Skip to main content

Table 11 Results of the heterogeneity analysis of the impact of boarding on students' cognitive abilities

From: The impact of boarding schools on the development of cognitive and non-cognitive abilities in adolescents

variables

WISC IQ score

Fluid intelligence

Crystal intelligence

Similarities

Digit span

Coding

Matrix reasoning

 

OLS

IV

OLS

IV

OLS

IV

OLS

IV

OLS

IV

OLS

IV

OLS

IV

 

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

(13)

(14)

Panel A: Sample of male students

 Boarding

0.448

9.128**

0.132

1.494**

-0.205

0.998

-0.205

0.998

0.346

2.756**

-0.604

0.295

0.654*

1.432*

 

(1.418)

(3.991)

(0.250)

(0.609)

(0.362)

(1.046)

(0.362)

(1.046)

(0.422)

(1.110)

(0.399)

(0.918)

(0.378)

(0.867)

 Observations

238

238

238

238

238

238

238

238

238

238

238

238

238

238

 Phase I F-statistic values

 

36.872

 

36.872

 

36.872

 

36.872

 

36.872

 

36.872

 

36.872

Panel B: Sample of female students

 Boarding

-0.584

-1.371

-0.336

-0.275

0.512

0.167

0.512

0.167

-0.102

1.284

-0.674

-0.456

-0.231

-1.652

 

(1.764)

(7.339)

(0.299)

(1.193)

(0.404)

(1.796)

(0.404)

(1.796)

(0.427)

(1.934)

(0.431)

(1.831)

(0.402)

(1.771)

 Observations

234

234

234

234

234

234

234

234

234

234

234

234

234

234

 Phase I F-statistic values

 

9.784

 

9.784

 

9.784

 

9.784

 

9.784

 

9.784

 

9.784

Panel C: Sample of left-behind children

 Boarding

-0.140

9.751*

0.116

1.652**

-0.458

1.006

-0.458

1.006

0.671

2.952**

-0.008

1.855

-0.315

0.147

 

(1.653)

(5.256)

(0.266)

(0.828)

(0.438)

(1.344)

(0.438)

(1.344)

(0.425)

(1.385)

(0.434)

(1.255)

(0.354)

(1.159)

 Observations

240

240

240

240

240

240

240

240

240

240

240

240

240

240

 Phase I F-statistic values

 

21.891

 

21.891

 

21.891

 

21.891

 

21.891

 

21.891

 

21.891

Panel D: Sample of non-left-behind children

 Boarding

1.909

-1.566

0.045

-0.770

0.925***

1.363

0.925***

1.363

0.079

1.470

-0.623

-3.446**

0.680*

-0.336

 

(1.305)

(5.544)

(0.243)

(0.913)

(0.338)

(1.436)

(0.338)

(1.436)

(0.389)

(1.535)

(0.383)

(1.551)

(0.353)

(1.311)

 Observations

232

232

232

232

232

232

232

232

232

232

232

232

232

232

 Phase I F-statistic values

 

15.299

 

15.299

 

15.299

 

15.299

 

15.299

 

15.299

 

15.299

Panel E: Sample with poor family conditions

 Boarding

-1.441

6.109

-0.280

0.809

-0.012

1.311

-0.012

1.311

-0.255

1.519

-1.246**

0.064

0.661

0.842

 

(1.942)

(5.490)

(0.311)

(0.863)

(0.465)

(1.329)

(0.465)

(1.329)

(0.527)

(1.543)

(0.587)

(1.327)

(0.596)

(1.288)

 Observations

144

144

144

144

144

144

144

144

144

144

144

144

144

144

 Phase I F-statistic values

 

15.818

 

15.818

 

15.818

 

15.818

 

15.818

 

15.818

 

15.818

Panel F: Sample with good family conditions

 Boarding

0.940

7.132

0.085

1.257

0.283

0.630

0.283

0.630

0.530

2.884**

-0.385

0.197

0.111

0.690

 

(1.365)

(5.126)

(0.233)

(0.831)

(0.324)

(1.304)

(0.324)

(1.304)

(0.366)

(1.402)

(0.346)

(1.282)

(0.318)

(1.174)

 Observations

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

328

 Phase I F-statistic values

 

19.995

 

19.995

 

19.995

 

19.995

 

19.995

 

19.995

 

19.995

  1. Source: Author’s survey
  2. Standard deviations in parentheses * p < 0.1. ** p < 0.05. *** p < 0.01