农村学生眼镜使用行为的同伴效应及对学业表现的影响研究
|
摘要
本文基于对31所农村初中995名低视力学生开展的一项随机干预实验,检验了低视力学生眼镜使用行为中的同伴效应。研究发现,学生的配镜行为和戴镜行为中均存在同伴效应,同伴的配镜和戴镜情况会显著影响低视力学生本人是否配镜和戴镜。同伴效应的影响效果并非线性,可能存在一种低水平均衡陷阱。也就是说,同一班级内学生的配镜和戴镜比例可能在某较低水平处于稳态,需要较大的外部冲击才能打破这一低水平均衡陷阱。本文还发现,同伴的眼镜使用行为也会对学生本人的学业表现产生影响。同伴效应的存在表明,相关部门需要对学生眼镜使用行为进行外部干预,以促进学生的健康成长和学业发展。
This paper estimates the peer effect on students' behaviors of eyeglasses usage based on the analysis of a randomized control trial conducted in 31 rural junior high schools and 995 students with vision problem.This study finds that there is peer effect in students' behaviors of purchasing or wearing eyeglasses.The proportion of peers who purchase or wear eyeglasses will significantly affect the students' behaviors of purchasing or wearing eyeglasses.The study found that the peer effect is not linear and there may exists a low-level equilibrium trap.The ratio of purchasing and wearing glasses in the junior high school may stay at a lower level.A large external shock,such as government policies,is required to break this low-level trap.This peer effect will further affect the student's academic performance.The existence of peer effect on health care seeking behaviors implies the intervention from policy makers.
This paper estimates the peer effect on students' behaviors of eyeglasses usage based on the analysis of a randomized control trial conducted in 31 rural junior high schools and 995 students with vision problem.This study finds that there is peer effect in students' behaviors of purchasing or wearing eyeglasses.The proportion of peers who purchase or wear eyeglasses will significantly affect the students' behaviors of purchasing or wearing eyeglasses.The study found that the peer effect is not linear and there may exists a low-level equilibrium trap.The ratio of purchasing and wearing glasses in the junior high school may stay at a lower level.A large external shock,such as government policies,is required to break this low-level trap.This peer effect will further affect the student's academic performance.The existence of peer effect on health care seeking behaviors implies the intervention from policy makers.
引文
[1]Coleman J.(1968).The concept of equality of educational opportunity.Harvard Educational Review,38(1),7-22.
[2][32]杜育红,袁玉芝.教育中的同伴效应研究述评:概念、模型与方法[J].教育经济评论,2016(03):77-91.
[3][49]Manski,C.F.(1993).Identification of endogenous social effects:The reflection problem.Review of Economic Studies,60(3),531-542.
[4][51]陆铭,张爽.人以群分:非市场互动和群分效应的文献评论[J].经济学(季刊),2007(3):991-1020.
[5]Duflo,E.,Dupas,P.,&Kremer,M.(2011)Peer effects,teacher incentives,and the impact of tracking:Evidence from a randomized evaluation in Kenya.American Economic Review,101(5),1739-1774.
[6]Hanushek,E.A.,Kain,J.F.,Markman,J.M.,et al.(2010).Does peer ability affect student achievement?Journal of Applied Econometrics,18(5),527-544.
[7][41][62]Sacerdote,B.(2001).Peer effects with random assignment:Results for Dartmouth roommates.The Quarterly Journal of Economics,116(2),681-704.
[8][40]曹妍.大陆移民学生如何影响香港本地学生的学业成就?---基于PISA数据的同伴效应实证研究[J].教育与经济,2013(04):47-55.
[9]梁耀明,何勤英.大学生学业成绩的宿舍同伴效应分析[J].教育与经济,2017(04):83-88.
[10]袁舟航,闵师,项诚.农村小学同伴效应对学习成绩的影响:近朱者赤乎?[J].教育与经济,2018(01):65-73.
[11]Gaviria,A.,&Raphael,S.(2001).School-based peer effects and juvenile behavior.Review of Economics&Statistics,83(2),257-268.
[12][13][16][44]Powell,L.M.,Tauras,J.A.,&Ross,H.(2005).The importance of peer effects,cigarette prices and tobacco control policies for youth smoking behavior.Journal of health Economics,24(5),950-968.
[14][15][23][46][50][52]李强.同伴效应对中国农村青少年体重的影响[J].中国农村经济,2014(03):73-84.
