Gifted Children Programs’ Short and Long-Term Impact : Higher Education, Earnings, and the Knowledge-Economy

Kambhampati, Uma; Lavy, Victor; Lavy, Victor; Goldstein, Yoav

“Validation of the Frey and Detterman (2004) I.Q. prediction equations using the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales.” Personal. Individ. Differ. 41, 353–357.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
(B) 1992-2005 Graduates Sample Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by grade of taking the test- the solid red line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 10th or 11th grade, and the blue dashed line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 12th grade. The graphs also show the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions. The sample includes (non-gifted) students in cities without a GCP from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
(B) 1992-2005 Graduates Sample Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by grade of taking the test. The solid red line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 12th grade, and the blue dashed line represents the sample of students who took the test after 12th grade (during the military service or after). The graph also shows the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
(B) 1992-2005 Graduates Sample Notes: This figure plots the number of students who participated in the UPET, by grade of taking the test, for the comparison group pull, i.e., students in cities without a GCP (upper panel, in blue) and GCP participants (lower panel, in red). The sample includes all students who took the UPET at any age, from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005. Lower and upper bars are binned, i.e., 17 represents 17 and below, and 23 represents 23 and above.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
(B) 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by grade of taking the test- the solid red line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 10th or 11th grade, and the blue dashed line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 12th grade. The graphs also show the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions. The sample includes only GCP participants from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
(B) After Matching II Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by group. The solid red line represents the sample of GCP students, and the blue dashed line represents the matched comparison group. The graphs also show the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions. The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010, who took the UPET at any age.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
(B) After Matching Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by group- the solid red line represents the sample of GCP students, and the blue dashed line represents the matched comparison group (version I, which does not use the UPET scores in the logit specification). The graphs also show the Kolmogorov– Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, which is about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
(B) After Matching Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by group. The solid red line represents the sample of GCP students, and the blue dashed line represents the matched comparison group. The graphs also show the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions. The sample includes only students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during 10th or 11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
(B) Matching II, UPET Scores as Ability Measure Notes: This figure plots the distribution of the propensity score by groups- the solid red line represents the sample of GCP students, and the blue dashed line represents the comparison group (includes nonGCP students from other cities). The graph on the left shows the distributions before the matching, and the graph on the right shows the distributions after the matching. The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010, who took the UPET at any age.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Abadie, A., & Cattaneo, M. D. (2018). Econometric methods for program evaluation. Annual Review of Economics, 10, 465-503.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Abadie, A., & Imbens, G. 2002. Simple and bias-corrected matching estimators for average treatment effects. Working Paper 0283, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Abadie, A., & Imbens, G. W. 2008. On the failure of the bootstrap for matching estimators. Econometrica, 76(6), 1537-1557.
Abdulkadiroglu, Atila, Joshua D. Angrist and Parag A. Pathak. 2014. “The Elite Illusion: Achievement Effects at Boston and New York Exam Schools.” Econometrica 82(1): 137‐196.
All columns represent students' average level in the same locality concerning different outcome variables. The sample includes only students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who participated in the UPET during the 10th or 11th grade. * represents statistical significance at the 90% level.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
All scores are on a scale of 0-100. We included all compulsory subjects. The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade. * represents statistical significance at the 90% level.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Angrist Joshua, and Victor Lavy. 1999. “Using Maimonides’ Rule to Estimate the Effect of Class Size on Children’s Academic Achievement.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A1: Age of Taking UPET, GCP Participants and Comparison (A) 2006-2010 Graduates Sample Notes: This figure plots the number of students who participated in the UPET, by grade of taking the test, for the comparison group pull, i.e., students in cities without a GCP (upper panel, in blue) and GCP participants (lower panel, in red). The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010. Lower and upper bars are binned, i.e., 17 represents 17 and below, and 23 represents 23 and above.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A10: GCP Effects on the Rank of Average Annual Income Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on the rank average annual income in 2016-2018. