文献类型：期刊文献

英文题名：A comparison study on responsiveness of three mechanisms to affirmative action in school choice

作者：Chen, Yajing[1];Huang, Yanyue[2];Jiao, Zhenhua[2];Zhao, Yunfan[3]

机构：[1]East China Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Business, Shanghai 200237, Peoples R China;[2]Shanghai Univ Int Business & Econ, Sch Business, Shanghai 201620, Peoples R China;[3]Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Math, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA

年份：2022

卷号：50

期号：5

起止页码：488

外文期刊名：OPERATIONS RESEARCH LETTERS

收录：;EI(收录号：20223012400484);WOS:【SCI-EXPANDED(收录号:WOS:000864442000001)】；

语种：英文

外文关键词：School choice; Affirmative action; Responsiveness; Deferred acceptance mechanism; Top trading cycles mechanism; Boston mechanism

摘要：This note provides a comparison study on responsiveness of three popular mechanisms to affirmative action in school choice. When the exogenous school choice environment gives full priority to the minority, the student-proposing deferred acceptance (DA) mechanism is responsive to both the quota-based and reserve-based affirmative action policies. In comparison with DA mechanism, the top trading cycles (TTC) mechanism is responsive to neither the quota-based nor the reserve-based affirmative action even when the exogenous school choice environment gives full priority to the minority. When each minority student has higher priority than each majority student at each school, the TTC mechanism is responsive to the quota-based affirmative action. However, under the environment as above, the Boston mechanism is not responsive to the quota-based affirmative action. (C) 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.