[17]Resnikoff,S.,Pascolini,D.,Mariotti,S.P.,et al.(2008).Global magnitude of visual impairment caused by uncorrected refractive errors in 2004.Bulletin of the World Health Organization,86(1),63-70.
[18][20][21][28][29][56]Nie,J.,Pang,X.,Sylvia,S.,et al.(2019).Seeing is Believing:Experimental Evidence of the Impact of Eyeglasses on Academic Performance,Aspirations and Dropout among Junior High School Students in Rural China.Economic Development and Culture Change.Forthcoming.
[19]教育部.综合防控儿童青少年近视实施方案(征求意见稿)[EB/OL].2018-08-02,http://www.moe.gov.cn.
[22][27][30][57]Ma,X.,Zhou,Z.,Yi,H.,et al.(2014).Effect of providing free glasses on children’s educational outcomes in China:Cluster randomized controlled trial.British Medical Journal,349(9):1-12.
[24][25][47]Rasmusen,E.(1996).Stigma and self-fulfilling expectations of criminality.The Journal of Law&Economics,39(2),519-543.
[26][54]Glewwe,P.,Park,A.,Zhao,M.(2016).A better vision for development:Eyeglasses and academic performance in rural primary schools in China.Journal of Development Economics,122,170-182.
[31][33]Glaeser,E.L.,&Scheinkman,J.A.(2000).Non-market interactions.Nber Working Papers,70(1914),99-104.
[34][43][59]Glaeser,E.,&Scheinkman,J.E.(2001).Measuring social interactions.In P.Young(Ed.),Social dynamics(pp.83-132).MA:MIT Press.
[35]Sah,R.K.(1991).Social osmosis and patterns of crime.Journal of political Economy,99(6),1272-1295.
[36]Foster,G.(2006).It’s not your peers,and it’s not your friends:Some progress toward understanding the educational peer effect mechanism.Journal of Public Economics,90(8),1455-1475.
[37][39]袁玉芝.教育中的同伴效应分析---基于上海2012年PISA数据[J].上海教育科研,2016(3):30-34.
[38][61]Hoxby,C.(2000).Peer effects in the classroom:Learning from gender and race variation.NBER Working Papers,No.7867.
[42][45]An,W.(2015).Instrumental variables estimates of peer effects in social networks.Social Science Research,50,382-394.
[48]Manski,C.F.(1993).Identification of endogenous social effects:The reflection problem.Review of Economic Studies,60(3),531-542.
[53]Nizalova,O.Y.,&Murtazashvili,I.(2016).Exogenous treatment and endogenous factors:Vanishing of omitted variable bias on the interaction term.Journal of Econometric Methods,5(1),71-77.
[55]Heckman,J.,&Carneiro,P.(2003).Human capital policy.NBER Working Papers,No.821.
[58]Luo,R.,Shi,Y.,Zhang,L.,et al.(2012).Nutrition and educational performance in rural China’s elementary schools:Results of a randomized control trial in Shaanxi Province.Economic Development and Cultural Change,60(4),735-772.
[60]Bai,Y.,Yi,H.,Zhang,L.,Shi,Y.,Ma,X.,Congdon,N.,Zhou,Z.,Boswell,M.,&Rozelle,S.(2014).An investigation of vision problems and the vision care system in rural China.Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical.Medicine and Public Health,45(6),1464-1473.
