IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/miceco/v14y2026i1p95-117.html

The Carrot or the Stick? An Economic Model of Optimal Course Difficulty, Student Effort and Cheating Using AI

Author

Listed:
  • Nodir Adilov
  • Jeffrey W. Cline

Abstract

Despite the transformative effects large language models are having on education, the current economic models of student cheating do not factor in the impact of a highly capable artificial intelligence (AI). We attempt to fill this gap by constructing an economic model of student effort, course difficulty and cheating using AI on a per-course requirement basis. We find that to maximize student knowledge, there are two viable approaches to instructor selection of course difficulty. The ‘carrot’ approach is characterized by low course difficulty to incentivize effort with a high grade, while the ‘stick’ approach is characterized by high course difficulty to motivate enough effort to pass the course. We also find that student effort falls as the capability of AI increases. As a result, AI can eliminate the strategy of using high course difficulty to motivate students as a viable pedagogical option beyond a certain threshold level of AI capability. JEL Classifications: I21, I23, A22

Suggested Citation

  • Nodir Adilov & Jeffrey W. Cline, 2026. "The Carrot or the Stick? An Economic Model of Optimal Course Difficulty, Student Effort and Cheating Using AI," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 14(1), pages 95-117, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:miceco:v:14:y:2026:i:1:p:95-117
    DOI: 10.1177/23210222251387434

    Download full text from publisher

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ; ; ; ;

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:miceco:v:14:y:2026:i:1:p:95-117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.