Browsing by Author "Jennings, Amanda Brooke"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Are you more economic than a first grader?: A mixed methods approach in a common pool resources experiment(Department of Applied Economics and Statistics, University of Delaware, Newark, DE., 2016-01) Jennings, Amanda Brooke;The purpose of this mixed methods study is to investigate the similarities and differences between children, lay adults, and economics experts in a common pool resources game, thereby providing initial insight into children’s naïve economic theories. Quantitative data is drawn from participation in an artifactual field experiment adapted from Knapp & Murphy’s (2010) common pool resource game. Qualitative data is drawn from semi-structured interviews. By incorporating mixed methods within the framework of a common pool resources game, I capture both behaviors during the game and insight into reasons for those behaviors. I use a binary logistic model to predict participants’ choices to play the game vs. take an allocation of a resource. The sample, N=47, consists of three purposefully selected groups: children, novice adults (no advanced economics knowledge), and expert adults (graduate level economics knowledge). Consistent with the literature, males are more likely to play the game and females are more likely to take the allocation. While the literature is mixed with respect to how children behave when compared to novice adults, this study finds children are significantly more likely to play the game than novice adults and equally likely to play the game as expert adults. Qualitative data provides possible explanations for these findings. Findings have implications for economic education curriculum design and instruction.Item Exploring the autonomous economic world of children: a mixed methods study of kids' naïve economic theories incorporating ethnographic and behavioral economics methodologies(University of Delaware, 2017) Jennings, Amanda BrookeChildren construct meaning from their economic experiences in the form of naïve theories and use these theories to explain the relationships between their actions and the outcomes. Inevitably, due to their lack of economic literacy, these theories will be incomplete. Through curriculum design that acknowledges and addresses these naïve theories, we can help children develop theories consistent with expert theories. As a first step, however, we need to understand what children’s naïve economic theories look like, and what factors inform their development. My dissertation is an investigation of children’s naïve economic theories about resource allocation. In this multiphase, mixed methods study, there are two overlapping phases conducted over one academic year: in Phase 1, I utilized ethnographic methods to develop an initial model of children’s naïve theory of resource allocation; in Phase 2, I used adaptations of classic experimental economics games to test and revise my initial model. In this study I find children’s naïve economic theories are based on their experiences allocating resources in their own economic world. Additionally, when children participate in the adult economic world, they apply these same rules for resource allocation. These findings about children’s naïve economic theories have implications for future research as well as curriculum development in economic education. Through understanding children’s current thinking, we can better design curriculum to guide naïve theory development to be consistent with expert economic theory.