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A14: GCP Effects on Bagrut Mean Composite Score, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on bagrut mean composite score, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A15: GCP Effects on Bagrut Math Score, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on bagrut math score, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A16: GCP Effects on Bagrut Hebrew Score, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on bagrut Hebrew score, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A17: GCP Effects on Bagrut Bible Score, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on bagrut Bible score, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A18: GCP Effects on MA Degree Attainment, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on MA degree attainment, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A19: GCP Effects on Ph.D. Degree Attainment, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on Ph.D. degree attainment, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A2: UPET Scores Distributions, by Grade of Testing, NonGifted (A) 2006-2010 Graduates Sample Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by grade of taking the test- the solid red line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 10th or 11th grade, and the blue dashed line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 12th grade. The graphs also show the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions. The sample includes only (non-gifted) students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A20: GCP Effects on Double Major BA, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on double Major in BA degree attainment, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A21: GCP Effects on STEM Double Major BA, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on stem double major BA degree attainment, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A22: GCP Effects on BA in Math, Statistics, and Computer Sciences, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on BA in Math, Statistics, and Computer Sciences, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A23: GCP Effects on BA in Engineering, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on BA in Engineering, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A24: GCP Effects on BA in Physical Sciences, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on BA in Physical Sciences, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A25: GCP Effects on Employment in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on employment in 2018, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A26: GCP Effects on Self Employment in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on selfemployment in 2018, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A27: GCP Effects on Salaried Worker Income in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on salaried workers' income in 2018, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A28: GCP Effects on Salaried Worker Income (employed=1) in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on salaried workers' income (employed=1) in 2018, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A29: GCP Effects on Income (employed=1) in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on Annual Income (employed=1) in 2018, by sample by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A3: UPET Scores Distributions, by Grade of Testing, GCP Participants (A) 2006-2010 Graduates Sample Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by grade of taking the test. The solid red line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 12th grade, and the blue dashed line represents the sample of students who took the test during after their 12th grade (during the military service or after). The graph also shows the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions. The sample includes only GCP participants who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A30: GCP Effects on Employment in High-Tech Services Sector in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on employment in the High-Tech services sector in 2018, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A31: GCP Effects on Employment in High-Tech Manufacturing Sector in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on employment in the High-Tech Manufacturing Sector in 2018, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A32: GCP Effects on Employment in the Knowledge Economy in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on employment in the knowledge economy in 2018, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 19922005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A33: GCP Effects on Employment in the Academic Sector in 2018, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on employment in the academic Sector in 2018, by sample. Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in the text. Main, larger cities denote a sample that restricts the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test-takers. Extend all denotes a sample that adds to the main sample UPET test-takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A34: GCP Effects on Marriage Before 30, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on marriage before 30, by sample. Main is the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in text. Main, larger cities is restricting the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test takers. Extend all is adding to the main sample UPET test takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A35: GCP Effects on Having Children Before 30, By Sample Notes: This figure plots point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on having children before 30, by sample by sample. Main is the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in text. Main, larger cities is restricting the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test takers. Extend all is adding to the main sample UPET test takers at all ages.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A4: Pre-treatment Middle-school Test Scores, Before and After Matching II, 2006-2010 Sample Notes: This figure plots the distribution of the Pre-treatment Middle-school Test (Metzav) test scores by groups. The solid red line represents the sample of GCP students, and the blue dashed line represents the comparison group (includes non-GCP students from other cities). The graphs on the left show the distributions before the matching, and the graphs on the right show the distributions after the matching (version II, which does not use the Metzav scores in the logit specification). The graphs also show the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions. The sample includes students who participated in the 8th-grade Metzav tests, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010, who took the UPET at any age.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A5: UPET Scores After Matching I, 2006-2010 Sample (A) Before Matching Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by group- the solid red line represents the sample of GCP students, and the blue dashed line represents the comparison group pull before the matching. The graphs also show the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, which is about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 20062010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A6: GCP Effects on Bagrut Test Scores (1-6 Scores), 20062010 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on Bagrut test scores (compulsory and most chosen elective subjects). These scores are normalized on a scale of 0-6. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students who participated in the 8th-grade Metzav tests, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A7: GCP Effects on Bagrut Test Scores (z Scores), 2006-2010 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on Bagrut test scores (compulsory and most chosen elective subjects). Scores are normalized based on the normal distribution (yearly). Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students who participated in the 8th-grade Metzav tests, about half of the students in cohorts of highschool graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A8: GCP Effects on Average Annual Income, in 2016-2018 Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on average annual income (in 100K NIS), in 2016-2018. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females).
