Teaching and Incentives: Substitutes or Complements?
Interventions to promote learning are often categorized into supply- and demand-side approaches. In a randomized experiment to promote learning about COVID-19 among Mozambican adults, we study the interaction between a supply and a demand intervention, respectively: teaching via targeted feedback, and providing financial incentives to learners. In theory, teaching and learner-incentives may be substitutes (crowding out one another) or complements (enhancing one another). Experts surveyed in advance predicted a high degree of substitutability between the two treatments. In contrast, we find substantially more complementarity than experts predicted. Combining teaching and incentive treatments raises COVID-19 knowledge test scores by 0.5 standard deviations, though the standalone teaching treatment is the most cost-effective. The complementarity between teaching and incentives persists in the longer run, over nine months post-treatment.
-
-
Copy CitationJames Allen IV, Arlete Mahumane, James Riddell IV, Tanya Rosenblat, Dean Yang, and Hang Yu, "Teaching and Incentives: Substitutes or Complements?," NBER Working Paper 28976 (2021), https://doi.org/10.3386/w28976.Download Citation
-
Published Versions
James Allen, Arlete Mahumane, James Riddell, Tanya Rosenblat, Dean Yang, Hang Yu, Teaching and incentives: Substitutes or complements?, Economics of Education Review, Volume 91, 2022 citation courtesy of 
More from the NBER
In addition to working papers, the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter, the NBER Digest, the Bulletin on Health, and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship — as well as online conference reports, video lectures, and interviews.
