SEIC Database Results

7/31/2019 SEIC Database Results

1/3

1

SMU Economics Intelligence Club Database ResultsFrom 13th May to 27th May, SEIC surveyed students on the past modules they have taken, and were

promised aggregated results back in return. Students were asked to rate the amount of time taken

to complete the module, and the difficulty level and dissatisfaction level of the module.

So why did I go through the trouble to do this? A reason is my hope to value-add to fellow students

on the aspect of choosing modules. This is because there are many instances when students are not

able to find out about a certain non-core module because no friend had taken it. Even if there is

someone telling you about his/her opinion, the opinion is bound to be biased. By gathering

information from multiple sources, I hope to tackle some of the issues on information asymmetry.

Though more respondents will be better, the seemingly not so large number is deceiving. This is

because each respondent is required to fill in 6 responses, and so we have 294 responses in total! In

case you are wondering who did the survey, heres a breakdown:

Next, Ill share with you some of my analysis and discovery.

Year 1, 16

Year 2, 16

Year 3, 15

Year 4 and

above, 2


2/3

2

Result 1

Motivation: In theory, the average of all results should approximate 5(This is because in the survey, for the slider scale from 0-10, I stated that the average module is worth 5 points)

Variable measured Time taken Module difficulty DissatisfactionResult average 6.4 5.9 4.3

Wow I am pretty wrong in my motivation (These values should be very near 5 given that a grand

total of 294 responses are collected). If each person has an equal probability to fill in any of his/her

module taken, does this mean that most modules are more difficult, more time consuming, less de-

satisfying than the average module taken by each person? But wait, then what is our definition of

the average module again?

So, I think one of the following results should be true.

a) There is a cognitive bias to think that most modules you have taken are more difficult, more time

consuming, and less de-satisfying than the average module you have taken.b) People prefer to divulge information on the more difficult/time consuming and less de-satisfying

modules.

Result 2

Motivation: Do students work harder when a module is more difficult?

My answer is yes. There is a correlation between the amount of time taken for a module, and the

difficulty of the module.

However, do note that the fit is not very perfect. I am guessing that this is because different students

have different utility functions (Convex vs Concave). For example, one group of students will choose

to spend a lot more time for just a marginal increase in difficulty of the module, while the other type

of students will choose to spend far less amount of time.

y = 0.7122x + 1.3875

R = 0.3814

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Difficulty

Time Taken


3/3

3

Result 3

Motivation: I have a hunch that students are more dissatisfied when the

mod is difficult and time-consuming.

However, a simple regression shows dismal result. If you took Applied Econometrics, perhaps you

can help me check what my omitted variables are, or if I have any specification error.

Model used:

Y = + *TimeTaken + *Module Difficulty + e

Model R2 = 0.054

Variable Coefficient t-score (similar to normal

distributions Z-score) 2.3 4.1

0.13 1.3

0.20 2.2

For now, I am done looking at this and will pass the raw data to the current SEIC. I think much more

data analysis can be done, but Ill leave this to the SEIC Behavioural Economics Research Group to

discover more for further behavioural study and analysis. (Suggestions: Do upper years rate their

modules differently? Do people tend to fill in harder modules first? Are people telling you their

honest answer when they fill in such surveys?)

Database I/C: Wong Hong Wei ([email protected])
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

SEIC Database Results

Documents

Transcript of SEIC Database Results