(1)健康风险行为(health risk behaviors)是指致使健康出现风险的行为,包括吸烟、饮酒等。
(2)低视力问题包括近视、远视、弱视等,90%以上的视力问题可以通过戴眼镜矫正。
(1)低水平均衡陷阱由经济学家纳尔森(Nelson R.R)于1956年提出。该理论认为,低收入国家由于收入低造成投资不足、而投资不足又反过来影响收入增长,因此使低收入国家人均收入长期维持在较低水平,难以增长,类似坠入一个难以逃脱的陷阱。本文使用该概念是指,当班级内配镜比例低时,当有新的学生出现视力问题后,他们的配镜意愿就会相对更低,不愿意配眼镜;这反过来又使得班级内配镜比例难以进一步增加,也如同坠入一个陷阱。
(2)当学生有视力问题后,需要到医院或眼镜店检查视力;如果可以配眼镜矫正视力的,则需要验光配镜。这是为恢复视力健康而进行的诊疗,因此本文称之为诊疗行为。学生类似的诊疗行为还包括通过体检发现是否贫血,如果贫血应及时补充铁元素等。
(1)在计算统计功效时,假设最小可探测的影响效果(MDE)为0.25个标准差,组内相关性(ICC)为0 .10(调研数据实际ICC为0.049),基线与评估数据的相关性为0.50,预计有15%的样本流失。32所学校的统计功效可以达到80%。
(2)主要是对镜架、鼻托进行调整,让戴镜时不滑落,保证舒适度。
(1)本文数据显示,学生自己购买眼镜后,经常戴的比例约为95%。
(2)该处为矫正视力的近视或远视眼镜,不包括太阳镜等。该工具变量主要用于分析学生配镜行为(当有视力问题时是否去配了眼镜)的同伴效应,因此强调的是家庭成员是否有眼镜,而不是戴眼镜。
(1)虽然该部分在估计戴镜行为的同伴效应,但此处使用的变量是基线时同伴中需要配镜的比例,而不是戴镜的比例,这是因为有多少人需要配眼镜决定了会在该班级发放多少免费眼镜,这可以反映出干预的强度;但基线时同伴中戴眼镜的比例并不影响免费眼镜的发放,与干预强度没有关系。
(1)市场因素指以价格为核心作用机制的因素,人与人行为之间是通过价格直接或间接地联系在一起,市场信号影响了人的行为。
[2][32]杜育红,袁玉芝.教育中的同伴效应研究述评:概念、模型与方法[J].教育经济评论,2016(03):77-91.
[3][49]Manski,C.F.(1993).Identification of endogenous social effects:The reflection problem.Review of Economic Studies,60(3),531-542.
[4][51]陆铭,张爽.人以群分:非市场互动和群分效应的文献评论[J].经济学(季刊),2007(3):991-1020.
[5]Duflo,E.,Dupas,P.,&Kremer,M.(2011)Peer effects,teacher incentives,and the impact of tracking:Evidence from a randomized evaluation in Kenya.American Economic Review,101(5),1739-1774.
[6]Hanushek,E.A.,Kain,J.F.,Markman,J.M.,et al.(2010).Does peer ability affect student achievement?Journal of Applied Econometrics,18(5),527-544.
[7][41][62]Sacerdote,B.(2001).Peer effects with random assignment:Results for Dartmouth roommates.The Quarterly Journal of Economics,116(2),681-704.
[8][40]曹妍.大陆移民学生如何影响香港本地学生的学业成就?---基于PISA数据的同伴效应实证研究[J].教育与经济,2013(04):47-55.
[9]梁耀明,何勤英.大学生学业成绩的宿舍同伴效应分析[J].教育与经济,2017(04):83-88.
[10]袁舟航,闵师,项诚.农村小学同伴效应对学习成绩的影响:近朱者赤乎?[J].教育与经济,2018(01):65-73.
[11]Gaviria,A.,&Raphael,S.(2001).School-based peer effects and juvenile behavior.Review of Economics&Statistics,83(2),257-268.
[12][13][16][44]Powell,L.M.,Tauras,J.A.,&Ross,H.(2005).The importance of peer effects,cigarette prices and tobacco control policies for youth smoking behavior.Journal of health Economics,24(5),950-968.
[14][15][23][46][50][52]李强.同伴效应对中国农村青少年体重的影响[J].中国农村经济,2014(03):73-84.
[17]Resnikoff,S.,Pascolini,D.,Mariotti,S.P.,et al.(2008).Global magnitude of visual impairment caused by uncorrected refractive errors in 2004.Bulletin of the World Health Organization,86(1),63-70.
[18][20][21][28][29][56]Nie,J.,Pang,X.,Sylvia,S.,et al.(2019).Seeing is Believing:Experimental Evidence of the Impact of Eyeglasses on Academic Performance,Aspirations and Dropout among Junior High School Students in Rural China.Economic Development and Culture Change.Forthcoming.
[19]教育部.综合防控儿童青少年近视实施方案(征求意见稿)[EB/OL].2018-08-02,http://www.moe.gov.cn.
[22][27][30][57]Ma,X.,Zhou,Z.,Yi,H.,et al.(2014).Effect of providing free glasses on children’s educational outcomes in China:Cluster randomized controlled trial.British Medical Journal,349(9):1-12.
[24][25][47]Rasmusen,E.(1996).Stigma and self-fulfilling expectations of criminality.The Journal of Law&Economics,39(2),519-543.
[26][54]Glewwe,P.,Park,A.,Zhao,M.(2016).A better vision for development:Eyeglasses and academic performance in rural primary schools in China.Journal of Development Economics,122,170-182.
