Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection
Barrett, The Honors College at Arizona State University proudly showcases the work of undergraduate honors students by sharing this collection exclusively with the ASU community.
Barrett accepts high performing, academically engaged undergraduate students and works with them in collaboration with all of the other academic units at Arizona State University. All Barrett students complete a thesis or creative project which is an opportunity to explore an intellectual interest and produce an original piece of scholarly research. The thesis or creative project is supervised and defended in front of a faculty committee. Students are able to engage with professors who are nationally recognized in their fields and committed to working with honors students. Completing a Barrett thesis or creative project is an opportunity for undergraduate honors students to contribute to the ASU academic community in a meaningful way.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5
Filtering by
- Creators: Department of Economics
Description
In this work we analyze just what makes the topic of third party voting so intriguing to voters and why it is different than voting for one of the major parties in American politics. First, we will discuss briefly the history of politics in America and what makes it exciting. Next, we will outline some of the works by other political and economic professionals such as Hotelling, Lichtman and Rietz. Finally, using the framework described beforehand this paper will analyze the different stances that voters, candidates, and others involved in the political process of voting have regarding the topic of third party voting.
ContributorsMcElroy, Elizabeth (Co-author) / Beardsley, James (Co-author) / Foster, William (Thesis director) / Goegan, Brian (Committee member) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
The NBA operates under a unique system with both forms of the salary cap. The league has a team salary cap that sets a limit that teams can spend on their entire roster. The NBA has a soft cap and a luxury tax system, meaning if teams spend over a determined amount, they are taxed for the salaries in excess. The league also has a player salary cap. The 1999 NBA collective bargaining agreement first introduced the individual player salary cap in the league. This cap sets a limit on what the best players can earn, otherwise known as the maximum contract. In an economic system with a soft team cap, the introduction of the player salary cap has important implications. The stated outcome of such a salary cap is to improve competitive balance and better distribute star players throughout the league. This study evaluated the 1990-2015 regular seasons to measure the impact of the player salary cap on competitive balance, the distribution of team payrolls, and the dispersion of star players. In accordance with the Rottenberg's invariance hypothesis, the player salary cap has hurt the players and benefited the owners by redistributing income from one party to the other, without impacting the distribution of talent in the league. The rule change has not affected competitive balance, while team payrolls have converged and star players have become more dispersed throughout the league. These changes hurt the league overall, preventing the maximization of revenues. Despite this inefficiency, the chance of the league moving to eliminate the player salary cap is low.
ContributorsWelu, Brian Andrew (Author) / Marburger, Daniel (Thesis director) / Goegan, Brian (Committee member) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor) / W. P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
Description
Our research encompassed the prospect draft in baseball and looked at what type of player teams drafted to maximize value. We wanted to know which position returned the best value to the team that drafted them, and which level is safer to draft players from, college or high school. We decided to look at draft data from 2006-2010 for the first ten rounds of players selected. Because there is only a monetary cap on players drafted in the first ten rounds we restricted our data to these players. Once we set up the parameters we compiled a spreadsheet of these players with both their signing bonuses and their wins above replacement (WAR). This allowed us to see how much a team was spending per win at the major league level. After the data was compiled we made pivot tables and graphs to visually represent our data and better understand the numbers. We found that the worst position that MLB teams could draft would be high school second baseman. They returned the lowest WAR of any player that we looked at. In general though high school players were more costly to sign and had lower WARs than their college counterparts making them, on average, a worse pick value wise. The best position you could pick was college shortstops. They had the trifecta of the best signability of all players, along with one of the highest WARs and lowest signing bonuses. These were three of the main factors that you want with your draft pick and they ranked near the top in all three categories. This research can help give guidelines to Major League teams as they go to select players in the draft. While there are always going to be exceptions to trends, by following the enclosed research teams can minimize risk in the draft.
ContributorsValentine, Robert (Co-author) / Johnson, Ben (Co-author) / Eaton, John (Thesis director) / Goegan, Brian (Committee member) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Department of Information Systems (Contributor) / School of Accountancy (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
Grade inflation in modern universities across the United States has been documented since the 1960's and shows no signs of disappearing soon. Responses to this trend have ranged from mild worry to excessive panic. However, is the concern justified? How significant are the effects, if any, of grade inflation on students? Specifically, does grade inflation on the aggregate level have any effect on how much an individual will learn from their courses? This is precisely the question my project hoped to address. Grade inflation in U.S. colleges has played a central role in student-teacher relationships and the way university classrooms run. Through teacher interviews, student surveys, and a literature review, this paper investigates the nuanced effects grade inflation is having on student motivation and learning. The hypothesis is that the easier it is for a student to obtain their desired grade, the less they will end up engaging in and learning from a given course. Major findings of the literature include: grade inflation has robbed grades of their signaling power, grade inflation has helped create students are too grade-oriented, student evaluations of teaching have prompted higher grades, higher expectations for high grades induce greater study times, and open dialogue can help reverse grade inflation trends. The student surveys and faculty interviews agreed with much of the literature and found that professors believe grade inflation is real but do not believe its effects are significant, students admit to being primarily motivated by grades, and students find grades critically important to their future. The paper concludes that grade inflation is not as detrimental to student outcomes as ardent critics argue and offers practical ways to address it.
ContributorsGregory, Austin Scott (Author) / Ruediger, Stefan (Thesis director) / Goegan, Brian (Committee member) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
This paper proposes that voter decision making is determined by more than just the policy positions adopted by the candidates in the election as proposed by Antony Downs (1957). Using a vector valued voting model proposed by William Foster (2014), voter behavior can be described by a mathematical model. Voters assign scores to candidates based on both policy and non-policy considerations, then voters then decide which candidate they support based on which has a higher candidate score. The traditional assumption that most of the population will vote is replaced by a function describing the probability of voting based on candidate scores assigned by individual voters. If the voter's likelihood of voting is not certain, but rather modelled by a sigmoid curve, it has radical implications on party decisions and actions taken during an election cycle. The model also includes a significant interaction term between the candidate scores and the differential between the scores which enhances the Downsian model. The thesis is proposed in a similar manner to Downs' original presentation, including several allegorical and hypothetical examples of the model in action. The results of the model reveal that single issue voters can have a significant impact on election outcomes, and that the weight of non-policy considerations is high enough that political parties would spend large sums of money on campaigning. Future research will include creating an experiment to verify the interaction terms, as well as adjusting the model for individual costs so that more empirical analysis may be completed.
ContributorsCoulter, Jarod Maxwell (Author) / Foster, William (Thesis director) / Goegan, Brian (Committee member) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05