Abstract
Importance. As universities around the world decide whether to remain open or to close their campuses because of the COVID-19 pandemic, they often are doing so without objective information on the preferences and risk tolerance of their students. Objectives. To quantify: 1) risk tolerance for in-person instruction; 2) willingness to pay for in-person instruction versus online-only instruction; and 3) risk-tolerance for social activities held off campus among knowledgable students. Design, Setting, and Participants. We developed an automated survey tool that administered a standard gamble exercise grounded in game theory to 46 Columbia University public health graduate students who were knowledgeable about COVID-19 and who had experience with both online and offline coursework. Students were asked to trade between the risk of becoming infected with COVID-19 and: 1) attending classes in-person versus online and 2) attending parties in the greater New York City area. We also assessed their willingness to pay for online only tuition, and plans to travel off campus. Main Outcome Measures. The decision point in iterative trade-offs between risk of infection with COVID-19 and a desired goal (taking classes in-person or attending social events). Results. On average, students were willing to accept a 23% (standard error [SE]: 4%) risk of infection on campus over the semester in exchange for the opportunity to attend classes in-person. Students were willing-to-pay only 48% (SE: 3%) of typical in-person tuition were courses held exclusively online, and no students were willing to pay full price for online-only instruction. Students planned to leave campus an average of 3.6 times per week (SE: 0.54), and 15% of the students would be willing to attend a party in the community surrounding the university even if the prevalence of circulating COVID-19 were high. Conclusions and Relevance. Students with a strong knowledge of COVID-19 transmission and risks are an enigma: they are willing to pay only around 50% for online classes but likely to engage in activities that present significant barriers to holding in-person classes. This enigma underscores the conundrum facing universities.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by internal funds at Columbia University
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the Columbia University Medical Center IRB. It was deemed exempt.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The complete dataset is available as a supplementary appendix.
