High-Ability Influencers? The Heterogeneous Effects of Gifted Classmates

References

1. 1. Alan, Sule,
   2. Seda Ertac, and
   3. Ipek Mumcu

   . 2018. “Gender stereotypes in the classroom and effects on achievement.” Review of Economics and Statistics 100 (5):876–890.

   OpenUrl
2. 1. Anelli, Massimo and
   2. Giovanni Peri

   . 2017. “The effects of high school peers’ gender on college major, college performance and income.” Economic Journal 129 (618):553–602.

   OpenUrl
3. 1. Angrist, Joshua

   . 2014. “The perils of peer effects.” Labour Economics 30:98–108.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
4. 1. Angrist, Joshua and
   2. Kevin Lang

   . 2004. “Does school integration generate peer effects? Evidence from Boston’s Metco Program.” American Economic Review 94 (5):1613–1634.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
5. 1. Antshel, Kevin,
   2. Stephen Faraone,
   3. Katharine Maglione,
   4. Alysa Doyle,
   5. Ronna Fried,
   6. Larry Seidman, and
   7. Joseph Biederman

   . 2008. “Temporal stability of ADHD in the high-IQ population: results from the MGH Longitudinal Family Studies of ADHD.” Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 47 (7):817–825.

   OpenUrl
6. 1. Avilova, Tatyana and
   2. Claudia Goldin

   . 2018. “What can UWE do for economics?” AEA Papers & Proceedings 108:186–190.

   OpenUrl
7. 1. Balestra, Simone,
   2. Beatrix Eugster, and
   3. Helge Liebert

   . forthcoming. “Peers with special needs: effects and policies.” Review of Economics and Statistics.
8. 1. Bianco, Margarita,
   2. Bryn Harris,
   3. Dorothy Garrison-Wade, and
   4. Nancy Leech

   . 2011. “Gifted girls: Gender bias in gifted referrals.” Roeper Review 33 (3):170–181.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
9. 1. Black, Sandra,
   2. Paul Devereux, and
   3. Kjell Salvanes

   . 2013. “Under pressure? The effect of peers on outcomes of young adults.” Journal of Labor Economics 31 (1):119–153.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
10. 1. Booij, Adam,
    2. Ferry Haan, and
    3. Erik Plug

    . 2016. “Enriching students pays off: Evidence from an individualized gifted and talented program in secondary education.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 9757, IZA.
11. 1. Booij, Adam,
    2. Edwin Leuven, and
    3. Hessel Oosterbeek

    . 2017. “Ability peer effects in university: evidence from a randomized experiment.” Review of Economic Studies 84 (2):547–578.

    OpenUrl
12. 1. Brenøe, Anne and
    2. Ulf Zölitz

    . forthcoming. “Exposure to more female peers widens the gender gap in STEM participation.” Journal of Labor Economics.
13. 1. Brown, Thomas,
    2. Philipp Reichel, and
    3. Donald Quinlan

    . 2009. “Executive function impairments in high IQ adults with ADHD.” Journal of Attention Disorders 13 (2):161–167.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
14. 1. Buckles, Kasey

    . 2019. “Fixing the leaky pipeline: strategies for making economics work for women at every stage.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 33 (1):43–60.

    OpenUrl
15. 1. Bui, Sa,
    2. Steven Craig, and
    3. Scott Imberman

    . 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.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
16. 1. Burke, Mary and
    2. Tim Sass

    . 2013. “Classroom peer effects and student achievement.” Journal of Labor Economics 31 (1):51–82.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
17. 1. Buser, Thomas,
    2. Noemi Peter, and
    3. Stefan Wolter

    . 2017. “Gender, willingness to compete and career choices along the whole ability distribution.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 10976, IZA.
18. 1. Card, David and
    2. Laura Giuliano

    . 2014. “Does gifted education work? For which students?” NBER Working Paper No. 20453, National Bureau of Economic Research.
19. 1. Card, David and
    2. Laura Giuliano

    . 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.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
20. 1. Card, David and
    2. Abigail Payne

    . 2017. “High school choices and the gender gap in STEM.” NBER Working Paper No. 23769, National Bureau of Economic Research.
21. 1. Carlana, Michela

    . 2019. “Implicit stereotypes: Evidence from teachers’ gender bias.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 134 (3):1163–1224.

