Interview in the Brazil Journal

 I was interviewed for the Brazil Journal by Giuliano Guandalini. The interview was conducted in English, but appears in Portuguese. We discussed controversial markets generally, including kidney exchange, which is not legal yet in Brazil.

Troca de rins. Drogas. Barriga de aluguel. Este Nobel sugere liberar tudo  (Kidney exchange. Drugs. Surrogacy...)

 Here's a snippet that comes through pretty clearly in retranslation back into English by Google Translate:

"In the US and many other countries, his work and that of other researchers has contributed to improving the waiting list for kidney transplants. In Brazil, we continue with the traditional system, with a long wait for donors. Why is it so difficult to make reforms of this kind in public services based on the teachings of modern economics?  

"A transplant always depends on an organ donation, whether from a dead person or a living individual. It is natural that family members and society in general are concerned about how this will be done in an ethical and careful manner. 

"Brazil does a lot of transplants. So there is no restriction on the medical capacity side so that more transplants can be done. But when we look at total kidney transplants in relation to population size, the number is not that big. 

"Meanwhile, there are thousands of people on dialysis because transplants have not been enough. The issue, therefore, is to allow more donations to occur in life, and changing kidneys is a way for people to help save someone they love. 

"Brazil may be one of the next countries to carry out the exchange of kidneys. Some experimental surgeries have already been performed, with legal authorization. Researchers will be able to gain support to perform more operations of this type and then, perhaps, society will be able to convince itself of the importance of changing kidneys. 

"What are the obstacles that prevent the adoption of organ exchange? Are they ethical, moral, religious issues? 

"A little bit of all those things. There are those concerned that poor and vulnerable people may have their organs stolen. Evidently, there must be complete assurance that this will not happen. But of course the poor would also like to save the lives of loved ones by giving them a kidney. "

Experiments and market design, video (I'm interviewed by Chiara Spina from INSEAD)

Professor Chiara Spina interviewed me about the use of experiments in market design (20 minute video). (We spoke about a number of experiments I collaborated on with Judd Kessler, among others.)

Scott Cunningham's Mixtape Podcast Interview with Alvin Roth

 Here's Scott Cunningham's Mixtape Podcast Interview with Alvin Roth... "We discuss Gale and Shapley, Roth and Sotomayor, game theory and more"

You can listen to our conversation at the link above.  He drew me out about some things I hadn't thought of in a while, such as my varied relationships with Gale, Shapley and Bob Wilson, and how my ideas about matching markets developed over the course of my career (which started in Operations Research and then morphed into Economics...)

He also reveals the manner in which he was the perfect reader of my 1990 book Two-Sided Matching with Marilda Sotomayor. 

His site is multi-media, if you scroll down you'll find a video (the one below in on YouTube), and if you keep scrolling down you'll find an essay he wrote called "Paying it Forward..." which recounts more about what our book meant to him and some of our subsequent interactions over the years. And below that is his Transcript of [our] podcast interview, for those who prefer to read rather than listen or watch.

**********

I've had occasion to blog about Scott:

Friday, February 16, 2018

Sex work, Craigslist, and the law; podcast with Scott Cunningham

Here's a link to an interview with Scott Cunningham, whose work on sex work I've blogged about before. There's a surprising amount of discussion about causal inference and differences in differences. (I always suspected that econometrics was sexy, but this is the first time I’ve heard a podcast about that.)

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

The accidental experiment with legal prostitution in Rhode Island

A scholarly paper and an easy to read-or-listen-to NPR report recount the period in which indoor prostitution was legal in Rhode Island.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

The Craigslist market for erotic/adult services

Repugnance and market design in translation: video and transcript (en español, en argentina)

 I recently was interviewed by Jorge Fontevecchia via Zoom in Argentina. Among other things, we spoke (in English) about how both markets and bans on markets need social support to work well. You can listen to the interview as it was broadcast on Argentine tv, in Spanish translation, with voice-over (i.e. you can only hear me vaguely in the background, and a Spanish speaking lady's voice conveys my answers...).