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Appendix Figure A9: GCP Effects on the Log of Average Annual Income Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on the natural log of average annual income (in 100K NIS) in 2016-2018. Red dots and lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Bailey JA 2nd. “Self-image, self-concept, and self-identity revisited.” J Natl Med Assoc. 2003;95(5):383-386.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Balestraa Simone, Aurélien Sallinb and Stefan C. Wolterc. 2021 “High-Ability Influencers? The Heterogeneous Effects of Gifted Classmates.” Forthcoming, Journal of Human Resources.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Betts, Julian, and Jaimie Shkolnik. 2000. “The Effects of Ability Grouping on Student Achievement and Resource Allocation in Secondary Schools.” Economics of Education Review 19, no. 1: 1-15.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Bhatt, R. (2011). A review of gifted and talented education in the united states. Education Finance and Policy, 6(4):557–582.
Bhatt, R. (2012). The impacts of gifted and talented education. Technical report, Georgia State University. 31 Booij Adam S., Ferry Haan, Erik Plug. “Enriching Students Pays Off: Evidence from an Individualized Gifted and Talented Program in Secondary Education.” IZA DP No. 9757: February 2016.
Bhatt, Rachana. “The Impacts of Gifted and Talented Education.” SSRN Working Paper No. 09-11 (2009).
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Boettger, Eva Reid–Heiner, and Eva Reid. “Gifted education in various countries of Europe.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 33.3 (2005): 275-294.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Booij Adam S., Ferry Haan, Erik Plug. “Can Gifted and Talented Education Raise the Academic Achievement of All High-Achieving Students?” IZA DP No. 10836 June 2017.
Both Genders Table 4: University Degrees Attainment, and Field of Study, 2006-2010 Sample Panel A.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Brown, G. D., Gardner, J., Oswald, A. J., & Qian, J. (2008). Does wage rank affect employees’ well‐being?. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 47(3), 355-389.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Bui, S. A., Craig, S. G., and Imberman, S. A. (2014). Is gifted education a bright idea? Assessing the impact of gifted and talented programs on students. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 6(3):30 – 62.
Card, D. and Giuliano, L. (2014). Does gifted education work? For which students? Technical Report 20453, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Card, D., & Giuliano, L. (2016). Universal screening increases the representation of low-income and minority students in gifted education. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(48), 13678-13683.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Card, D., Mas, A., Moretti, E., & Saez, E. (2012). Inequality at work: The effect of peer salaries on job satisfaction. American Economic Review, 102(6), 2981-3003.
Colangelo, N., & Assouline, S.G. (2000). Counseling gifted students. In International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (2nd). Heller, K. A., Monks, F. J., Sternberg, R. J., & Subotnik, R. F. (Eds.). New York, NY: Elsevier Applied Science Publishers/Elsevier Science Publishers.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Column (1) shows the means among the treatment group, Column (2) shows the means among the comparison group, Columns (3) and (4) show the difference between the means and the corresponding p-value. All columns represent students' average level in the same locality concerning different outcome variables. The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade. That is about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010 * represents statistical significance at the 90% level.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Column (1) shows the means among the treatment group, Column (2) shows the means among the comparison group, Columns (3) and (4) show the difference between the means and the corresponding p-value. All columns represent the average level of peers (students in the same class in high school) concerning different outcome variables. The sample includes only students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who participated in the UPET during the 10th or 11th grade. * represents statistical significance at the 90% level.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Columns (1), (5), and (9) show the means among the treatment group, Columns (2), (6), and (10) show the means among the comparison group, Columns (3), (7), (11) and (4), (8), (12) show the difference between the means and the corresponded p-value. Total credits refer to the total credits accumulated in the study progroam. All other variables are indicator variables for five credits bagrut in the subject. The sample includes only students who participated in the Meitzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010. *represents statistical significance at the 90% level.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Dai, D. Y., & Rinn, A. N. (2008). The big-fish-little-pond effect: What do we know and where do we go from here?. Educational Psychology Review, 20(3), 283-317.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Davis, B., Engberg, J., Epple, D. N., Sieg, H., and Zimmer, R. (2010). Evaluating the gifted program of an urban school district using a modified regression discontinuity design. Working Paper 16414, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Davis, Billie, John Engberg, Dennis Epple, Holger Sieg, & Ron Zimmer. (2013). “Evaluating the Gifted Program of an Urban School District using a Modified Regression Discontinuity Design” Annals of Economics and Statistics, Vol.111/112, 2013.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Duflo, Esther, Pascaline Dupas, and Michael Kremer. 2011. “Peer Effects, Teacher Incentives, and the Impact of Tracking: Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation in Kenya,” American Economic Review, 101(5):1739-74.
Elsner, B. & Isphording, I. E. (2017). A Big Fish in a Small Pond: Ability Rank and Human Capital Investment. Journal of Labor Economics, 35(3), 787–828.
