A new joint study by the University of Haifa and the University of Michigan found that the more a person feels that he is competing against a larger group of people, the lower his level of performance
The larger the number of examinees, the lower the average score, according to a series of new joint studies by researchers from the University of Haifa and the University of Michigan. "The findings of the study also shed light on the discussion regarding the size of classes in the education system: in small classes students will have more motivation to 'compete' and achieve higher achievements," said Dr. Avishalom Tor, editor of the study from the University of Haifa.
The series of studies, which Dr. Thor conducted together with Dr. Stephen Garcia from the University of Michigan, sought to test whether a larger number of competitors in different fields would affect the motivation and performance of the single competitor even when the number of competitors does not affect the expected value of winning the competition.
In the first study, the researchers examined the scores of the American SAT exam (a university entrance exam, similar to thepsychometric in Israel) in the 50 states of the United States. The researchers divided the number of examinees in each country by the number of sites where the exam was held and thus arrived at the average number of examinees at each site. The researchers took into account a variety of differences in relevant socioeconomic variables between the countries. From the findings it emerged that the lower the average score of the students per country was, the higher the average score of that country was.
Since it is difficult to make assumptions based on averages calculated at the level of countries, a second, more focused study was carried out. In this study, the results of 1383 students from the University of Michigan were collected in a cognitive test called CRT. The data was taken from 22 different dates of the same exam over 3 years, in which case it is known exactly how many examinees there were in each exam and what was the average score of each date. In this case too, the same relationship was found - the fewer there were examinees at a specific time, the higher the average grade.
The next experiment was even more controlled. In the third study, 74 students were asked to take a short test, with each examinee taking it separately from the others. Some students were told that they were being tested as part of a group of 10 people and others that they were part of a group of 100 people. They were also told that if they were part of the 20% who solved the test in the fastest way - without compromising the correctness of the answers, of course - they would win five dollars. The findings revealed that the students who thought they were competing against 9 other people completed the study in a significantly faster average time than those who thought they were competing against 99 others.
Additional experiments even directly examined how the competitors judge their chances of winning, as well as interpersonal differences, and showed that the change in competitive motivation directly results from a decrease in the importance of social comparison - the process in which people evaluate themselves through comparison with others - with the increase in the number of competitors.
"The research findings have implications for almost all areas of life. They shed light on the debate regarding the size of classes in the education system, because in small classes students will be more motivated to 'compete' and reach higher achievements. The findings also affect the world of work - salespeople, for example, will achieve lower achievements if they work in a large warehouse compared to working in small groups," concluded Dr. Tor.
6 תגובות
Michael Rothschild,
It seems to me that from the above research it appears that the competitive motivation is a relevant variable regarding the student's level of study.
But it is clear to everyone (and in this regard I agree with your words above), that there is no doubt that creating an interest in studies and a desire for self-improvement that does not depend on the environment are of great fundamental importance. Hence, the level of competitive motivation cannot be the only variable that determines the level of study/achievement, nor even the fundamental parameter in this matter, and it certainly does not predict everything in this matter.
However, I would be careful not to discount the importance of competitive motivation. In my opinion - the competitive motivation should not be underestimated - it is probably an important variable in connection with the determination of the educational level and the achievements in the tests.
It is possible to think, in my opinion, that for a certain part of the students it will turn out that creating an interest in studies and a desire to improve oneself is the only significant parameter, and everything else is negligible. I would not be surprised if these are students who, in addition to their natural abilities, are also the most talented in the specific field being studied. On the other hand, it can be estimated that even among these students, if they are in a homogeneous group in terms of their abilities, it is the competitive motivation that will affect the overall level of the group and also differentiate the students from themselves to a significant degree, beyond the relative priorities arising from the level of individual subject matter and ability. It is also possible to think that with regard to other groups of students (with average ability, or in conditions where the group is homogeneous in terms of individual abilities) competitive motivation will be an important variable in determining the level of study/achievement in tests both at the overall level of the group and in differentiating between the students themselves.
It seems that from the above research it appears that the competitive motivation is a relevant variable regarding the student's level of study.
The research also shows that the competitive motivation itself changes, among other things, as a function of the number of competitors, hence the title of the article.
But it is clear that the number of competitors (the number of other examinees/the number of other students in the class, etc.) is not the only parameter that determines the level of competitive motivation.
Competitive motivations can be created regardless of the number of competitors, so a class with limited students is not the only way to create competitive motivation for the purpose of improving the level of study/achievement in tests. This insight is important, since the costs associated with the creation of sects with limited students are heavy in terms of the education system, and usually the system is not able to allow them, certainly not on a systemic or large scale.
There is something elusive here. In the first two experiments described, the difference could definitely be due to the size of the class during the study, and not necessarily during the test. I don't think anyone will fall off their chair if it turns out that what caused the difference is that people simply learn better in small classes.
In the third experiment, which did only examine the difference in the number of examinees, it was not stated whether the examinees' scores were indeed higher in the smaller class. It was only said that the examinees finished the exam faster. In my opinion, this could be due to the fact that a test taker in a large class will be afraid of finishing among the first and will go over his test again to check for mistakes, and anyone who has ever finished a test when he was the first in the class knows what I'm talking about.
I think they checked the least interesting question.
After all, it is more important to know the conditions under which the student will learn best than to know the conditions under which his existing knowledge will be better expressed.
There may be a correlation between the two but it has not been proven.
In general, it may be that the solution to both problems is not in creating a more competitive external environment but in creating an interest in studies and a desire for self-improvement that does not depend on the environment. Obviously this is easier said than done but in my experience it is possible.
Proof that the solution is what was always clear, that studying in small groups is better than studying in classes with many students.
Shabbat Shalom
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Is it possible to provide a link to the full study? Interesting to read