The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Enhancing the Efficacy of Teacher Incentives through Loss Aversion: A Field Experiment
Open accessAbstract
Domestic attempts to use financial incentives for teachers to increase student achievement have been ineffective.In this paper, we demonstrate that exploiting the power of loss aversion-teachers are paid in advance and asked to give back the money if their students do not improve sufficiently-increases math test scores between 0.201 (0.076) and 0.398 (0.129) standard deviations.This is equivalent to increasing teacher quality by more than one standard deviation.A second treatment arm, identical to the loss aversion treatment but implemented in the standard fashion, yields smaller and statistically insignificant results.This suggests it is loss aversion, rather than other features of the design or population sampled, that leads to the stark differences between our findings and past research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Status quo bias in decision making
Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. (1988) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00055564 · Cited by 5,897
Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00584.x · Cited by 4,501
The Impact of Individual Teachers on Student Achievement: Evidence from Panel Data
Rockoff, J. E. (2004) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/0002828041302244 · Cited by 2,432
Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?
List, J. A. (2003) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/00335530360535144 · Cited by 1,183
Self-citationCan You Recognize an Effective Teacher When You Recruit One?
Rockoff, J. E., Jacob, B. A., Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2011) · Education Finance and Policy · doi:10.1162/edfp_a_00022 · Cited by 390
Cited by
Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions
Kraft, M. A. (2020) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x20912798 · Cited by 1,281
Incentives, Selection, and Teacher Performance: Evidence from IMPACT
Dee, T. S., & Wyckoff, J. (2015) · Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · doi:10.1002/pam.21818 · Cited by 331
Reference-Dependent Preferences: Evidence from Marathon Runners
Allen, E. J., Dechow, P. M., Pope, D. G., & Wu, G. (2017) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2015.2417 · Cited by 324
Teacher Effects and Teacher-Related Policies
Jackson, C. K., Rockoff, J. E., & Staiger, D. O. (2014) · Annual Review of Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev-economics-080213-040845 · Cited by 300
Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment
Barberis, N. (2012) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2177288 · Cited by 293
Metadata
- Authors
- Fryer, R., Levitt, S., List, J., & Sadoff, S.
- Venue
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Publisher
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Published
- 2012-07
- OpenAlex
- W1535305819
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 6
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Enhancing the Efficacy of Teacher Incentives through Loss Aversion: A Field Experiment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3386/w18237
- The paper
- Fryer, R., Levitt, S., List, J., & Sadoff, S. (2012). Enhancing the Efficacy of Teacher Incentives through Loss Aversion: A Field Experiment. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w18237
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