A  Spanish transcript is here:

Alvin Roth: “La repugnancia afecta a mercados, y la prohibición de algunos de ellos sigue siendo muy controvertida”

When I look at the result in Google Translate, the back-translation produces some unexpected results (as well as the expected result that "repugnance" comes back as "disgust."  Here's an example of a funny Q&A involving the dual meanings of the Spanish word "tiempo":

How does the passage of time affect the markets?

“Weather affects markets in many ways..."

But here's a Q&A that back-translated well enough to get the gist (modulo some pronouns):

Do you think that whenever there is a transaction involving money, what is being exchanged automatically becomes an object or thing because there is money involved?

“I don't agree with that at all. He's probably getting paid to do this interview that he's doing, but his employer is paying him because he's an expert journalist and interviewer. And sadly, I'm not getting paid for this interview, but you and I are no less human. There is nothing about the transaction that you are not doing as part of your job, and I do it just for fun. Nothing in that transaction makes one of us more or less human. When I think of merchandise [commodities], I think of things that are not different from each other. If I were a baker and I wanted to buy wheat I could buy it at a commodity market, it has all sorts of descriptive terms, we make bread with number two hard red winter wheat, that's a complete description. I don't have to care which farmer you buy it from because it has been well described. But when you want to hire a baker in your bakery, you don't just hire a baker because they are not commodities. You have to find a particular person that you want to hire and you don't make an offer to the general market saying, I want 5 thousand bushels of wheat, but to a particular person saying, I want to hire you. That doesn't depersonalize the market at all."

***********

Update:

Here's a Portugese translation, on which Google translate also works reasonably well:

Alvin Roth: “Um dos problemas mais difíceis que estamos vendo no mundo agora tem a ver com o reassentamento de refugiados”

*Por Jorge Fontevecchia – Cofundador da Editoria Perfil – CEO da Perfil Network.

Kim Krawiec interviews me about repugnance on her podcast Taboo Trades

 Kim Krawiec interviews me on her podcast Taboo Trades:

She writes "Al Roth and I discuss hitmen, drugs, kidneys, paid sex, and other repugnances. We’re joined by co-hosts Madison White and Alex Leseney (both UVA 3Ls), with appearances from UVA 3Ls Thalia Stanberry, Caitlyn Stollings, Jackson Bailey, and Autumn Adams-jack. A good time was had by all!"

The podcast starts with a cold open, drawn from the body of the interview, in which I ask her co-hosts to help me hire a hitman to rub out a negative referee.  But mostly we talk about transactions that have no easily measurable negative externalities, yet that third parties nevertheless object to.

Peter Lorentzen interviews me about market design (podcast)

 Peter Lorentzen interviews me about market design, and my book Who Gets What and Why. (We have an interesting conversation on market design and my career, not closely related to the book...)

"In our interview, we range far beyond the examples from the book to discuss the implications of his work for the design of tech’s market-making “platform” businesses like Airbnb, Amazon, Lyft, or Uber, the challenges he faces when countries or people view some kinds of transactions as “repugnant” or morally unacceptable, and the reasons why San Francisco’s school district (unlike Boston’s or New York’s) chose not to implement the un-gameable school choice plan his team devised for them.

"Host Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads a new digital economy-focused Master's program in Applied Economics."

;

Market design in La Republica

 In anticipation of the Econometric Society meeting in Colombia later this month, I was interviewed by La Republica. The interview was in English, and is published in Spanish, but is fairly readable via Google Translate...)

