×

School choice with costly information acquisition. (English) Zbl 1530.91441

Summary: I study a model of centralized school choice in which students engage in costly search over schools before submitting preference reports to a clearinghouse. I consider three classes of preferences over schools – idiosyncratic, common, and hybrid – and characterize outcomes under two search protocols – simultaneous and sequential. With idiosyncratic preferences, there are no search externalities, and inefficiencies arise only because of uncoordinated search. Common preferences, however, generate search externalities: when high-priority students search, seats available to lower-priority students are adversely selected. Consequently, sequential search generates greater welfare than simultaneous search with idiosyncratic preferences but not necessarily with common. Additionally, with common preferences, welfare is nonmonotonic in search costs. I also show that the search protocol affects outcome inequality in important ways. For both protocols, I provide an instrument by which a designer can break students’ indifferences in search strategies to coordinate search and increase welfare.

MSC:

91B68 Matching models
91B08 Individual preferences
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Abdulkadiroğlu, A.; Che, Y.-K.; Yasuda, Y., Expanding “choice” in school choice. Am. Econ. J. Microecon., 1, 1-42 (2015)
[2] Abdulkadiroğlu, A.; Pathak, P.; Roth, A. E.; Sönmez, T., Changing the Boston school choice mechanism (2006), National Bureau of Economic Research, Technical report
[3] Abdulkadiroğlu, A.; Pathak, P. A.; Roth, A. E., Strategy-proofness versus efficiency in matching with indifferences: redesigning the NYC high school match. Am. Econ. Rev., 5, 1954-1978 (2009)
[4] Artemov, G., Assignment mechanisms: common preferences and information acquisition. J. Econ. Theory (2021) · Zbl 1481.91121
[5] Bikhchandani, S., Stability with one-sided incomplete information. J. Econ. Theory, 372-399 (2017) · Zbl 1400.91367
[6] Bochet, O.; Magnani, J., Limited strategic thinking and the cursed match (2021), Technical report
[7] Chen, Y.; He, Y., Information acquisition and provision in school choice: a theoretical investigation. Econ. Theory, 1-35 (2021)
[8] Chen, Y.; He, Y., Information acquisition and provision in school choice: an experimental study. J. Econ. Theory (2021) · Zbl 1471.91339
[9] Chen, Y.; Kesten, O., Chinese college admissions and school choice reforms: a theoretical analysis. J. Polit. Econ., 1, 99-139 (2017)
[10] Chen, Y.-C., Hu, G., 2018. A theory of stability in matching with incomplete information. Available at SSRN 3384439.
[11] Corcoran, S. P.; Jennings, J. L.; Cohodes, S. R.; Sattin-Bajaj, C., Leveling the playing field for high school choice: results from a field experiment of informational interventions (2018), National Bureau of Economic Research, Technical report
[12] Doval, L., Whether or not to open Pandora’s box. J. Econ. Theory, 127-158 (2018) · Zbl 1420.90029
[13] Echenique, F.; Gonzalez, R.; Wilson, A.; Yariv, L., Top of the batch: interviews and the match. Am. Econ. Rev. Insights (2021)
[14] Erdil, A.; Ergin, H., What’s the matter with tie-breaking? Improving efficiency in school choice. Am. Econ. Rev., 3, 669-689 (2008)
[15] Erdil, A.; Ergin, H., Two-sided matching with indifferences. J. Econ. Theory, 268-292 (2017) · Zbl 1400.91373
[16] Fernandez, M., Rudov, K., Yariv, L., 2021. Centralized matching with incomplete information.
[17] Gale, D.; Shapley, L. S., College admissions and the stability of marriage. Am. Math. Mon., 1, 9-15 (1962) · Zbl 0109.24403
[18] Hakimov, R., Kübler, D., Pan, S., 2021. Costly information acquisition in centralized matching markets.
[19] Hastings, J. S.; Weinstein, J. M., Information, school choice, and academic achievement: evidence from two experiments. Q. J. Econ., 4, 1373-1414 (2008)
[20] Hoxby, C. M.; Turner, S., What high-achieving low-income students know about college. Am. Econ. Rev., 5, 514-517 (2015)
[21] Immorlica, N., Leshno, J., Lo, I., Lucier, B., 2020. Information acquisition in matching markets: the role of price discovery.
[22] Kesten, O.; Kurino, M., Strategy-proof improvements upon deferred acceptance: a maximal domain for possibility. Games Econ. Behav., 120-143 (2019) · Zbl 1425.91347
[23] Kloosterman, A.; Troyan, P., School choice with asymmetric information: priority design and the curse of acceptance. Theor. Econ., 3, 1095-1133 (2020) · Zbl 1466.91209
[24] Lee, R. S.; Schwarz, M., Interviewing in two-sided matching markets. Rand J. Econ., 3, 835-855 (2017)
[25] Liu, Q., Stability and Bayesian consistency in two-sided markets. Am. Econ. Rev., 8, 2625-2666 (2020)
[26] Liu, Q.; Mailath, G. J.; Postlewaite, A.; Samuelson, L., Stable matching with incomplete information. Econometrica, 2, 541-587 (2014) · Zbl 1457.91273
[27] Pathak, P. A.; Sönmez, T., Leveling the playing field: sincere and sophisticated players in the Boston mechanism. Am. Econ. Rev., 4, 1636-1652 (2008)
[28] Wald, A., Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. Ann. Math. Stat., 2, 117-186 (1945) · Zbl 0060.30207
[29] Weitzman, M. L., Optimal search for the best alternative. Econometrica, 641-654 (1979) · Zbl 0426.90017
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.