Figlio, David, and Marianne Page. 2002. “School Choice and the Distributional Effects of Ability Tracking: Does Separation Increase Equality?” Journal of Urban Economics 51, no. 3: 497-514. 32 Fredrickson, R. (1982). A multipotential approach to career planning. In Career information (pp. 42– 47). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Figure 1: UPET Scores Distributions, by Grade of Testing (A) 2006-2010 Sample Notes: This figure plots the distribution of UPET scores by grade of taking the test- the solid red line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 10th or 11th grade, and the blue dashed line represents the sample of students who took the test during their 12th grade. The graphs also show the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the equality of the probability distributions. The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 10: GCP Effects on Bagrut Test Scores, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on Bagrut test scores (all compulsory subjects). These scores are normalized on a scale of 0-6. The Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of highschool graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 11: GCP Effects on University Degree Attainment, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on university degree attainment. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 1011th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 12: GCP Effects on University Field of Studies, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on the university field of studies. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 1011th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 13: GCP Effects on Studies Timing, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on studies' timing. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 14: GCP Effect on Employment, by Sector in 2018, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on employment by Sector in 2018. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 15: GCP Effect on Annual Income, in 2018, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on annual income (in 100K NIS) in 2018. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 16: GCP Effect on Personal Outcomes, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on personal outcomes. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 2: Propensity Score Distributions, Before and After, 2006-2010 Sample (A) Matching I, Pre-Treatment Middle-school Test Scores as Ability Measure Notes: This figure plots the distribution of the propensity score by groups- the solid red line represents the sample of GCP students, and the blue dashed line represents the comparison group (includes nonGCP students from other cities). The graph on the left shows the distributions before the matching, and the graph on the right shows the distributions after the matching. The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 5: GCP Effects on Bagrut Test Scores, 2006-2010 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on Bagrut test scores (compulsory subjects). These scores are on a scale of 0-100. The red dots lines represent the sample of females, blue dots and lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey dots and lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students who participated in the 8th-grade Metzav tests, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 6: GCP Effects on University Degree Attainment, 2006-2010 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on university degree attainment. The red dots lines represent the sample of females, blue dots and lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey dots lines represent the entire sample (males and females).
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure 7: GCP Effects on University Field of Studies, 2006-2010 Sample Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on the university field of studies. Red dots lines represent the sample of females, blue dots lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey dots lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students who participated in the 8th-grade Metzav tests, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure A11: GCP Effect on Employment, by Sector in 2018, 1992-2005 Sample (Live in Israel in 2018) Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on employment by Sector in 2018. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure A12: GCP Effect on Annual Income, in 2018, 1992-2005 Sample (Live in Israel in 2018) Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on annual income in 2018. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 1011th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Figure A13: GCP Effect on Personal Outcomes, 1992-2005 Sample (Live in Israel in 2018) Notes: This figure plots the point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the effects of GCP on personal outcomes. Red lines represent the sample of females, blue lines represent the sample of males, and dark grey lines represent the entire sample (males and females). The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
GCP Comparison difference p-value (1) (2) (3) (4) Father education 13.64 13.56 0.08 0.15 Mother education 13.40 13.64-0.24 0.00* Number of Students in locality 4208.08 775.67 3432.41 0.00* Share Eligible for Bagrut 0.71 0.70 0.00 0.55 UPET Score (total) 564.47 565.11-0.65 0.70 UPET Score (quantitative) 112.68 112.79-0.11 0.66 UPET Score (verbal) 112.10 112.76-0.66 0.09* UPET Score (English) 109.42 109.26 0.16 0.63 Share 5 Credits Bagrut in English 0.41 0.46-0.05 0.00* Share 5 Credits Bagrut in Math 0.14 0.16-0.02 0.00* Share 5 Credits Bagrut in Physics 0.08 0.10-0.02 0.00* Bagrut Credit Units 18.35 21.00-2.65 0.00* BA Attainment 0.50 0.55-0.05 0.00* Number of Observations 510 510 Appendix Table A2: Localities with and without a GCP, 2006-2010 Sample Notes : This table presents complimentary descriptive statistics for the full sample (girls and boys).
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
GCP Comparison difference p-value (1) (2) (3) (4) Moved between 6th and 10th grade 0.16 0.21-0.05 0.14 Moved between 9th and 10th grade 0.04 0.07-0.03 0.13 Moved between 6th and 9th grade 0.14 0.17-0.03 0.38 Number of Observations 477 477 Appendix Table A4: Geographical Mobility, 2006-2010 Sample Notes : This table compares the share of students who moved between cities during the years before high school. Column (1) shows the means among the treatment group, Column (2) shows the means among the comparison group, Columns (3) and (4) show the difference between the means and the corresponding p-value. The sample includes only students who participated in the Metzav middle school test during their 8th grade, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010. * represents statistical significance at the 90% level.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Goodman, Joshua, Oded Gurantz and Jonathan Smith. 2020. “Take Two! SAT Retaking and College Enrolment Gaps.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 12(2):115-58.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Herrmann J, Schmidt I, Kessels U, Preckel F. 2016. “Big fish in big ponds: Contrast and assimilation effects on math and verbal self-concepts of students in within-school gifted tracks.” Br J Educ Psychol. Jun; 86(2):222-40.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Imbens Guido, 2004. “Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review”. The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 86, issue 1, 4-29.