"Migración será uno de los problemas más grandes del market design”: Alvin E. Roth

"Migration will be one of the biggest problems in market design": Alvin E. Roth

by Lilian Mariño Espinosa 

"The Universidad del Rosario, in its 367 years, has sought to be a pillar of knowledge, which is why it tends to generate spaces for dialogue that analyze and provide solutions to changes in society. In the midst of the current situation, in which the covid increased problems such as inequality, the institution will be the organizer of the Annual Meeting of the Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association (Lacea) and the Latin American chapter of the Econometric Society (Lames) , which will take place on October 20, 21 and 22, virtually.

"The event, which will feature policy makers, public and private officials and academics such as Alvin E. Roth, (from Stanford University and Nobel Prize in Economics in 2012), Pinelopi Goldberg (from Yale University and former Chief Economist of the Bank Mundial) and Oriana Bandiera (from the London School of Economics), will discuss and reflect on how Latin America can best cope with these difficulties, without losing sight of other economic challenges.

"As an appetizer for the event, at LR we spoke with Roth, who explained how market design can be an opportunity to solve several of the problems facing the region and the world..."

Market design podcast on The Demand Side with Edward Brown

 Here's a podcast in which I'm interviewed by Edward Brown on The Demand Side about market design: 

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0YYkxAvYrEQ3TtoyQM2ut1?si=qUGhdkUYQomkzsfXOOmRew&dl_branch=1

 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-demand-side/id1538150328?i=1000533080877

An interview in (not on) Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, largely about resident matching

 For those  readers of this blog who may have missed the May issue of Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, here's an interview by the editor

A Conversation with ... Alvin E. Roth PhD, Economist, Game Theorist, and Nobel Laureate Who Improved the Modern Residency Match  by Leopold, Seth S. MD, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Volume 479(5), May 2021, p 863-866   doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001758

The interview includes this long answer to a short question about the resident Match:

Seth S. Leopold MD: Many readers will dispute the idea that the Match is resistant to strategic manipulation (“gaming the system”); why do you believe it is, and why do you think this perception persists?

Alvin E. Roth PhD: That question requires a somewhat complicated answer. The Match is built around an idea of how to organize a simple labor market, and that idea had to be adapted to the complex structure of the modern medical labor force. A simple labor market would be one in which graduating medical students each seek a single position, positions are well described in advance, and applicants and residency programs can each rank-order all of their possible matches; that is, applicants can rank programs and programs can rank applicants. That simple market can be modeled mathematically, and it can be shown that a deferred acceptance algorithm with applicants proposing makes it a dominant strategy for all applicants to submit rank-order lists corresponding to their true preferences. (A dominant strategy is one in which regardless of what rank-order lists others submit, no applicant can do better than to rank residency programs in order of his or her true preferences. For instance, your chance of getting your second-choice program if your first choice rejects you is exactly the same as if you had listed your second choice first.)

"That’s a theoretical answer about a market that is quite a bit simpler than the modern market for residencies. The deferred acceptance algorithm for that simple market was studied by Gale and Shapley [8], for which Shapley shared the 2012 Nobel Prize in Economics. (I had earlier shown that in a simple market, applicants can’t profitably manipulate their rank-order lists [16].)

"The actual modern market for residencies differs from that simple market in several ways. For one thing, not all applicants are seeking a single position. This can happen for several reasons, the most important of which is that couples can enter the Match looking for pairs of jobs; in 2020, for example, more than one thousand couples submitted rank-order lists consisting of pairs of jobs. There are also many more residency programs than an applicant can submit on a rank-order list, and many more applicants than programs can interview, so decisions have to be made beforehand that are more complicated than how to order the rank-order list. These complications may also add to confusion about the Match and about how the Match algorithm works.

"Computational studies of the Match nevertheless confirm that once interviews are over and an applicant has decided what programs to apply to, it is perfectly safe to submit a rank-order list that corresponds to the applicant’s true preferences [18]. To put it another way, there is no advantage to submitting a rank-order list that differs from an applicant’s preferences (and there is a danger in submitting a different rank-order list, because the Match will use the submitted list to make matches, in order).