    OpenUrl
22. 1. Carrell, Scott,
    2. Richard Fullerton, and
    3. James West

    . 2009. “Does your cohort matter? Measuring peer effects in college achievement.” Journal of Labor Economics 27 (3):439–464.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
23. 1. Carrell, Scott,
    2. Mark Hoekstra, and
    3. Elira Kuka

    . 2018. “The long-run effects of disruptive peers.” American Economic Review 108 (11):3377–3415.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
24. 1. Carrell, Scott,
    2. Marianne Page, and
    3. James West

    . 2010. “Sex and science: how professor gender perpetuates the gender gap.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 125 (3):1101–1144.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
25. 1. Carrell, Scott,
    2. Bruce Sacerdote, and
    3. James West

    . 2013. “From natural variation to optimal policy? The importance of endogenous peer group formation.” Econometrica 81 (3):855–882.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
26. 1. Chetty, Raj,
    2. John Friedman,
    3. Nathaniel Hilger,
    4. Emmanuel Saez,
    5. Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, and
    6. Danny Yagan

    . 2011. “How does your kindergarten classroom affect your earnings? Evidence from Project STAR.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 126 (4):1593–1660.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 1. Cools, Angela,
    2. Raquel Fernandez, and
    3. Eleonora Patacchini

    . 2019. “Girls, boys, and high achievers.” NBER Working Paper No. 25763, National Bureau of Economic Research.
28. 1. Deary, Ian,
    2. Steve Strand,
    3. Pauline Smith, and
    4. Cres Fernandes

    . 2007. “Intelligence and educational achievement.” Intelligence 35 (1):13–21.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
29. 1. Dee, Thomas

    . 2007. “Teachers and the gender gaps in student achievement.” Journal of Human Resources 42 (3):528–554.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
30. 1. Der, Geoff,
    2. David Batty, and
    3. Ian Deary

    . 2009. “The association between IQ in adolescence and a range of health outcomes at 40 in the 1979 US National Longitudinal Study of Youth.” Intelligence 37 (6):573–580.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. 1. Duflo, Esther,
    2. Pascaline Dupas, and
    3. Michael Kremer

    . 2011. “Peer effects, teacher incentives, and the impact of tracking: evidence from a randomized evaluation in Kenya.” American Economic Review 101 (5):1739–1774.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
32. 1. Ellison, Glenn and
    2. Ashley Swanson

    . 2010. “The gender gap in secondary school mathematics at high achievement levels: evidence from the American Mathematics Competitions.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 24 (2):109–128.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
33. 1. Eugster, Beatrix and
    2. Raphael Parchet

    . 2019. “Culture and taxes.” Journal of Political Economy 127 (1):296–337.

    OpenUrl
34. 1. Firpo, Sergio,
    2. Nicole Fortin, and
    3. Thomas Lemieux

    . 2009. “Unconditional quantile regressions.” Econometrica 77 (3):953–973.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
35. 1. Fryer, Roland and
    2. Steven Levitt

    . 2010. “An empirical analysis of the gender gap in mathematics.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2 (2):210–240.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
36. 1. Gneezy, Uri,
    2. Muriel Niederle, and
    3. Aldo Rustichini

    . 2003. “Performance in competitive environments: Gender differences.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 118 (3):1049–1074.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
37. 1. Gomez, Rapson,
    2. Vasileios Stavropoulos,
    3. Alasdair Vance, and
    4. Mark Griffiths

    . 2019. “Gifted children with ADHD: how are they different from non-gifted children with ADHD?” International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction :1–15.
38. 1. Gottfried, Allen,
    2. Adele Eskeles Gottfried,
    3. Kay Bathurst, and
    4. Diana Wright Guerin

    . 1994. Gifted IQ: Early Developmental Aspects – The Fullerton Longitudinal Study. Springer Science & Business Media.
39. 1. Hoxby, Caroline

    . 2000. “Peer effects in the classroom: learning from gender and race variation.” NBER Working Paper No. 7867, National Bureau of Economic Research.
40. 1. Hyde, Janet and
    2. Janet Mertz

    . 2009. “Gender, culture, and mathematics performance.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106 (22):8801–8807.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
41. 1. Iriberri, Nagore and
    2. Pedro Rey-Biel

    . 2019. “Competitive pressure widens the gender gap in performance: Evidence from a two-stage competition in mathematics.” Economic Journal 129 (620):1863–1893.

