Static versus dynamic deferred acceptance in school choice: Theory and experiment

被引:22
|
作者
Klijn, Flip [1 ,2 ]
Pais, Joana [3 ,4 ]
Vorsatz, Marc [5 ]
机构
[1] CSIC, Inst Econ Anal, Campus UAB, Bellaterra 08193, Barcelona, Spain
[2] CSIC, Barcelona GSE, Campus UAB, Bellaterra 08193, Barcelona, Spain
[3] Univ Lisbon, ISEG UL, Lisbon, Portugal
[4] UECE Res Unit Complex & Econ, REM Res Econ & Management, Lisbon, Portugal
[5] Univ Nacl Educ Distancia, Dept Anal Econ, Paseo Senda del Rey 11, E-28040 Madrid, Spain
关键词
Dynamic school choice; Deferred acceptance; Stability; Efficiency; COLLEGE ADMISSIONS; STABILITY; TRUTH; MACHIAVELLI; INFORMATION; TRUNCATION; STRATEGIES;
D O I
10.1016/j.geb.2018.08.009
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
In the context of school choice, we experimentally study how behavior and outcomes are affected when, instead of submitting rankings in the student-proposing or school-proposing deferred acceptance (DA) mechanism, students make decisions dynamically, going through the steps of the underlying algorithms. Our main results show that, contrary to theory, (a) in the dynamic student-proposing DA mechanism, students propose to schools respecting the order of their true preferences slightly more often than in its static version while, (b) in the dynamic school-proposing DA mechanism, students react to proposals by always respecting the order and not accepting schools in the tail of their true preferences more often than in the corresponding static version. As a consequence, the dynamic mechanisms outperform their static counterparts in what stability and average payoffs are concerned. In the aggregate, the dynamic school-proposing DA mechanism is the best performing mechanism. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:147 / 163
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Minimal-Access Rights in School Choice and the Deferred Acceptance Mechanism
    Klaus, Bettina
    Klijn, Flip
    MATHEMATICS OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2024, 49 (03) : 1487 - 1501
  • [2] Improving schools through school choice: An experimental study of deferred acceptance
    Klijn, Flip
    Pais, Joana
    Vorsatz, Marc
    ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2020, 186
  • [3] Dynamic portfolio choice with deferred annuities
    Horneff, Wolfram
    Maurer, Raimond
    Rogalla, Ralph
    JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE, 2010, 34 (11) : 2652 - 2664
  • [4] ITERATIVE VERSUS STANDARD DEFERRED ACCEPTANCE: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE
    Bo, Inacio
    Hakimov, Rustamdjan
    ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 2020, 130 (626): : 356 - 392
  • [5] Strategic Performance of Deferred Acceptance in Dynamic Matching Problems
    Kennes, John
    Monte, Daniel
    Tumennasan, Norovsambuu
    AMERICAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL-MICROECONOMICS, 2019, 11 (02) : 55 - 97
  • [6] Boston versus deferred acceptance in an interim setting: An experimental investigation
    Featherstone, Clayton R.
    Niederle, Muriel
    GAMES AND ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR, 2016, 100 : 353 - 375
  • [7] School choice with consent: an experiment
    Cerrone, Claudia
    Hermstruwer, Yoan
    Kesten, Onur
    ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 2024, 134 (661): : 1760 - 1805
  • [8] Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions
    Roth, Alvin E.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GAME THEORY, 2008, 36 (3-4) : 537 - 569
  • [9] Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions
    Alvin E. Roth
    International Journal of Game Theory, 2008, 36 : 537 - 569
  • [10] Effectiveness of school choice - The Milwaukee experiment
    Greene, JP
    Peterson, PE
    Du, JT
    EDUCATION AND URBAN SOCIETY, 1999, 31 (02) : 190 - 213