"This fact doesn’t seem to have yet penetrated to everyone who participates in the Match [13]. For this reason, all those who advise medical students entering the Match should increase their advising efforts around this point.

"Note that the Match is only the final part of the transition to residency (or to fellowships). That transition starts with applications and interviews and includes various kinds of signals, like exam scores and transcripts and letters of reference. While the dominant-strategy property of the Match makes that part of the process strategically simple (that is, we can confidently advise students to submit rank-order lists in order of their true preferences), the other parts of the process (what rotations to take before applying, where to apply, how to conduct yourself at interviews) are not simple at all."

Signals and interviews in the transition from medical school to residency

Late last year I was interviewed by Dr. Seth Leopold, who is a Professor in the Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine at the University of Washington School of Medicine, and Editor-in-Chief of the journal Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research.   That interview has just appeared ahead of print on the journal's website: 

A Conversation with … Alvin E. Roth PhD, Economist, Game Theorist, and Nobel Laureate Who Improved the Modern Residency Match  by Leopold, Seth S. MD, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research: April 7, 2021 - Publish Ahead of Print - doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001758

Here's one part of our Q&A:

Dr. Leopold:You once commented in a Not the Last Word column in CORR® that the Match might be improved if a bit more room could be made for candidates to send “signals” to programs that indicate particular interest[5]; if you could make one change to the Match right now to make it fairer all around, what would that change be?

Dr. Roth: I don’t yet know enough about the whole pre-Match process of applications and interviews to answer that confidently. I’m hoping to gain access to data that will illuminate more clearly how applications lead to interviews, and how interviews interact with other kinds of information to influence what rank-order lists are submitted by applicants and programs. Some of that process is surely in flux, between the pandemic causing interviews to be conducted remotely and the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 going pass/fail. Signaling is a way to address miscoordination in interviewing (such as whether too many interviews are concentrating on too few candidates), but there are other ways the interview process might be broken that might better be addressed by other tweaks in how interviews are organized.

Dr. Leopold:I believe the study you’re proposing here would find a very attentive audience, both in medical schools and residency programs across the country, especially competitive ones like orthopaedic surgery. Based on other kinds of markets you’ve evaluated—I recognize I’m asking you to speculate—what do you think you might find here?

Dr. Roth: Presently, in at least some specialties, many interviews are conducted for each residency and fellowship position. It could be that interviews play a critical role in allowing programs and applicants to assess each other, regardless of the other information they may have. But it could also be that at least some interviews are being conducted “defensively,” because all the interviews that others are participating in make it hard for each program or applicant to predict how likely any interview will lead to a position being offered and accepted in the Match. So, it is possible that there is “too much” interviewing, in the sense that in perhaps predictable ways, some programs are interviewing some candidates they can virtually never hire, and some candidates they would never want to hire. Conversely, applicants are interviewing for some jobs they have hardly any chance of being offered, and some they sensibly think they won’t need to take. Of course, some things can be predictable even if they can’t be predicted by individual applicants and programs with the information they now have available. It might therefore be possible to suggest institutional reforms that would help reduce the uncertainty in deciding which interviews to offer. That might also reduce the number (and costs) of interviews. (In just such a way, the Match helped solve the problem of uncertainty involved in offers and acceptances, back when offers were exploding.) And there’s a possibility that fewer interviews could make everyone better off in terms of expectations, particularly if participants on both sides of the market will feel a reduced need to do so many interviews if everyone else reduces the number they do. But as you say, until we can look into this carefully, I’m just speculating.

Rajk College interviews me and Matt Jackson (pre-pandemic)

 Here's an interview that reminds me of the before (Covid) days, when we could go into the office.

It was conducted January 30, 2020 by students from Rajk College in Budapest, who also interviewed Matt Jackson.  Along with some more familiar things (what are matching markets?) I got to talk about the relationship of market design to mechanism design, and what I like about being an academic.

