The effects of incentives to exercise on student performance in college

Abstract

What are the effects of on-campus recreational sports and exercise on educational outcomes of university students? We randomize financial incentives to encourage students’ participation in on-campus sports and exercise in two cohorts of college freshmen. Incentives increased participation frequency by 47% and improved grades by 0.14 standard deviations in the first cohort. The incentives were less effective in promoting participation and did not improve grades in the second cohort. In the first cohort, students primarily substituted off-campus with on-campus physical activities and seemed more able to integrate exercising with studying. The incentives appear to have improved grades by enhancing the effectiveness of studying and encouraging students to spend more time in class.

Introduction

On-campus recreational sports and exercise are an integral part of university life in many countries. Universities offer these programs and facilities to promote an active lifestyle, to improve the well-being of students, and to attract new students. However, these amenities are costly and often compete with funds for other activities such as teaching or research. Jacob, McCall, and Stange (2017) document that non-profit 4-year colleges in the US spend on average 50 cents on recreational amenities for each dollar spent on academics. While particularly less academic-oriented students value such amenities in their enrollment decision (Jacob et al., 2017), it is unclear whether and how these amenities contribute to the learning experience of enrolled students. Understanding the question of how on-campus recreational sports influence students’ educational attainment provides further evidence on how physical activity influences human capital accumulation. What is more, this understanding is important for universities and policy makers to plan and justify on-campus recreational facilities and opportunities.

We conduct an experimental study to estimate the effects of incentivizing on-campus physical activity on student achievement. We randomize financial incentives to participate in on-campus recreational sports and exercise among two cohorts of freshmen students at a Swiss university. Students can earn up to 200 CHF (approximately 220 USD) if they use athletic facilities or partake in recreational programs twice per week during their first year. Prior studies have found that similar financial incentives over shorter periods can raise exercise levels of college students (Acland, Levy, 2015, Charness, Gneezy, 2009).¹

Moreover, we investigate several potential mechanisms through which increased exercise on-campus could influence educational outcomes. First, we investigate characteristics of activities beyond frequency, including location, timing, and type. For instance, studies in neuroscience suggest that exercise immediately and persistently increases cognitive performance (Hillman, Erickson, Kramer, 2008, Hötting, Röder, 2013, Lambourne, Tomporowski, 2010). Thus, studying might be more effective if preceded by an exercise session. Second, we explore students’ use of time. Time spent exercising requires a reduction in time devoted to other activities. Grades might deteriorate if less time is spent studying (Stinebrickner & Stinebrickner, 2008). If on-campus sports replace other potentially harmful leisure activities such as drinking, grades might increase.² However, some evidence suggests a positive association between physical activity and alcohol consumption (Musselman & Rutledge, 2010). Third, we investigate several self-reported measures of health and emotional well-being. Benefits of physical activity on these dimensions have been extensively documented.³ These benefits could lead to gains in productivity and therefore improved educational outcomes.

Our study draws on three unique data sources to answer the above questions. First, we collect comprehensive on-campus sports and exercise information with a student ID scanner system at the entrance of the university sports facilities. Second, we use administrative student records for educational outcomes. Third, we administer online surveys at the end of each semester to obtain information on sports and exercise off campus, on students’ use of time, and on health and well-being. These surveys allow us to shed light on the mechanisms through which educational outcomes may be affected. All three data sources are linked using a unique student identifier.

Our results suggest a substantial impact of on-campus exercise on educational outcomes. Cash incentives raised on-campus sports by 47% or 0.26 facility visits per week in the first cohort. Incentives were less effective at increasing participation in the second cohort, in particular for male students. As a consequence, the incentives did not increase on-campus sports enough for a sufficiently strong first stage in this cohort. Therefore, we focus on the first cohort in our main analysis of educational outcomes.

The incentives improved grades of the treatment group by on average 0.14 standard deviations compared to those of the control group. Additional evidence from surveys suggests that the incentives did not raise the overall amount of physical activity but led to a substitution of on-campus activity for off-campus activity. On-campus activity increased mostly in the afternoon. The survey data also provides evidence that students spend more time in class and possibly more time studying. These findings indicate that incentivizing on-campus exercise may encourage the integration of exercising and studying during the day. This, in turn, may enhance student performance because of more efficient studying and/or more time spent in class. In line with the finding that overall activity does not seem to change, health outcomes and emotional well-being do not appear to explain educational gains. Effects on grades are concentrated among male students, students who were more active prior to joining the university, and students at higher quantiles of the grade distribution.

This study relates to a growing body of economic literature on the effects of sports and physical activity on educational and labor market outcomes. Existing results suggest positive associations of physical activity with cognitive and non-cognitive development of children (Felfe et al., 2016), with school grades (Lipscomb, 2007, Pfeifer, Cornelißen, 2010, Rees, Sabia, 2010), as well as with labor market success of adults (Barron, Ewing, Waddell, 2000, Eide, Ronan, 2001, Ewing, 2007, Kosteas, 2012, Lechner, 2009, Pfeifer, Cornelißen, 2010, Rooth, 2011, Stevenson, 2010).⁴ A limitation of the studies mentioned above is how they tackle the problem of self-selection into physical activity. Individuals who practice sports or exercise differ from those who do not (Farrell, Shields, 2002, Schneider, Becker, 2005). These differences might be related to other life outcomes as well, confounding the effect of sports on educational and labor market outcomes. Existing studies have used instrumental variable, selection on observables, or panel data methods to address this endogeneity problem. However, concerns regarding a causal interpretation of the findings remain.

This study makes three contributions to the literature. First, to the best of our knowledge, we are the first to use an experimental design to identify the causal effect of incentivizing recreational sports and exercise on educational outcomes of university students. Second, we provide a comprehensive picture of this effect and the channels through which these effects operate. This is possible with our novel data that combines detailed information on exercise behavior with administrative student data and rich survey data. Third, we add to the literature on the effectiveness of financial incentives to form exercise habits, providing results of a longer lasting intervention.

A more recent study has since used an experimental research design similar to ours. Cappelen, Charness, Ekström, Gneezy, and Tungodden (2017) encouraged a cohort of Norwegian college students with financial incentives to engage in more physical activities in 2016. Their results support our findings as their incentives appear to have improved academic performance by 0.15 standard deviations. They argue that increased self-control might be an important mechanism through which increased exercise improves academic importance. Nonetheless, they cannot rule out cognition and time-use as alternative mechanisms.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Section 2 introduces the institutional setting and describes the intervention and randomization design. Section 3 describes the data and reports descriptive statistics. Section 4 presents the effects of the incentives on exercising on campus. Section 5 presents the effects on study outcomes, discusses potential mechanisms, and explores effect heterogeneity. Section 6 concludes.