    OpenUrl
42. 1. Jackson, Kirabo,
    2. Rucker Johnson, and
    3. Claudia Persico

    . 2016. “The effects of school spending on educational and economic outcomes: Evidence from school finance reforms.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 131 (1):157–218.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
43. 1. Karpinski, Ruth,
    2. Audrey Kinase Kolb,
    3. Nicole Tetreault, and
    4. Thomas Borowski

    . 2018. “High intelligence: A risk factor for psychological and physiological overexcitabilities.” Intelligence 66:8–23.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
44. 1. Lavy, Victor,
    2. Daniele Paserman, and
    3. Analia Schlosser

    . 2011. “Inside the black box of ability peer effects: evidence from variation in the proportion of low achievers in the classroom.” Economic Journal 122 (559):208–237.

    OpenUrl
45. 1. Lavy, Victor and
    2. Analia Schlosser

    . 2011. “Mechanisms and impacts of gender peer effects at school.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 3 (2):1–33.

    OpenUrlPubMed
46. 1. Lavy, Victor,
    2. Olmo Silva, and
    3. Felix Weinhardt

    . 2012. “The good, the bad, and the average: evidence on ability peer effects in schools.” Journal of Labor Economics 30 (2):367–414.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
47. 1. Lynn, Richard and
    2. Gerhard Meisenberg

    . 2010. “National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations.” Intelligence 38 (4):353–360.

    OpenUrl
48. 1. Lynn, Richard and
    2. Tatu Vanhanen

    . 2012. “National IQs: a review of their educational, cognitive, economic, political, demographic, sociological, epidemiological, geographic and climatic correlates.” Intelligence 40 (2):226–234.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
49. 1. Mahone, Mark,
    2. Kathleen Hagelthorn,
    3. Laurie Cutting,
    4. Linda Schuerholz,
    5. Shelley Pelletier,
    6. Christine Rawlins,
    7. Harvey Singer, and
    8. Martha Denckla

    . 2002. “Effects of IQ on executive function measures in children with ADHD.” Child Neuropsychology 8 (1):52–65.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
50. 1. Make, Matthew and
    2. Jonathan Plucker

    . 2018. “Creativity.” In Handbook of Giftedness in Children: Psychoeducational Theory, Research, and Best Practices, edited by Steven Pfeiffer. Springer International Publishing, 247–270.
51. 1. Manski, Charles

    . 1993. “Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem.” Review of Economic Studies 60 (3):531–542.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
52. 1. Mansour, Hani,
    2. Daniel Rees,
    3. Bryson Rintala, and
    4. Nathan Wozny

    . 2018. “The effects of professor gender on the post-graduation outcomes of female students.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 11820, IZA.
53. 1. Mayer, John,
    2. Donna Perkins,
    3. David Caruso, and
    4. Peter Salovey

    . 2001. “Emotional intelligence and giftedness.” Roeper Review 23 (3):131–137.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
54. 1. McDermott, Paul,
    2. Marley Watkins, and
    3. Anna Rhoad

    . 2014. “Whose IQ is it? Assessor bias variance in high-stakes psychological assessment.” Psychological Assessment 26 (1):207–214.

    OpenUrl
55. 1. Montolio, Daniel and
    2. Pere Taberner

    . 2018. “Gender differences under test pressure and their impact on academic performance: a quasi-experimental design.” IEB Working Paper 2018/21, IEB.
56. 1. Morgenroth, Thekla,
    2. Michelle Ryan, and
    3. Kim Peters

    . 2015. “The motivational theory of role modeling: How role models influence role aspirants’ goals.” Review of General Psychology 19 (4):465–483.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
57. 1. Morin, Louis-Philippe

    . 2015. “Do men and women respond differently to competition? Evidence from a major education reform.” Journal of Labor Economics 33 (2):443–491.

    OpenUrl
58. 1. Mouganie, Pierre and
    2. Yaojing Wang

    . 2020. “High performing peers and female STEM choices in school.” Journal of Labor Economics 38 (3):805–841.