[31][33]Glaeser,E.L.,&Scheinkman,J.A.(2000).Non-market interactions.Nber Working Papers,70(1914),99-104.
[34][43][59]Glaeser,E.,&Scheinkman,J.E.(2001).Measuring social interactions.In P.Young(Ed.),Social dynamics(pp.83-132).MA:MIT Press.
[35]Sah,R.K.(1991).Social osmosis and patterns of crime.Journal of political Economy,99(6),1272-1295.
[36]Foster,G.(2006).It’s not your peers,and it’s not your friends:Some progress toward understanding the educational peer effect mechanism.Journal of Public Economics,90(8),1455-1475.
[37][39]袁玉芝.教育中的同伴效应分析---基于上海2012年PISA数据[J].上海教育科研,2016(3):30-34.
[38][61]Hoxby,C.(2000).Peer effects in the classroom:Learning from gender and race variation.NBER Working Papers,No.7867.
[42][45]An,W.(2015).Instrumental variables estimates of peer effects in social networks.Social Science Research,50,382-394.
[48]Manski,C.F.(1993).Identification of endogenous social effects:The reflection problem.Review of Economic Studies,60(3),531-542.
[53]Nizalova,O.Y.,&Murtazashvili,I.(2016).Exogenous treatment and endogenous factors:Vanishing of omitted variable bias on the interaction term.Journal of Econometric Methods,5(1),71-77.
[55]Heckman,J.,&Carneiro,P.(2003).Human capital policy.NBER Working Papers,No.821.
[58]Luo,R.,Shi,Y.,Zhang,L.,et al.(2012).Nutrition and educational performance in rural China’s elementary schools:Results of a randomized control trial in Shaanxi Province.Economic Development and Cultural Change,60(4),735-772.
[60]Bai,Y.,Yi,H.,Zhang,L.,Shi,Y.,Ma,X.,Congdon,N.,Zhou,Z.,Boswell,M.,&Rozelle,S.(2014).An investigation of vision problems and the vision care system in rural China.Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical.Medicine and Public Health,45(6),1464-1473.
(1)健康风险行为(health risk behaviors)是指致使健康出现风险的行为,包括吸烟、饮酒等。
(2)低视力问题包括近视、远视、弱视等,90%以上的视力问题可以通过戴眼镜矫正。
(1)低水平均衡陷阱由经济学家纳尔森(Nelson R.R)于1956年提出。该理论认为,低收入国家由于收入低造成投资不足、而投资不足又反过来影响收入增长,因此使低收入国家人均收入长期维持在较低水平,难以增长,类似坠入一个难以逃脱的陷阱。本文使用该概念是指,当班级内配镜比例低时,当有新的学生出现视力问题后,他们的配镜意愿就会相对更低,不愿意配眼镜;这反过来又使得班级内配镜比例难以进一步增加,也如同坠入一个陷阱。
(2)当学生有视力问题后,需要到医院或眼镜店检查视力;如果可以配眼镜矫正视力的,则需要验光配镜。这是为恢复视力健康而进行的诊疗,因此本文称之为诊疗行为。学生类似的诊疗行为还包括通过体检发现是否贫血,如果贫血应及时补充铁元素等。
(1)在计算统计功效时,假设最小可探测的影响效果(MDE)为0.25个标准差,组内相关性(ICC)为0 .10(调研数据实际ICC为0.049),基线与评估数据的相关性为0.50,预计有15%的样本流失。32所学校的统计功效可以达到80%。
(2)主要是对镜架、鼻托进行调整,让戴镜时不滑落,保证舒适度。
(1)本文数据显示,学生自己购买眼镜后,经常戴的比例约为95%。
(2)该处为矫正视力的近视或远视眼镜,不包括太阳镜等。该工具变量主要用于分析学生配镜行为(当有视力问题时是否去配了眼镜)的同伴效应,因此强调的是家庭成员是否有眼镜,而不是戴眼镜。
(1)虽然该部分在估计戴镜行为的同伴效应,但此处使用的变量是基线时同伴中需要配镜的比例,而不是戴镜的比例,这是因为有多少人需要配眼镜决定了会在该班级发放多少免费眼镜,这可以反映出干预的强度;但基线时同伴中戴眼镜的比例并不影响免费眼镜的发放,与干预强度没有关系。
(1)市场因素指以价格为核心作用机制的因素,人与人行为之间是通过价格直接或间接地联系在一起,市场信号影响了人的行为。