Kerr, B. A., & Colangelo, N. (1988). The college plans of academically talented students. Journal of Counselling & Development. 67(1), 42–48.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Kerr, B., and Erb, C. (1991). Career counseling with academically talented students. Effects of a value-based intervention. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(3), 309–314.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Lavy Victor, 2015. “Do Differences in School’s Instruction Time Explain International Achievement Gaps in Math, Science, and Reading? Evidence from Developed and Developing Countries,” Economic Journal, November 125 (November), 397–424.
Lavy Victor, D. Paserman and A. Schlosser. 2012. “Inside the Black Box of Ability Peer Effects: Evidence from Variation in Low Achievers in the Classroom”, Economic Journal, March.
Lavy Victor, Olmo Silva and Felix Weinhardt, 2012. “The Good, The Bad and The Average: Evidence on Ability Peer Effects in Schools.” Journal of Labor Economics, April.
Lavy Victor. 2020a. “Expanding School Resources and Increasing Time on Task: Effects of a Policy Experiment in Israel on Student Academic Achievement and Behavior” Journal of the European Economic Association, February, 18(1):232–265.
Lavy Victor. 2020b. “Teachers’ Pay for Performance in the Long-Run: The Dynamic Pattern of Treatment Effects on Students’ Educational and Labor Market Outcomes in Adulthood.” The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 87, October: 2322–2355.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Lavy Victor. 2021. The Long-Term Consequences of Free School Choice.” Journal of the European Economic Association. Volume 19, Issue 3, June, Pages 1734–1781. 33 Lavy Victor, Assaf Kott, and Genia Rachkovski. 2022. “Does Remedial Education at Late Childhood Pay Off After All? Long-Run Consequences for University Schooling, Labor Market Outcomes and Inter-Generational Mobility.” Journal of Labor Economics, Volum 40, 1, pp. 239–282.
Leung , S. A. , Conoley , C . W. , and Sfheel , M.J . 1994. The career and educational aspirations of gifted high school students: A retrospective study. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72, 298-303.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Main denotes the main sample of 1992-2005 graduates, described in text. Extend12 is adding to the main sample UPET 12th grade test takers. Extend all is adding to the main sample UPET test takers at all ages. Main, larger cities is restricting the comparison group to include only students from larger cities (with 200 or more students in the cohort). * represents statistical significance at the 90% level.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Main\Extend all exact cohort is identical to the main\extend all sample, except that we match exactly the cohort. The sample ‘Main\Extend all 1992-2000’ is a subset of the ‘main\extend all’ sample, including only the older cohorts (1992-2000). * represents statistical significance at the 90% level.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Marsh H. and Rhonda G. Craven. (2002). “The Pivotal Role of Frames of Reference in Academic Self-Concept Formation: The "Big Fish-Little Pond" Effect.” Developmental Psychology, January, Volume 2.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Marsh, H. W. (2005). Self-concept theory, measurement and research into practice: the role of selfconcept in educational psychology. Leicester, UK: Education Section of the British Psychological Society.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Marsh, H. W., and Parker, J. W. (1984). Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don't learn to swim as well? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(1), 213–231.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Marsh, H. W., Byrne, B. M., & Shavelson, R. J. (1988). A multifaceted academic self-concept: Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 366–380.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Marsh, H., Seaton, M., Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., Hau, O’Mara, A., & Craven, R. (2008). The Big Fish Little Pond Effect Stands Up to Critical Scrutiny: Implications for Theory, Methodology, and Future Research. Educational Psychology Review, 20(3), 319–350.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Meredith C. Frey and Douglas K. Detterman. 2004. “Scholastic Assessment or g? The Relationship Between the Scholastic Assessment Test and General Cognitive Ability.” Psychological Science, Volume 15 - Number 6: 373:378 Lavy Victor and Analia Schlosser. 2011. “Mechanism and Impacts of Gender Peer Effects at School.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, April.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Mogstad M., L. Kirkeboen, and E. Leuven, "College as a Marriage Market", March 2021, Draft.
Monks, F.J. & Pfluger, R. (2005). Gifted Education in 21 European Countries: Inventory and Perspective. Radboud University Nijmengen. Retrieved from https://www.bmbf. de/pub/gifted_education_21_eu_countries.pdf Murphy, Richard and Felix. Weinhardt. 2020. “Top of The Class: The Importance of Ordinal Rank” The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 87(6), pp. 2777–2826.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
N Share Working in the Knowledge Economy University Degree Field of Study (1) (2) No STEM 27,128 20.02 Biological or Physical sciences 5,111 41.67 Math, CS, Stats 7,428 63.46 Engineering 13,607 57.09 Math, CS, Stats and Engineering 1,538 69.70 Number of Observations 54,812 Appendix Table A16: STEM Studies and the Knowledge Economy Notes: This table shows descriptive statistics on the interaction between STEM studies and working in the Knowledge Economy. The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 1011th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
ONLINE APPENDIX Quantitative Verbal English Total (1) (2) (3) (4) A. GCP Participants Math 0.30 0.11-0.02 0.19 Science 0.16 0.19 0.17 0.22 English 0.15 0.03 0.17 0.13 Hebrew 0.03 0.08-0.01 0.05 B. Comparison Pull Math 0.48 0.27 0.17 0.39 Science 0.31 0.29 0.23 0.33 English 0.20 0.24 0.38 0.29 Hebrew 0.23 0.32 0.19 0.30 Appendix Table A1: Correlation between UPET Scores and 8th Grade Test Scores, 2006-2010 Sample Notes : This table presents correlations between the UPET scores and 8th-grade test scores. The sample includes students who participated in the 8th-grade Metzav tests, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010. Panel A includes only GCP participants, and panel B includes only students from cities with no GCP. Columns represent UPET scores, and rows represent 8th grade test scores.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Outcome: Mean Bagrut Math Bagrut BA Double Major PHD Math, CS, Stats (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Estimated Effect-0.0271-0.0730 0.0980 0.0221 0.0446 SE 0.0141 0.0294 0.0167 0.0118 0.0147 SE Bootstrap 0.0147 0.0287 0.0167 0.0120 0.0147 Appendix Table A6: Standard Errors Calculations, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This table presents standard errors calculations. The upper panel compares the standard errors that we use in our descriptive tables (7, A12, A13) with the correction offered by Abadie and Imbens (2008). The lower panel compares the standard errors used in our main figures (5-11) with bootstrapped standard errors. We use our main sample (1992-2005 graduates) described in the text.