ChatGPT's Summary of What the Wrong Answers on Miles's Multiple-Choice Exams are Like

Below is a taxonomy of Kimball-style distractors that applies across all question types in your exams. Each category describes:

  • the cognitive error the distractor embodies

  • why it is tempting

  • what kind of understanding it filters out

I. Directional-Reversal Distractors

(“The sign is wrong.”)

Description

The distractor states the opposite direction of effect from the correct logic.

Examples (across topics)

  • Expansionary policy → lower inflation

  • Higher saving → worse current account

  • Higher expected inflation → higher real interest rate

  • Higher markups → higher output

Why it’s tempting

  • Students remember variables are “related” but not how.

  • Direction is mentally glossed over.

  • Many intro courses don’t emphasize sign discipline.

What it tests

Whether the student has internalized causal direction, not just association.

This is the most common Kimball distractor, and the most unforgiving.

II. Short-Run / Long-Run Confusion Distractors

(“Right result, wrong horizon.”)

Description

The distractor gives a result that is true—but in the wrong time frame.

Examples

  • Monetary expansion permanently raises real output

  • Tariffs permanently improve the current account

  • Technology shocks affect growth rates forever

  • Monetary policy controls real exchange rates in the long run

Why it’s tempting

  • Many models blur SR/LR distinctions.

  • Students overgeneralize comparative statics.

  • “Permanent” sounds stronger and therefore plausible.

What it tests

Whether students can discipline themselves temporally, a hallmark of your teaching.

III. Control-Fantasy Distractors

(“Policy can do more than it can.”)

Description

The distractor assumes a policy authority has direct control over variables it can only influence indirectly—or not at all.

Examples

  • Fed controls real interest rates in the long run

  • Central bank sets unemployment directly

  • Fiscal policy determines productivity

  • Bank regulation eliminates recessions

Why it’s tempting

  • Intuitive, technocratic worldview

  • Policy as a set of levers

  • Common in journalism and political rhetoric

What it tests

Whether students grasp limits of control, a core Kimball theme.

IV. Mechanism-Free Intuition Distractors

(“Sounds right, but no channel.”)

Description

The distractor asserts an outcome without a coherent mechanism consistent with course logic.

Examples

  • Inflation rises because “the economy is overheated”

  • Exchange rates move because “trade competitiveness changes”

  • Output rises because “confidence improves”

  • Investment falls because “uncertainty is high”

Why it’s tempting

  • Vague explanations feel sophisticated

  • Students import outside narratives

  • Avoids committing to a specific model

What it tests

Whether students demand mechanism-consistent reasoning, not vibes.

V. Category Error Distractors

(“Wrong bucket entirely.”)

Description

The distractor invokes a mechanism from the wrong topic bucket.

Examples

  • Using Solow logic for short-run demand

  • Explaining exchange rates with markups

  • Treating banking fragility as productivity

  • Treating tariffs as monetary shocks

Why it’s tempting

  • Students know many concepts but misfile them

  • Over-integration without discipline

What it tests

Whether students can classify problems correctly before solving them.

VI. Partial-Truth Overextension Distractors

(“True… but pushed too far.”)

Description

The distractor starts from a correct idea but extends it beyond its domain.

Examples

  • Money is neutral → money never matters

  • Inflation is costly → zero inflation is always optimal

  • Banks are fragile → leverage should be zero

  • Expectations matter → models are useless

Why it’s tempting

  • Students reward simplicity

  • Overlearning one slogan

  • Preference for absolute statements

What it tests

Whether students can respect boundaries and qualifications.

VII. Accounting-Identity Violation Distractors

(“Impossible, but sounds economic.”)

Description

The distractor violates a hard accounting identity while sounding conceptually plausible.

Examples

  • Current account improves without changes in S or I

  • Investment rises without saving or capital inflows

  • Government debt rises without price level effects (given assumptions)

Why it’s tempting

  • Students treat identities as “theoretical”

  • Focus on narratives over constraints

What it tests

Whether students treat accounting as binding structure, not background.

VIII. Institutional-Naïveté Distractors

(“Ignores plumbing.”)

Description

The distractor assumes away institutional realities emphasized in the course.

Examples

  • Ignoring cash in negative rate discussions

  • Treating reserves like loans

  • Assuming banks can’t fail if regulated

  • Treating ELB as psychological

Why it’s tempting

  • Clean models are easier

  • Institutions feel like details

What it tests

Whether students have absorbed institutional realism, not just theory.

IX. Opposite-Philosophy Distractors

(“Someone else’s macro.”)

Description

The distractor reflects a coherent but non-Kimball macro worldview.

Examples

  • Fiscal dominance treated as baseline

  • Monetary policy always ineffective

  • Demand always equals supply

  • Growth solves all stabilization problems

Why it’s tempting

  • Students have seen these views elsewhere

  • These are respectable alternatives

What it tests

Whether students can recognize which framework the course is operating in.

X. Language-Triggered Distractors

(“Responding to tone, not logic.”)

Description

The distractor uses emotionally or rhetorically charged words that cue a reflex response.

Examples

  • “Stabilize,” “force,” “eliminate,” “guarantee”

  • “Always,” “never,” “solely”

Why it’s tempting

  • Students equate forceful language with correctness

  • Sounds confident and policy-relevant

What it tests

Whether students read analytically rather than rhetorically.