Cargando…
A field evaluation of a matching mechanism: University applicant behavior in Australia
The majority of undergraduate university applications in the state of New South Wales—Australia's largest state—are processed by a clearinghouse, the Universities Admissions Centre (UAC). Applicants submit an ordered list of degrees to the UAC, which applies a matching algorithm to allocate uni...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9802117/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36712791 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac010 |
_version_ | 1784861623933992960 |
---|---|
author | Guillen, Pablo Kesten, Onur Kiefer, Alexander Melatos, Mark |
author_facet | Guillen, Pablo Kesten, Onur Kiefer, Alexander Melatos, Mark |
author_sort | Guillen, Pablo |
collection | PubMed |
description | The majority of undergraduate university applications in the state of New South Wales—Australia's largest state—are processed by a clearinghouse, the Universities Admissions Centre (UAC). Applicants submit an ordered list of degrees to the UAC, which applies a matching algorithm to allocate university places to eligible applicants. Applicants receive advice on how to construct their degree preference list from multiple sources including individual universities. This advice is often confusing and misleading. To evaluate the performance of the current system, we run a large sample (832 observations) online experiment with experienced participants in a choice environment that mimics the UAC application process, and in which truth telling is optimal. We vary the advice received across treatments: no advice, the UAC advice only, an instance of misleading university advice only, and both the UAC and the misleading university advice together. Overall, 75.5% of participants fail to behave in their best interest. High rates of applicant manipulation persist even when applicants are provided with the UAC's accurate advice. Students who attend nonselective government high schools are more prone to use strictly dominated strategies than those who attend academically selective government high schools and private high schools. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9802117 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98021172023-01-26 A field evaluation of a matching mechanism: University applicant behavior in Australia Guillen, Pablo Kesten, Onur Kiefer, Alexander Melatos, Mark PNAS Nexus Social and Political Sciences The majority of undergraduate university applications in the state of New South Wales—Australia's largest state—are processed by a clearinghouse, the Universities Admissions Centre (UAC). Applicants submit an ordered list of degrees to the UAC, which applies a matching algorithm to allocate university places to eligible applicants. Applicants receive advice on how to construct their degree preference list from multiple sources including individual universities. This advice is often confusing and misleading. To evaluate the performance of the current system, we run a large sample (832 observations) online experiment with experienced participants in a choice environment that mimics the UAC application process, and in which truth telling is optimal. We vary the advice received across treatments: no advice, the UAC advice only, an instance of misleading university advice only, and both the UAC and the misleading university advice together. Overall, 75.5% of participants fail to behave in their best interest. High rates of applicant manipulation persist even when applicants are provided with the UAC's accurate advice. Students who attend nonselective government high schools are more prone to use strictly dominated strategies than those who attend academically selective government high schools and private high schools. Oxford University Press 2022-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9802117/ /pubmed/36712791 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac010 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the National Academy of Sciences. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Social and Political Sciences Guillen, Pablo Kesten, Onur Kiefer, Alexander Melatos, Mark A field evaluation of a matching mechanism: University applicant behavior in Australia |
title | A field evaluation of a matching mechanism: University applicant behavior in Australia |
title_full | A field evaluation of a matching mechanism: University applicant behavior in Australia |
title_fullStr | A field evaluation of a matching mechanism: University applicant behavior in Australia |
title_full_unstemmed | A field evaluation of a matching mechanism: University applicant behavior in Australia |
title_short | A field evaluation of a matching mechanism: University applicant behavior in Australia |
title_sort | field evaluation of a matching mechanism: university applicant behavior in australia |
topic | Social and Political Sciences |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9802117/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36712791 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac010 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guillenpablo afieldevaluationofamatchingmechanismuniversityapplicantbehaviorinaustralia AT kestenonur afieldevaluationofamatchingmechanismuniversityapplicantbehaviorinaustralia AT kieferalexander afieldevaluationofamatchingmechanismuniversityapplicantbehaviorinaustralia AT melatosmark afieldevaluationofamatchingmechanismuniversityapplicantbehaviorinaustralia AT guillenpablo fieldevaluationofamatchingmechanismuniversityapplicantbehaviorinaustralia AT kestenonur fieldevaluationofamatchingmechanismuniversityapplicantbehaviorinaustralia AT kieferalexander fieldevaluationofamatchingmechanismuniversityapplicantbehaviorinaustralia AT melatosmark fieldevaluationofamatchingmechanismuniversityapplicantbehaviorinaustralia |