Teaching and incentives: Substitutes or complements?

Abstract

Interventions to promote learning are often categorized into supply- and demand-side approaches. In a randomized experiment to promote learning about COVID-19 among Mozambican adults, we study the interaction between a supply and a demand intervention, respectively: teaching via targeted feedback, and providing financial incentives to learners. In theory, teaching and learner-incentives may be substitutes (crowding out one another) or complements (enhancing one another). Experts surveyed in advance predicted a high degree of substitutability between the two treatments. In contrast, we find substantially more complementarity than experts predicted. Combining teaching and incentive treatments raises COVID-19 knowledge test scores by 0.5 standard deviations, though the standalone teaching treatment is the most cost-effective. The complementarity between teaching and incentives persists in the longer run, over nine months post-treatment. © 2022

Author(s)

Arlete Mahumane

Year

2022

Countries

Mozambique

Language

English

Research Method

Quantitative

Article Type

Peer-Reviewed Articles

Keywords

COVID-19 | Adult education | Intervention evaluation | teaching methods | Excel Import

Full Citation Style

Mahumane, A. (2022). Teaching and incentives: Substitutes or complements?. Strategic Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2022.102317
Mahumane, A., 2022. Teaching and incentives: Substitutes or complements?. Strategic Research Journal. Available at: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2022.102317>
Mahumane, A.. "Teaching and incentives: Substitutes or complements?." Strategic Research Journal (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2022.102317
Mahumane A. Teaching and incentives: Substitutes or complements?. Strategic Research Journal. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2022.102317

Research Team

Arlete Mahumane

Arlete Mahumane

© 2026 AERD Database System. All Rights Reserved. Developed by Strategic Technologies.