The Impact of the Double Reduction Policy on Household Educational Investment Behavior from the Perspective of Bounded Rationality: An Examination Based on the History of Economic Thought and Behavioral Economics

Linxuan Gan

doi:10.70088/rc3j5d51

Authors

Linxuan Gan Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, China Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70088/rc3j5d51

Keywords:

double reduction policy, household educational investment, rational actor assumption, bounded rationality, behavioral economics

Abstract

In the context of the implementation of the “Double Reduction” policy, household educational investment has not contracted as expected; instead, it has shown a trend of structural transformation and covert increase. This apparent paradox poses a direct challenge to the traditional rational actor assumption. From the perspective of the history of economic thought, this study systematically reviews the evolution of rational choice theory, bounded rationality, and behavioral economics, and examines their differing applicability to educational investment decisions. The study finds that under a framework of full rationality, a contraction in supply and an increase in costs should lead to a decline in household demand for educational investment. However, in practice, households have reallocated their investments through more concealed, premium, and alternative channels, displaying clear tendencies toward risk aversion and social comparison. To explain this divergence, this paper develops an analytical framework of “policy shock–cognitive mechanisms–behavioral outcomes” and argues that bounded rationality mechanisms—such as incomplete information, loss aversion, and herd effects—are key factors sustaining household educational investment. The findings suggest that household educational investment should not be simply characterized as irrational behavior, but rather understood as satisficing decision-making under conditions of uncertainty. The study extends the application of bounded rationality to education policy analysis and provides a behavioral economics perspective for educational governance.

References

R. Thaler, "Mental accounting and consumer choice," Marketing Science, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 199–214, 1985.

A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, "Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 297–323, 1992.

H. A. Simon, "Bounded rationality in social science: Today and tomorrow," Mind & Society, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 25–39, 2000.

K. R. Monroe, "Paradigm shift: from rational choice to perspective," International Political Science Review, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 151–172, 2001.

S. Li, "Education investment 'rat race' in China: How income inequality shapes family investment in shadow education," Asia Pacific Education Review, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 75–88, 2026.

J. Zhou, Y. Shao, and Z. Zhang, "The impact of China’s 'Double Reduction' policy on the fertility and education investment behaviour of Chinese households," Applied Economics, pp. 1–19, 2026.

X. Liu, M. Meng, G. Pan, and G. Zhao, "Unintended Consequences of China’s Double Reduction Policy: Its Immediate and Intergenerational Impacts," ROCKWOOL Foundation Berlin (RFBerlin), Working Paper No. 26034, 2026.

X. Liu, "Research on the well-off family education investment under the Policy of Double Reduction," Journal of Educational Technology and Innovation, vol. 5, no. 4, 2023.

Y. Xiaochen, "Structural Characteristics of Family Educational Investment under police Reform: A Case Study of 'Double Reduction' Policy in Inner Mongolia, China," Technium Social Sciences Journal, vol. 77, p. 82, 2025.

K. Zhong and J. Park, "The double reduction policy and education development in China," International Journal of Comparative Education and Development, vol. 25, no. 3–4, pp. 137–152, 2023.

H. Chunyan and D. J. C. Moneva, "Research on Family Education Investment under the 'Double Reduction' Policy," Journal of Intelligence and Knowledge Engineering, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 77, 2023.