"A (Dynamic) Investigation of Stereotypes, Belief-Updating, and Behavior" (with Katherine Coffman and Basit Zafar). Economic Inquiry, 2024 

Using a controlled experiment, we study the dynamic effects of feedback on decision‐making across verbal skills and math. Before feedback, men are more optimistic about their performance and more willing to compete than women, especially in math. While feedback shifts individuals' beliefs and behavior, we see substantial persistence of gender gaps 1 week later. This is particularly true among individuals who receive negative feedback. Our results are not well-explained by motivated reasoning; in fact, negative feedback is more likely to be recalled than positive feedback. Overall, our results highlight the challenges involved in overcoming gender gaps in dynamic settings. 

The Impact of COVID-19 on Student Experiences and Expectations: Evidence from a Survey” (with Esteban Aucejo, Jacob French, and Basit Zafar). Journal of Public Economics, 2020


Press: The Chronicle of Higher Education, Market Watch, VoxEU 

In order to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education, we surveyed approximately 1500 students at one of the largest public institutions in the United States using an instrument designed to recover the causal impact of the pandemic on students' current and expected outcomes. Results show large negative effects across many dimensions. Due to COVID-19: 13% of students have delayed graduation, 40% have lost a job, internship, or job offer, and 29% expect to earn less at age 35. Moreover, these effects have been highly heterogeneous. One-quarter of students increased their study time by more than 4 hours per week due to COVID-19, while another quarter decreased their study time by more than 5 hours per week. This heterogeneity often followed existing socioeconomic divides. Lower-income students are 55% more likely than their higher-income peers to have delayed graduation due to COVID-19. Finally, we show that the economic and health-related shocks induced by COVID-19 vary systematically by socioeconomic factors and constitute key mediators in explaining the large (and heterogeneous) effects of the pandemic. 

Working Papers

"Gender, Grade Sensitivity, and Major Choice" (Under review) Draft

It has been documented that the probability of women continuing their studies in or switching out of male-dominated fields --like STEM and business-- is more sensitive to their performance in relevant courses at the beginning of their college career relative to men. The reasons why women and men react differently to grades during college, and how this behavior impacts their major choices, are however not well understood. Using novel survey data with hypothetical major choice scenarios that exogenously vary different attributes, I estimate students' sensitivity to grades and find that women value an extra GPA point about $3,000 more than men. I find that anticipated discrimination in the labor market of male-dominated fields is important to understand this gender gap in grade sensitivity. I further provide evidence of the gender differences in beliefs about labor market discrimination in different fields. My results show that beliefs about gender discrimination in the labor market account for 48% of the gender gap in grade sensitivity. Understanding why talented women with the potential to succeed in male-dominated fields drop out because of less-than-stellar grades in an introductory class is important for closing the gender gap in these areas, improving the labor market outcomes of highly skilled women, and achieving an efficient allocation of resources across fields of study and occupations. 

"Gendered Effects of Labels on Advanced Course Enrollment" Draft

This paper investigates gender differences in how high school students react to standardized test performance labels regarding their advanced math and English enrollment decisions. Using a regression discontinuity design, I find that women labeled as not proficient in math are less likely to enroll in advanced math courses than their proficient-labeled peers. In contrast, labels do not affect their advanced English enrollment. While, on average, men enroll in advanced classes at a lower rate than women, men's likelihood of enrollment is not impacted by the labels they receive, regardless of subject. These findings highlight unintended consequences of testing practices that affect human capital investment decisions differentially by gender, potentially contributing to the persistent underrepresentation of women in male-dominated fields.

Current Research Projects