Roommate effects on grades: Evidence from first-year housing assignments
McEwan P.J.; Soderberg K.A.
2006
Research in Higher Education
15
10.1007/s11162-005-9392-2
This paper estimates the effect of students' background characteristics on the academic outcomes of their college roommates. It uses data from four classes of students at Wellesley College, where roommate assignment is credibly random, conditional on student responses to a housing preference form. In linear specifications, there are no peer effects on students' grade point averages. There is some evidence that students' SAT scores have nonlinear effect on their roommates' achievement, but the results are not robust. We conclude that roommate peer effects might exist among small groups of students, but they are not a key determinant of students' average academic outcomes at Wellesley College. © Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006.
Liberal arts college; Natural experiment; Peer effects; Roommates; Selection bias
Aaronson D., Using sibling data to estimate the impact of neighborhoods on children's educational outcomes, Journal of Human Resources, 33, 4, pp. 915-946, (1998); Epple D., Romano R.E., Competition between private and public schools, vouchers, and peer-group effects, American Economic Review, 88, 1, pp. 33-62, (1998); Evans W.N., Oates W.E., Schwab R.M., Measuring peer group effects: A study of teenage behavior, Journal of Political Economy, 100, 5, pp. 966-991, (1992); Foster J.R., Peerless Performers: The Absence of Robust Peer Effects at A Large, Heterogeneous University., (2003); Gaviria A., Raphael S., School-based peer effects and juvenile behavior, Review of Economics and Statistics, 83, 2, pp. 257-268, (2001); Gleason M.A., Siegfried J.J., Academic Roommate Peer Effects, (2003); Hoxby C., Peer effects in the classroom: Learning from gender and race variation, Working Paper 7867, (2000); Kremer M., Levy D.M., Peer effects and alcohol use among college students, Working Paper 9876, (2003); McEwan P.J., Peer effects on student achievement: Evidence from Chile, Economics of Education Review, 22, 2, pp. 131-141, (2003); Moffit R.A., Policy interventions, low level equilibria, and social interactions, Social Dynamics, pp. 45-82, (2001); Nechyba T.J., Mobility, targeting, and private school vouchers, American Economic Review, 90, 1, pp. 130-146, (2000); Newcomb T.M., The general nature of peer group influence, College Peer Groups, Aldine, Chicago, pp. 2-16, (1966); Pascarella E.T., Terenzini P.T., How College Affects Students, 2, (2005); Renn K.A., Arnold K.D., Reconceptualizing research on college student peer culture, Journal of Higher Education, 74, 3, pp. 261-291, (2003); Rivkin S.G., Tiebout sorting, aggregation and the estimation of peer group effects, Economics of Education Review, 20, 3, pp. 201-209, (2001); Robertson D., Symons J., Do peer groups matter? Peer group versus schooling effects on academic attainment, Economica, 70, 277, pp. 31-53, (2003); Sacerdote B., Peer effects with random assignment: Results for Dartmouth roommates, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 2, pp. 681-704, (2001); Stinebrickncr T.R., Stinkebrickncr R., Peer Effects among Student from Disadvantaged Backgrounds; Whitt E.J., Edison, Pascarella E.T., Nora A., Terenzini P.T., Interaction with peers and objective and self-reported cognitive outcomes across three years of college, Journal of College Student Development, 40, 1, pp. 61-78, (1999); Winston G.C., Zimmerman D.J., Peer effects in higher education, College Choices: the Economics of Where to Go, When to Go, and How to Pay for It, (2004); Zimmerman D.J., Peer effects in academic outcomes: Evidence from a natural experiment, Review of Economics and Statistics, 85, 1, pp. 9-23, (2003)
Article
Scopus