Job Market Paper:

Blindsided at the Start: Evidence from the National College Entrance Exam (JMP Link)

with Yi CHEN (ShanghaiTech University), Sikun DOU(Singapore Management University), Hongbin LI(Stanford University) 

Presented at:  Labour Reading Group (University of Cambridge), Ph.D. Empirical Brown Bag (LMU Munich), Ph.D. Micro Brown Bag (LMU Munich)

Abstract

 We study how an adverse start to a high-stakes exam affects performance and educational gaps. Using the National College Entrance Exam in China, we construct an Large Language Model-based measure of question difficulty across 22 mathematics exam sets and merge it with records for 13.6 million students. A one-standard-deviation increase in first-question difficulty lowers math scores by 0.252 standard deviations. Students from higher-quality high schools are significantly less affected; when applications are fixed before the exam, this differential response shifts STEM admission toward higher-quality-school students. Mechanism tests point to a salience channel: the effect is specific to the opening position and concentrated among unusually difficult, innovative, and expectation-violating questions.

Work in Progress:

2025.04-Now GenAI Generated Emotional Paintings and Pro-Environmental Behaviour

with  Alice Guerra (University of Bologna), Jiajia LI (Sichuan Agricultrual University), Alessandro Tavoni (University of Bologna), Jian ZHANG (Sichuan Agricultural University) 

Presented at:  Micro Summer Retreat (LMU Munich)

2021.12-Now Playing it Safe: How Conservatism Shapes the Gender Gap in High-Stakes Decisions (Available upon request)

with Yi CHEN (ShanghaiTech University), Sikun DOU(Singapore Management University), Hongbin LI(Stanford University) 

Presented at: the 8th China Center for Economic Research Summer Institute(2024), EEA-ESEM Rotterdam (2024), and the International SITES-GLO Conference (2024), AIEL – DSE Workshop(2025)(Poster Session).

Abstract 

A large body of laboratory experiments has confirmed that women are more risk-averse than men. However, less is known about the real-world costs and benefits of being cautious. We explore this question by examining gender differences in school choices during the Chinese College Entrance Examination (Gaokao) in the early 2000s. During our study period, China employed a sequential admission mechanism, making the choice of a first-batch first-preference school particularly risky. If a student narrowly missed the cutoff for that school, they faced a high likelihood of being placed in a significantly less desirable school. We find consistent evidence that female students were more likely to avoid this risk by selecting a more conservative option as their first-preference choice. This strategy involves both costs and benefits. On the benefit side, given their test scores, female students were less likely to fail their target schools compared to male students. On the cost side, however, they were more often admitted to lower-quality schools and less desirable majors. These gender differences remain robust across a range of checks, including controls for preferences toward specific majors and types of schools. To further validate that these patterns are driven by differences in risk aversion, we exploit policy shifts in the timing of preference submissions—from before to after exam results were known—which reduced uncertainty. We find that reduced uncertainty narrows the gender gap across various outcomes.

Science Dissemination

              All disseminations are supported by International PhD College, Collegio Superiore, University of Bologna