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Outcome: Mean Bagrut Math Bagrut BA Double Major PHD Math, CS, Stats (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Replacement-0.054* -0.112* 0.113* 0.031* 0.047* N: 1,825 (1,825) (0.014) (0.029) (0.018) (0.013) (0.016) Caliper = 0.05-0.027* -0.057* 0.112* 0.028* 0.043* N: 1,691 (1,691) (0.015) (0.030) (0.017) (0.012) (0.015) Caliper = 0.2-0.050* -0.080* 0.126* 0.037* 0.051* N: 1,777 (1,777) (0.014) (0.030) (0.017) (0.011) (0.015) Appendix Table A5: Alternative Matching Methods, 1992-2005 Sample Notes: This table presents the main results of this paper derived based on the alternative matching methods.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Outcome: Mean Score Math Hebrew Bible English History Literature Civil Studies Matching on: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) I, 8th Grade Test Scores (2006-2010) 0.21-1.50* 0.17-0.74 1.77* -0.05-0.37-1.83* N: 510 (510) (0.37) (0.86) (0.38) (0.55) (0.33) (0.52) (0.60) (0.65) II, UPET Scores (2006-2010) -1.03* -3.52* -0.56-1.02* 0.17-0.32 0.24-2.49* N: 409 (409) (0.33) (0.90) (0.37) (0.58) (0.26) (0.53) (0.62) (0.64) III, 5th Grade Test Scores (2009-2013) 0.01-1.48* 0.58-2.06* 1.00* -0.64 0.00-1.65* N: 483 (483) (0.40) (0.89) (0.48) (0.90) (0.36) (0.58) (0.78) (0.67) IIII, 5th&8th Grade Test Scores (2006-2013) 0.18-1.04* 0.03-1.38* 1.56* -0.14 0.51-1.88* N: 999 (999) (0.26) (0.59) (0.28) (0.45) (0.24) (0.38) (0.48) (0.47) Panel B.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Pfeiffer, S. I. 2003. Psychological considerations in raising a healthy gifted child. In P. OlszewskiKubilius, L. Limburg-Weber, & S. I. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Early gifts: Recognizing and nurturing children’s talents (pp. 173–185). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Plucker, J. A., Robinson, N. M., Greenspon, T. S., Feldhusen, J. F., McCoach, D. B., & Subotnik, R. F. (2004). It's Not How the Pond Makes You Feel, but Rather How High You Can Jump. American Psychologist, 59(4), 268–269.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Praekelt, F., Zeidner, M., Goetz, T., & Schleyer, E. (2008). Female big fish swimming against the tide: The BLUE and gender ratio in special gifted classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 78-96. 34 Preckel F, Götz T, Frenzel A. 2010. “Ability grouping of gifted students: effects on academic selfconcept and boredom.” Br J. Educ Psychol. Sep; 80 pp:451-72.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Rinn, Anne N. "Effects of programmatic selectivity on the academic achievement, academic selfconcepts, and aspirations of gifted college students." Gifted Child Quarterly 51.3 (2007): 232245.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Robinson, N. M., Lanzi, R. G., Weinberg, R. A., Ramey, S. L., & Ramey, C. T. (2002). Factors associated with high academic competence in former Head Start children at third grade. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 281–294.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Rosenbaum Paul R. and Donald B. Rubin, 1983. “The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects”, Biometrika, Volume 70, April 1983, Pages 41–55.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Sajjadi, Seyed Hossein, F. Gillian Rejsikind and Bruce M. Shore “Is Multipotentiality a Problem or Not? A New Look at the Data”, June 2001, High Ability Studies 12(1):27-43.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Sampson, James P. Jr. and Ashley K. Chason “Helping Gifted and Talented Adolescents and Young Adults: Psychoeducational Theory, Research, and Best Practices.” In Handbook of Giftedness in Children, Edited by Steven I. Pfeiffer, 2008, Springer.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Shani-Zinovich, I., (2007). Personal-Emotional Profile and ‘Ego Identity Status among Gifted Adolescents.” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Haifa, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department o Psychology.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Shani-Zinovich, I., & Zeidner, M. (2009). ‘On being a gifted adolescent: Developmental, affective and social issues.” In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 195–220). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
The sample includes only GCP participants from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
The sample includes students from the cohorts of high-school graduates in 1992-2005 who took the UPET during their 10-11th grade.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
The sample includes students who participated in the 8th-grade Metzav tests, about half of the students in cohorts of high-school graduates in 2006-2010.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
The sample is our main (1992-2005 graduates) sample described in the text. Replacement refers to PSM identical to the one described in the text, with the only change we allow matching with replacement. Caliper = 0.05 (Caliper = 0.2) refers to PSM identical to the one described in the text, with the only change of allowing smaller (larger) caliper. * represents statistical significance at the 90% level. Panel A.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Tymms, Peter. "A test of the big fish in a little pond hypothesis: An investigation into the feelings of seven-year-old pupils in school." School Effectiveness and School Improvement 12.2 (2001): 161-181.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Valentine, J. C., DuBois, D. L., & Cooper, H. (2004) “The relations between self-beliefs and academic achievement: A systematic review” Educational Psychologist (39), pp.111– 133.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Vrignaud, Pierre, Denis Bonora, and Annie Dreux. “Counselling the gifted and talented in France: minimizing gift and maximizing talent.” International Journal for the advancement of counselling 27.2 (2005): 211-228.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Zeidner, Moshe, and E. J. Schleyer. “The Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect for Academic Self-Concept, Test Anxiety, and School Grades in Gifted Children.” Contemp Educ Psychol. 1999 Oct;24(4):305-329.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Zeidner, Moshe, and Inbal Shani-Zinovich . A comparison of multiple facets of self-concept in gifted vs. non-identified Israeli students. High ability studies, 35 Zeidner, Moshe, Inbal Shani-Zinovich, Gerald Matthews, and Richard Roberts. 2005. “Assessing emotional intelligence in gifted and non-gifted high school students: outcomes depend on the measure.” Intelligence 33 (4):369–391.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Zeidner, Moshe, and Inbal Shani-Zinovich. (2013) .“Research on Personality and Affective Dispositions of Gifted Children: The Israeli Scene.” Gifted and Talented International, 28:1-2, 35-50.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