    OpenUrl
59. 1. Neisser, Ulric,
    2. Gwyneth Boodoo,
    3. Thomas Bouchard,
    4. Wade Boykin,
    5. Nathan Brody,
    6. Stephen Ceci,
    7. Diane Halpern,
    8. John Loehlin,
    9. Robert Perloff,
    10. Robert Sternberg, and
    11. Susana Urbina

    . 1996. “Intelligence: knowns and unknowns.” American Psychologist 51 (2):77–101.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
60. 1. Newman, Tina

    . 2008. “Assessment of giftedness in school-age children using measures of intelligence or cognitive abilities.” In Handbook of Giftedness in Children: Psychoeducational Theory, Research, and Best Practices, edited by Steven Pfeiffer. Springer International Publishing, 161–176.
61. 1. Niederle, Muriel and
    2. Lise Vesterlund

    . 2007. “Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much?” Quarterly Journal of Economics 122 (3):1067–1101.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
62. 1. Niederle, Muriel and
    2. Lise Vesterlund

    . 2011. “Gender and competition.” Annual Review of Economics 3 (1):601–630.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
63. 1. Nosek, Brian,
    2. Frederick Smyth,
    3. Natarajan Sriram,
    4. Nicole Lindner,
    5. Thierry Devos,
    6. Alfonso Ayala,
    7. Yoav Bar-Anan,
    8. Robin Bergh,
    9. Huajian Cai,
    10. Karen Gonsalkorale,
    11. Selin Kesebir,
    12. Norbert Maliszewski,
    13. Félix Neto,
    14. Eero Olli,
    15. Jaihyun Park,
    16. Konrad Schnabel,
    17. Kimihiro Shiomura,
    18. Bogdan Tudor Tulbure,
    19. Reinout Wiers,
    20. Monika Somogyi,
    21. Nazar Akrami,
    22. Bo Ekehammar,
    23. Michelangelo Vianello,
    24. Mahzarin Banaji, and
    25. Anthony Greenwald

    . 2009. “National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106 (26):10593–10597.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
64. 1. OECD

    . 2017. Education at a Glance 2017: OECD Indicators. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris (France).
65. 1. Peters, Scott and
    2. Michael Stuart Matthews

    . 2016. “Gifted education research from the economists’ perspective: What have we learned?” Journal of Advanced Academics 27 (2):150–161.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
66. 1. Petersen, Jennifer

    . 2013. “Gender differences in identification of gifted youth and in gifted program participation: A meta-analysis.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 38 (4):342–348.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
67. 1. Peyre, Hugo,
    2. Franck Ramus,
    3. Maria Melchior,
    4. Anne Forhan,
    5. Barbara Heude, and
    6. Nicolas Gauvrit

    . 2016. “Emotional, behavioral and social difficulties among high-IQ children during the preschool period: Results of the EDEN mother-child cohort.” Personality and Individual Differences 94:366–371.

    OpenUrl
68. 1. Pope, Devin and
    2. Justin Sydnor

    . 2010. “Geographic variation in the gender differences in test scores.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 24 (2):95–108.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
69. 1. Porter, Catherine and
    2. Danila Serra

    . 2019. “Gender differences in the choice of major: The importance of female role models.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics.
70. 1. Preckel, Franzis,
    2. Thomas Goetz,
    3. Reinhard Pekrun, and
    4. Michael Kleine

    . 2008. “Gender differences in gifted and average-ability students: Comparing girls’ and boys’ achievement, self-concept, interest, and motivation in mathematics.” Gifted Child Quarterly 52 (2):146–159.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
71. 1. Saygin, Perihan

    . 2020. “Gender bias in standardized tests: evidence from a centralized college admissions system.” Empirical Economics 59:1037–1065.

    OpenUrl
72. 1. Silverman, Linda Kreger

    . 2018. “Assessment of giftedness.” In Handbook of Giftedness in Children: Psychoeducational Theory, Research, and Best Practices, edited by Steven Pfeiffer. Springer International Publishing, 183–207.
73. 1. Sternberg, Robert,
    2. Linda Jarvin, and
    3. Elena Grigorenko

    . 2010. Explorations in Giftedness. Cambridge University Press.
74. 1. Vardardottir, Arna

    . 2015. “The impact of classroom peers in a streaming system.” Economics of Education Review 49:110–128.

    OpenUrl
75. 1. Whitmore, Diane

    . 2005. “Resource and peer impacts on girls’ academic achievement: evidence from a randomized experiment.” AEA Papers & Proceedings 95 (2):199–203.

    OpenUrl
76. 1. Zeidner, Moshe,
    2. Inbal Shani-Zinovich,
    3. Gerald Matthews, and
    4. Richard Roberts

    . 2005. “Assessing emotional intelligence in gifted and non-gifted high school students: outcomes depend on the measure.” Intelligence 33 (4):369–391.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
77. 1. Zölitz, Ulf and
    2. Jan Feld

    . 2019. “The effect of peer gender on major choice in business school.” Department of Economics Working Paper No. 270, University of Zurich.