Here's the interview with me (11 minutes):

 

And here's the one with Matt Jackson, recorded on the same day:

*****************

Here's a link to other interviews by Rajk College, and here's an article in Hungarian.

Video interview series presented by Rajk College for Advanced Studies for its 50th birthday. The series covers interviews made by selected awardees of the John von Neumann and Herbert Simon Awards established by Rajk College, Budapest, Hungary. This interview was made with Alvin Roth at the Economics Department of Stanford University CA at January 30, 2020 before any COVID-19 restrictions. Directors: Kornél Hoffmann, Márton Simó, Ádám Vig, Judit Berei, Artúr Velkey, Mátyás Tompa, Dóra Kovács Interviewers: Márton Simó, Ádám Vig Cinematographer: Dániel Bálint Editing: Levente Klára Graphic design: Soma Sebesvári Sponsored by: G7.hu, Oriens, Centrál Média, MTA KRTK KTI About Rajk College for Advanced Studies: homepage: http://rajk.eu/​ facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rajkofficial

National Kidney Donor Advocate Conference, on YouTube

 Here's an announcement I received from Ned Brooks, the founder of  NKDO, National Kidney Donation Organization (formerly Donor to Donor).  If I understand correctly, the different talks and interviews will be available at the link after first streaming in conference style, starting at 9am Pacific time. It includes a video of Ned interviewing me.

I'll update this post as necessary. 

"This Wednesday, October 21^st, NKDO, National Kidney Donation Organization (formerly Donor to Donor) will release the virtual National Kidney Donor Advocate Conference. This event is designed to give volunteer living donor advocates the information they need to be more effective advocates for living donation. Transplant industry experts across the country will be presenting to you and delivering invaluable advice about their area of expertise.

The conference will stream on our YouTube channel beginning at 12:00 noon Eastern this Wednesday. The conference will be in segments and accessed through the “playlist”, either streaming as one event or accessed at different points in the conference. The link is  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsoS-yavRQCVl7bwcjT2iCA , which will go live at noon Eastern on Wednesday.

- Have you ever wondered about the transplant surgeons who do the surgery? What they are thinking and what they would like you to know? Dr. Joshua Mezrich, transplant surgeon at UWMadison and author of “When Death Becomes Life: Notes from a Transplant Surgeon” talks about his experience with organ donors and recipients.

- Are you a living donor or a transplant recipient, or expecting to be one? Do you remember the experience of being evaluated at the transplant center and listening to all the information, and maybe feeling a little overwhelmed? Living Donor Coordinator Marian Charlton and Patient Coordinator Janet Hiller are two of the most respected voices in transplant, and they will tell you what they want you to know to better understand the process. Anyone who goes through this experience or has a loved one in transplant will want to see these segments.

- Living kidney donors deserve all protections available, from reimbursement for out-of-pocket costs and lost wages to medical coverage for medical issues that may arise months or years after donation. Garet Hil, founder and CEO of the National Kidney Registry, talks about the suite of protections available to living donors through Donor Shield.

-  Are you a kidney patient in need of a donor? Harvey Mysel, a two-time kidney recipient and founder and CEO of the Living Kidney Donor Network, talks about how to have your kidney donor find you.

- Professor Alvin Roth won the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work creating the algorithms that contributed to the creation of the “kidney chain”, a development that transformed kidney transplant procedures. Prof. Roth discusseshis work and the business known by the intriguing moniker of “repugnanttransactions.”

- All kidney patients will benefit by watching nephrologist Dr. David Serur talk about kidney disease and what every kidney patient and advocate needs to know to be properly informed about how to deal with renal disease. 

- Non-directed, or altruistic, donors are a rare breed, though we are trying to change that. No one knows the brain of the non-directed donor better than Professor Abigail Marsh, who has been studying non-directed donors for years. If you want to better understand why someone will happily donate a kidney to a stranger, this presentation will help answer that question.  Prof. Marsh is the author of “The Fear Factor: How One Emotion Connects Altruists, Psychopaths, and Everyone In-Between.”