Cocites

Documents in RePEc which have cited the same bibliography

Urban food retail in Africa: The case of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. (2013). minten, bart ; Assefa, Thomas ; Abebe, Girum ; Woldu, Thomas ; Lamoot, Indra .
In: ESSP working papers.
RePEc:fpr:esspwp:50.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Improving stove evaluation using survey data: Who received which intervention matters. (2013). Pfaff, Alexander ; Mueller, Valerie ; Liu, Yaping ; Smith, Kirk R. ; Peabody, John.
In: Ecological Economics.
RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:93:y:2013:i:c:p:301-312.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Racial Disparities in Job Finding and Offered Wages. (2011). Spenkuch, JÃƒÂ¶rg ; Pager, Devah ; Fryer, Roland G..
In: MPRA Paper.
RePEc:pra:mprapa:33607.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Impact evaluation of Indias â€˜Yeshasviniâ€™ communityâ€based health insurance programme. (2010). Aggarwal, Aradhna.
In: Health Economics.
RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:19:y:2010:i:s1:p:5-35.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Impact of farmer field schools on agricultural productivity and poverty in East Africa. (2010). Nkonya, Ephraim ; Kato, Edward ; Davis, Kristin ; Mekonnen, Daniel Ayalew ; Miiro, Richard ; Odendo, Martins ; Nkuba, Jackson .
In: IFPRI discussion papers.
RePEc:fpr:ifprid:992.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
The Real Effects of Financial Constraints: Evidence from a Financial Crisis. (2009). Harvey, Campbell ; Campello, Murillo ; Graham, John.
In: NBER Working Papers.
RePEc:nbr:nberwo:15552.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Corporate Debt Maturity and the Real Effects of the 2007 Credit Crisis. (2009). Campello, Murillo ; Laranjeira, Bruno ; Weisbenner, Scott ; Almeida, Heitor .
In: NBER Working Papers.
RePEc:nbr:nberwo:14990.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Labour Supply Effects of a Subsidised Old-Age Part-Time Scheme in Austria. (2009). Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf ; Hofer, Helmut ; Graf, Nikolaus .
In: NRN working papers.
RePEc:jku:nrnwps:2009_06.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Labour Supply Effects of a Subsidised Old-Age Part-Time Scheme in Austria. (2009). Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf ; Hofer, Helmut ; Graf, Nikolaus .
In: Economics working papers.
RePEc:jku:econwp:2009_06.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Labour Supply Effects of a Subsidised Old-Age Part-Time Scheme in Austria. (2009). Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf ; Hofer, Helmut ; Graf, Nikolaus .
In: IZA Discussion Papers.
RePEc:iza:izadps:dp4239.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
The Effectiveness of Private Voucher Education: Evidence from Structural School Switches. (2009). Repetto, Andrea ; Mizala, Alejandra ; Lara E., Bernardo.
In: Documentos de Trabajo.
RePEc:edj:ceauch:263.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Labour and income effects of caregiving across Europe: an evaluation using matching techniques. (2008). LÃƒÂ³pez NicolÃƒÂ¡s, ÃƒÂngel ; Garcia-Gomez, Pilar ; Casado-Marin, David ; Lopez-Nicolas, ngel.
In: Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers.
RePEc:yor:hectdg:08/23.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Social assistance and poverty reduction in Moldova, 2001-2004 an impact evaluation. (2008). Verme, Paolo.
In: Policy Research Working Paper Series.
RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:4658.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
An optimization-based matching procedure.. (2008). Rivera, Jorge ; Rau, TomÃƒÂ¡s ; Cayupi, Jorge Rivera ; Binder, Tomas Rau ; Krell, Rodrigo .
In: Working Papers.
RePEc:udc:wpaper:wp279.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Does knowledge diffusion between university and industry increase innovativeness?. (2008). LÃ¶Ã¶f, Hans ; BrostrÃ¶m, Anders ; Loof, Hans ; Brostrom, Anders.
In: The Journal of Technology Transfer.
RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:33:y:2008:i:1:p:73-90.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Understanding Low Average Returns to Education in Africa: The Role of Heterogeneity across Education Levels and the Importance of Political and Economic Reforms. (2008). Uwaifo Oyelere, Ruth.
In: IZA Discussion Papers.
RePEc:iza:izadps:dp3766.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Are Oligarchs Productive? Theory and Evidence. (2008). Gorodnichenko, Yuriy ; Grygorenko, Yegor.
In: IZA Discussion Papers.
RePEc:iza:izadps:dp3282.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Estimation of causal effects of fertility on economic wellbeing: evidence from rural Vietnam. (2008). arpino, bruno ; Aassve, Arnstein.
In: ISER Working Paper Series.
RePEc:ese:iserwp:2007-27.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Estimating the causal effect of fertility on economic wellbeing: Data requirements, identifying assumptions and estimation methods. (2008). arpino, bruno ; Aassve, Arnstein.
In: Working Papers.
RePEc:don:donwpa:013.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Identifying Structural Effects in Nonseparable Systems Using Covariates. (2008). White, Halbert ; Chalak, Karim.
In: Boston College Working Papers in Economics.
RePEc:boc:bocoec:734.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Rosca Participation in Benin: a Commitment Issue. (2008). Dagnelie, Olivier ; Lemay-Boucher, Philippe.
In: UFAE and IAE Working Papers.
RePEc:aub:autbar:735.08.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
The Adoption of Water Conservation and Intensification Technologies and Farm Income: A Propensity Score Analysis for Rice Farmers in Northern Ghana. (2008). Abdulai, Awudu ; Faltermeier, Liane.
In: 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida.
RePEc:ags:aaea08:6354.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Driven to Drink. Sin Taxes Near a Border. (2007). Beatty, Timothy ; EinarSommervoll, Dag ; Timothy K. M. Beatty, Erling Roed Larsen, .
In: Discussion Papers.
RePEc:ssb:dispap:507.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Childcare voucher and labour market behaviour: Experimental evidence from Finland. (2007). Viitanen, Tarja.
In: Working Papers.
RePEc:shf:wpaper:2007011.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Teen Smoking and Birth Outcomes. (2007). Wallace, Sally ; Walker, MaryBeth ; Tekin, Erdal.
In: NBER Working Papers.
