Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Working Knowledge
Business Research for Business Leaders
  • Browse All Articles
  • Popular Articles
  • Cold Call Podcast
  • Managing the Future of Work Podcast
  • About Us
  • Book
  • Leadership
  • Marketing
  • Finance
  • Management
  • Entrepreneurship
  • All Topics...
  • Topics
    • COVID-19
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Finance
    • Gender
    • Globalization
    • Leadership
    • Management
    • Negotiation
    • Social Enterprise
    • Strategy
  • Sections
    • Book
    • Podcasts
    • HBS Case
    • In Practice
    • Lessons from the Classroom
    • Op-Ed
    • Research & Ideas
    • Research Event
    • Sharpening Your Skills
    • What Do You Think?
  • Browse All
    The Impact of Penalties for Wrong Answers on the Gender Gap in Test Scores
    17 Sep 2018Working Paper Summaries

    The Impact of Penalties for Wrong Answers on the Gender Gap in Test Scores

    by Katherine B. Coffman and David Klinowski
    Multiple-choice questions on standardized tests are widely seen as objective measures of student ability, but the common practice of assessing penalties for wrong answers may generate gender bias. This study documents the impact of a policy change that removed penalties for wrong answers on the national college entry exam in Chile. This simple change reduced the gender gap in test performance by 9 percent.
    LinkedIn
    Email

    Author Abstract

    Multiple-choice exams play a critical role in university admissions across the world. A key question is whether imposing penalties for wrong answers on these exams deters guessing from women more than men, disadvantaging female test takers. We consider data from a large-scale, high-stakes policy change that removed penalties for wrong answers on the national college entry exam in Chile. We find that the policy change significantly reduced a large gender gap in questions skipped. It also impacted gender gaps in performance, leading to increased representation of women in the top percentiles of achievement.

    Paper Information

    • Full Working Paper Text
    • Working Paper Publication Date: August 2018
    • HBS Working Paper Number: HBS Working Paper #19-017
    • Faculty Unit(s): Negotiation, Organizations & Markets
      Trending
        • 23 May 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        Face Value: Do Certain Physical Features Help People Get Ahead?

        • 30 May 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        Can AI Predict Whether Shoppers Would Pick Crest or Colgate?

        • 31 May 2023
        • HBS Case

        From Prison Cell to Nike’s C-Suite: The Journey of Larry Miller

        • 02 May 2023
        • What Do You Think?

        How Should Artificial Intelligence Be Regulated—if at All?

        • 25 Jan 2022
        • Research & Ideas

        More Proof That Money Can Buy Happiness (or a Life with Less Stress)

    Katherine B. Coffman
    Katherine B. Coffman
    Piramal Associate Professor of Business Administration
    Contact
    Send an email
    → More Articles
    Find Related Articles
    • Gender
    • Prejudice and Bias
    • Education
    • Chile

    Sign up for our weekly newsletter

    Interested in improving your business? Learn about fresh research and ideas from Harvard Business School faculty.
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
    ǁ
    Campus Map
    Harvard Business School Working Knowledge
    Baker Library | Bloomberg Center
    Soldiers Field
    Boston, MA 02163
    Email: Editor-in-Chief
    →Map & Directions
    →More Contact Information
    • Make a Gift
    • Site Map
    • Jobs
    • Harvard University
    • Trademarks
    • Policies
    • Accessibility
    • Digital Accessibility
    Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College