- If you listen to podcasts, you are probably familiar with “Freakonomics” and its creator, Stephen Dubner. It was the Freakonomics interview with Prof. Roth that set Donor to Donor and NKDO into motion, and our interview with Mr. Dubner will interest anyone who understands “the power of the pod”.

- Jim Gleason is a heart transplant recipient and the president of TRIO, Transplant Recipients International Organization. Mr. Gleason is a motivational speaker who asks the question, “Are you a cookie monster?”

Here's the video of my video

NRMP conference on Transition into Residency: Oct 16-17

I'll be speaking  this morning at the opening session of the (virtual) NRMP conference on Transition into Residency: Conversations Across the Medical Education Continuum

My title will be "The Match as part of the larger system of transition to residency."

One of the topics I expect to discuss is the proliferation of applications and interviews, in the NRMP and also in many of the fellowship matches.

India NDTV interview on coronavirus, convalescent plasma, etc. (5 minute interview by Dr. Prannoy Roy)

My 5 minutes come at 1:12, but if I've embedded this right the video should begin from there when you start it...

More proposals for reducing applications and interviews before medical resident matching

If the number of proposals for reform is an indicator of a brewing problem (and I think it is), it's time to think about the various application and interview processes that precede the NRMP resident match.  Here are three more...

J. Bryan Carmody (2020) Applying Smarter: A Critique of the AAMC Apply Smart Tools. Journal of Graduate Medical Education: February 2020, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 10-13.
https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-19-00495.1

"Medical students today submit more residency applications than ever before. This trend is costly for students and imposes a substantial burden on program directors. Yet, despite a steady increase in the number of applications submitted per applicant, overall match rates have not improved.1 Put another way, applicants could collectively apply to fewer programs than they do now—and enjoy essentially the same overall match rate.

To assist students in determining the optimal number of residency programs to which they should apply, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) unveiled Apply Smart in 2016. The website notes that “there is a point where the relationship between the number of applications submitted and the likelihood of entry into a residency changes,” and suggests that students should consider limiting their applications at this point of diminishing returns.2 Responses to Apply Smart have been positive, with deans and program directors praising the tools and encouraging their use in counseling medical students.3–6

At first glance, the Apply Smart analyses seem highly informative. Yet, closer inspection reveals methodologic issues that introduce bias and suggest the need for improvements.
...
"Overapplication is costly, for applicants and programs alike. Given the incentives for medical students to overapply, it is unclear whether informational strategies alone can curtail overapplication. Until graduate medical education leaders are willing to support application caps or a fundamental restructuring of the Match to better allow signaling between applicants and programs,13 it is imperative that informational strategies present unbiased data that can aid students in applying to an appropriate number of programs. We cannot be satisfied for students to Apply Smart—we need to help them apply smarter."

************

Joseph G. Monir (2020) Reforming the Match: A Proposal for a New 3-Phase System. Journal of Graduate Medical Education: February 2020, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 7-9.
https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-19-00425.1

"The National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) was originally devised in 1952 to bring order to the chaotic residency application process.1 It currently has 2 phases: The Match and the Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program (SOAP). Applications are submitted through the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS). While this is a significantly superior system to its predecessor, it is not flawless. As both residency applicants and positions have become more competitive, the flaws of the current system are becoming increasingly problematic for all involved parties.