RePEc:nbr:nberwo:13386.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Public versus Private Provision of Daycare: An Experimental Evaluation. (2007). Viitanen, Tarja.
In: IZA Discussion Papers.
RePEc:iza:izadps:dp3009.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Trade, Standards and Poverty. Evidence from Senegal. (2007). Swinnen, Johan ; Maertens, Miet.
In: 106th Seminar, October 25-27, 2007, Montpellier, France.
RePEc:ags:eaa106:7924.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Health shocks, employment and income in the Spanish labour market. (2006). LÃƒÂ³pez NicolÃƒÂ¡s, ÃƒÂngel ; Garcia-Gomez, Pilar ; Nicolas, Angel Lopez ; Pilar García Gomez, .
In: Health Economics.
RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:15:y:2006:i:9:p:997-1009.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
An Introduction to Alternative Methods in Program Impact Evaluation. (2006). Nguyen, Cuong.
In: MPRA Paper.
RePEc:pra:mprapa:24900.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators. (2006). Imbens, Guido ; Abadie, Alberto.
In: NBER Technical Working Papers.
RePEc:nbr:nberte:0325.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Employment promotion measures and the quality of the job match for persons with disabilities. (2006). MuÃƒÂ±oz-BullÃƒÂ³n, Fernando ; Malo, Miguel ; Muoz-Bullon, Fernando .
In: Hacienda PÃºblica EspaÃ±ola.
RePEc:hpe:journl:y:2006:v:179:i:4:p:79-111.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Vertical Integration in the U.S. Cable Industry. (2006). Suzuki, Ayako.
In: ISER Discussion Paper.
RePEc:dpr:wpaper:0675.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Regional Disparity in ICT Adoption: an Empirical Evaluation of The Effects of Subsidies in Italy. (2006). carboni, oliviero ; Atzeni, Gianfranco.
In: Working Paper CRENoS.
RePEc:cns:cnscwp:200608.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
The Effects of Subsidies on Investment: an Empirical Evaluation on ICT in Italy. (2006). carboni, oliviero ; Atzeni, Gianfranco.
In: Revue de l'OFCE.
RePEc:cai:reofsp:reof_073_0279.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Estimation of Average Treatment Effects With Misclassification. (2006). Lewbel, Arthur.
In: Boston College Working Papers in Economics.
RePEc:boc:bocoec:556.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Analysis of job-training effects on Korean women. (2005). Lee, Myoung-jae.
In: Journal of Applied Econometrics.
RePEc:jae:japmet:v:20:y:2005:i:4:p:549-562.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Learning but Not Earning? The Value of Job Corps Training for Hispanic Youths. (2005). Flores-Lagunes, Alfonso ; Gonzalez, Arturo ; Neumann, Todd .
In: IZA Discussion Papers.
RePEc:iza:izadps:dp1638.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Covariate selection for non-parametric estimation of treatment effects. (2005). Waernbaum, Ingeborg ; de Luna, Xavier.
In: Working Paper Series.
RePEc:hhs:ifauwp:2005_004.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Propensity score matching, a distance-based measure of migration, and the wage growth of young men. (2005). Li, Xianghong ; Ham, John ; Reagan, Patricia B..
In: Staff Reports.
RePEc:fip:fednsr:212.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Job matching quality effects of employment promotion measures for people with disabilities. (2005). MuÃƒÂ±oz-BullÃƒÂ³n, Fernando ; Malo, Miguel.
In: DEE - Working Papers. Business Economics. WB.
RePEc:cte:wbrepe:wb055315.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
A Simple Ordered Data Estimator For Inverse Density Weighted Functions. (2005). Schennach, Susanne ; Lewbel, Arthur.
In: Boston College Working Papers in Economics.
RePEc:boc:bocoec:557.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Reelection Incentives and Political Corruption: Evidence from Brazilian Audit Reports. (2005). Finan, Frederico ; Ferraz, Claudio.
In: 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI.
RePEc:ags:aaea05:19544.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century Worlds Fairs. (2005). Moser, Petra.
In: American Economic Review.
RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:95:y:2005:i:4:p:1214-1236.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Matching as a Tool to Decompose Wage Gaps. (2004). ÃƒÂ‘opo, Hugo.
In: IZA Discussion Papers.
RePEc:iza:izadps:dp981.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Sequential Matching Estimation of Dynamic Causal Models. (2004). Lechner, Michael.
In: IZA Discussion Papers.
RePEc:iza:izadps:dp1042.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Estimation of Average Treatment Effects With Misclassification. (2004). Lewbel, Arthur.
In: Econometric Society 2004 North American Winter Meetings.
RePEc:ecm:nawm04:210.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Efficient Semiparametric Estimation of Quantile Treatment Effects. (2004). Firpo, Sergio.
In: Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings.
RePEc:ecm:nasm04:605.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Matching using Semiparametric Propensity Scores. (2004). Lehrer, Steven ; Kordas, Gregory.
In: Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings.
RePEc:ecm:nasm04:441.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
PESTICIDES AND CHILD HEALTH: EVIDENCE FROM HISPANIC CHILDREN IN THE U.S.. (2004). MacInnis, Bo.
In: 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO.
RePEc:ags:aaea04:20184.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper
Matching as a Tool to Decompose Wage Gaps. (2003). ÃƒÂ‘opo, Hugo.
In: Middlebury College Working Paper Series.
RePEc:mdl:mdlpap:0406.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Coauthors

Authors registered in RePEc who have wrote about the same topic

Report date: 2025-02-28 12:57:54 || Missing content? Let us know

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.

Gifted Children Programs’ Short and Long-Term Impact : Higher Education, Earnings, and the Knowledge-Economy. (2022). Lavy, Victor ; Kambhampati, Uma ; Goldstein, Yoav.
In: The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS).
RePEc:wrk:warwec:1396.
Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Cited: 0

Cites: 136

Cocites: 50

Coauthors: 0

Citations

Citations received by this document

This document has not been cited yet.

References

References cited by this document

Cocites

Documents in RePEc which have cited the same bibliography

Coauthors

Authors registered in RePEc who have wrote about the same topic

Report date: 2025-02-28 12:57:54 || Missing content? Let us know

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.