90 (1), 189-213.

Dutta, P. K. (1999). Strategies and games: theory and practice, MIT Press.

Eisenkopf, G. (2010). "Peer effects, motivation, and learning". Economics of Education Review, 29 (3), 364-374.

Falk, A. & A. Ichino (2006). "Clean evidence on peer effects". Journal of Labor Economics, 24 (1), 39-57.

Foster, G. & P. Frijters (2010). "Students' beliefs about peer effects". Economics Letters, 108 (3), 260-263.

Gibbons, R. (1992). A primer in game theory. Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Hanushek, E. A. & L. Woessmann (2008). "The role of cognitive skills in economic development". Journal of economic literature, 46 (3), 607-668.

Hollard, G. (2000). "On the existence of a pure strategy Nash equilibrium in group formation games". Economics Letters, 66 (3), 283-287.

Islam, T.M.T. Minier, J. & J. P. Ziliak (2015), "On Persistent Poverty in a Rich Country". Souther Economic Journal, 81 (3), 653-678.

Jehle, G. A. & P. J. Reny (2001) Advanced Microeconomic Theory. Addison Wesley Longman.

Kiss, D. (2013). The impact of peer achievement and peer heterogeneity on own achievement growth: Evidence from school transitions". Economics of Education Review, 37, 58-65.

Lazear, E. P. (2001). "Educational Production". Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116 (3), 777-803.

Mas-Colell, A.; M. D. Whinston & J. R. Green (1995). Microeconomic theory. New York: Oxford university press.

Nonis, S. A. & G. L. Hudson (2006). "Academic Performance of College Students: Influence of Time Spent Studying and Working". Journal of Education for Business, 81 (3), 151-159.

Osborne, M. J. & A. Rubinstein (1994). A course in game theory. MIT press.

Robertson, D. & J. Symons (2003). "Do peer groups matter? Peer group versus schooling effects on academic attainment". Economica, 70, 31-53.

Vardardottir, A. (2013). "Peer effects and academic achievement: a regression discontinuity approach". Economics of Education Review, 36, 108-121.