"Despite evidence that applying to a greater number of programs does not improve Match rates,2 applicants feel pressured to apply to more and more programs to avoid going unmatched. In 2018, each applicant submitted a mean of 90.6 applications (mean of 60.3 for US graduates and 136.4 for international graduates).3 Applicants feel forced to accept interviews at programs which they have minimal interest in attending, to the detriment of other genuinely interested students. This, in turn, pressures other applicants to do the same lest they be disadvantaged. Whipple et al confirmed this vicious cycle using their computer model for competitive residencies, where they found that applying to the maximum number of programs “led to a poor result for the majority of students when all applicants undertook the strategy.”4

"As a result of this vicious cycle, residency programs are inundated with an average of 996 applications per program5 and have few reliable methods of identifying which of those applicants would seriously consider training there. Interviewing applicants who have no desire to attend that program is a costly endeavor. Gardner and colleagues found that, when accounting for both material and personnel costs, programs spent on average $18,648 ± $13,383 per open position and $1,221 ± $894 per interviewee.6

"Applying so broadly is costly for applicants as well. Fogel et al7 found that 84% of applicants believed residency interviews were too expensive, with 64% of applicants spending at least $2,500, and those entering competitive fields spending considerably more. In a study of orthopedic surgery applicants, for example, interview costs averaged $7,119 (range $2,500–$15,000).8 These figures do not include the cost of the applications themselves or externships, making the total residency application cost significantly higher.

"It is clear that the current system is fraught with inefficiency and that all involved parties would be better served by a system where applicants only apply to the programs they would seriously consider attending.

"The 3-Phase System
Transitioning the Match to a 3-phase process as outlined below could address the aforementioned problems.

"Phase 1
This phase would run from September through December and would function the same as the Match is currently. However, applicants would be limited in the number of positions for which they could apply. The results of Phase 1 would be e-mailed to applicants in the beginning of January. Most interviews already occur within this time frame, so most programs could continue using the systems they have in place. The majority of positions would be anticipated to fill in Phase 1.

"Phase 2
This phase would run from January through March. Those who do not match in Phase 1 would proceed to Phase 2. This would again function like the current Match, with applicants applying to open programs, attending in-person interviews, and submitting a rank list. There would be no cap on the number of Phase 2 applications, allowing applicants to apply broadly. The results of Phase 2 would be e-mailed to applicants in March. The majority of unfilled positions from Phase 1 would be expected to fill in Phase 2.

Phase 3
This phase would be the current SOAP week, with daily rounds of interviews and offers. The number of applicants and positions entering the SOAP would likely decrease significantly."
**********

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Feb;143(2):634-639. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005254.
Solving Congestion in the Plastic Surgery Match: A Game Theory Analysis.
Molina Burbano F1, Yao A, Burish N, Ingargiola M, Freeman M, Stock J, Taub PJ.

Abstract
Plastic and reconstructive surgery is among the most competitive specialties in the residency match. Applicants seeking to maximize their chances of a successful match often submit numerous applications to the National Residency Matching Program. It is not uncommon for those applying to plastic and reconstructive surgery to apply to every program. The high application volume imparts significant time and financial burden for applicants and programs alike. Furthermore, it makes distinguishing between applicants with a genuine interest in a specific program and those who are merely hoping to improve their chances vastly more difficult. The authors sought to characterize trends in the match rate, as the number of integrated plastic and reconstructive surgery programs continues to increase. Furthermore, they reviewed the literature on game theory for possible solutions to residency application congestion. The authors propose the use of the game theory model to explain the observed results and show why an application limit is the most reasonable approach to address this issue.

Kidney exchange, in French, in Forbes

Here's a short interview in French about kidney exchange, in Forbes France:

Alvin Roth, Lauréat Du Prix Nobel D’Economie Veut Revolutionner Les Dons De Reins
Philippe Branche   10 janvier 2020

Here's one bit:

Are you currently working with politicians, legislators or medical administrators to resolve this problem ? 

Alvin Roth: I am, but not with great success. I recently spoke to decision makers in several countries: India, China, Germany, Canada and of course the United States. In October, renowned bioethicist Peter Singer expressed strong support for the Global Kidney Exchange Program, so that recently the idea of ​​expanding kidney exchange to include international exchanges has gained momentum. I also recently debated with a member of the Bundestag, the German parliament. In Germany, kidney transplantation from a living donor is legal, but a patient can only receive a kidney from an immediate family member, and therefore the literal interpretation of the law makes it impossible to exchange kidneys. German law provides that monetary exchanges of parts of the human body are illegal and, apparently, it is to avoid any possibility of payment for a kidney that the limitation to family members is applied. A minimal amendment to German law could allow immediate family members to make an indirect donation, via the kidney exchange system, which would preserve the confidence that the donor was not paid to make an exchange. By designing this market in this way, we are trying to expand the database and reduce the waiting time for sick people.

Brioni Legendary Minds: interviews and suits, and economists as clothing models

Brioni, the men's suit maker, has a series of video interviews called Legendary Minds, of unusually well dressed men. The videos are a bit unusual too, as the camera lingers on the suit at least as much as the speaker. You can watch me below:




The interview is also here:
https://www.brioni.com/us/legendary-minds-alvin-roth_section.

 Here are some of the accompanying stills:

********************
And here is the full set of Brioni Legendary Minds interviews to date:
https://www.brioni.com/us/legendary-minds_section

********************
As you might imagine, econ profs do fashion shoots all the time. Here are the stills from a slightly different one, involving clothing crafted by and for Stanford students, organized by Nina Buchmann, and featuring Muriel Niederle and myself, and Doug Bernheim.

Some Portuguese press on kidney exchange and market design

When I was in Lisbon I gave two talks, and some interviews.  Here's a nice story written after both my talks:
O que tem a economia a ver com transplantes de rins? Tudo [What Does The Economy Have To Do With Kidney Transplants? Everything.]
by SÓNIA M. LOURENÇO (whose sister once took my experimental economics class at Harvard)

Here's a story that followed the first talk, which was part of an honorary degree ceremony.
A ciência económica ao serviço do amor, saúde e felicidade
by Sandra Maximiano
[G translate: Economic science at the service of love, health and happiness]
Here's a video and some photos of the whole event...

And I gave a tv interview in which the interviewer wished to ignore my pre-interview insistence to talk about game theory and market design and the conference in Portugal as opposed to the recession and recovery, and Italy...(but we reached a sort of compromise...)*

Nobel da Economia em entrevista à TVI critica populismos e alerta para mais migração
Alvin Roth referiu ainda que o fenómeno do aquecimento global vai aumentar a migração.
[G translate: Nobel la Economía in interview with TVI criticizes populism and alert for more migration

Alvin Roth also noted that the phenomenon of global warming will increase migration.]
*************

Interview on market design and repugnance with Yale sophomore Eric Wallach

Here's the transcript of a recent telephone interview I did with ERIC WALLACH, a sophomore at Yale, for The Politic, Yale’s undergraduate journal of politics and culture.

 An Interview with Alvin Roth

Here's the one Q&A he chose as a highlight, at the top of the page:

"How do you approach issues that may be ethically constrained? Do you think there’s a way to minimize the value judgements you make as an economist?

It’s interesting you ask the question that way. For a long time, economists seemed to agree with the implicit assumption of your question that we should minimize the ethical judgements we make. I’m not sure that’s a universal position anymore. Among economists, there’s some discussion that maybe we should be taking ethical positions about some of the markets we see, and especially with repugnant markets."

Transcripts of conversations are a bit disorganized, but this interview covered some issues  different from the ones I normally get asked about (and it's short).

**********

Update: and here's Mr. Wallach's interview with Avinash Dixit:

An Interview with Avinash Dixit, Professor of Economics Emeritus at Princeton University

Radio interview on The Quarterly Report

I was interviewed Wednesday by Craig Hafer and Mike Faust on their radio show The Quarterly Report, starting with questions about my book Who Gets What and Why and moving on to market design generally, and then to Shotokan karate.   You can hear the conversation here:


You can also download the show as an mp3 audio file here:
https://weeushows.podbean.com/e/dr-alvin-roth-on-feedback/