We have all felt the shift in campus atmosphere as exam sessions approach. As libraries grow fuller, and available study seats become limited, an unspoken sense of urgency floods the halls. Conversations across the study rooms are narrowed to deadlines, sleep is neglected, and even physical activity is set aside to avoid “wasting” productive hours. Despite our different approaches, students fall into the same patterns and begin to resemble one another, driven by the same unseen force.
During exam sessions, our behavior is shaped by constraints such as time and the availability of study resources. In this context, it is possible to outline that the university becomes a clear illustration of scarcity – time, attention, energy or even mental strength. These limitations actively mould how we allocate our effort and focus, defining our performance, and to a certain extent, our general well-being.
Scarcity, according to Mullainathan and Shafir, is defined as the condition of “having less than you feel you need” (Mullainathan and Shafir, 2013). In 2013, in the book Scarcity, Mullainathan and Shafir challenged the traditional perspective advocated by economists such as Lionel Robins (McKenzie, 2018) that scarcity is a concept that merely limits available choices, arguing instead that it reshapes an individual’s cognition and behavior. Since scarcity is not constrained to a single domain but emerges across multiple contexts, it offers a broad framework for understanding human behavior, giving rise to Mullainathan and Shafir’s scarcity theory. The scarcity theory depicts that “scarcity itself induces a specific mindset by affecting how people think and decide, and subsequently affects human behaviors” (de Brujin and Antonides, 2022).
Mullainathan and Shafir’s findings may be considered a reflection of the university environment during exam seasons. One may observe this in a common student’s studying routine, for example, the choice of “sacrificing” content due to the lack of sufficient time before an exam, narrowing the focus to what feels more urgent in the moment. This process of attentional neglect and focus (de Brujin et al., 2022) is defined as tunneling. This may be showcased as a trade-off: as a deadline approaches, a student prioritizes cramming as much superficial-level material as possible, at the expense of deep understanding of the content. Thus, a student under time constraints opts to go through what can be achieved visibly and quickly, rather than a method with a more rewarding long-term payoff, that requires more time and cognitive resources in the moment.
In addition, we may approach this concept by analyzing other types of behavior, not directly connected to studying itself, but significantly affecting a student’s performance. During exam periods we tend to fall into a routine: as simple things turn into a burden, we cope by turning these activities into systematic operations. Due to our tendency to narrowly focus on what feels urgent, everyday activities that don’t contribute directly to our goal feel unimportant. For example, it is noticeable that even though preparing meals is essential for our well-being, it becomes a time-consuming activity. Going to the supermarket and maintaining healthy eating habits feels time-consuming, and the decision-making process behind it becomes tiring, making ordering food, buying sugary vending machine snacks and adopting repetitive eating patterns more appealing.
Moreover, the attempt to sustain a healthy sleeping schedule becomes increasingly challenging as exam pressure intensifies. This is due to sleeping hours being viewed as direct competition to study time, rather than a support and a necessary condition for good performance. Also, this trade-off is reinforced as the benefits of sleep, such as focus, are only visible in the long-term, while studying provides an immediate sense of progress.
In a period of predominant stress, the way we use our free time also begins to shift. Rather than engaging in activities that could support recovery, such as exercising, we tend to default to low-effort behaviors, such as scrolling on our phones. Even though this may be counterproductive, it is a consequence of mental fatigue. After long hours of intense studying, phone usage seems inviting as it becomes a short-term form of relief.
As a consequence, a question remains: how do we escape this pattern? Mullainathan and Shafir argue that the effects of scarcity can be reduced by minimizing cognitive load and that breaking this cycle requires more than individual discipline (Mullainathan and Shafir, 2013). Therefore, some helpful adjustments may include setting self-imposed deadlines and developing a flexible study schedule, including breaks for essential activities, such as exercising and cooking, to avoid last-minute pressure. Other than this, another solution to reducing mental fatigue is simplifying daily decisions, such as preparing meals in advance, which can help preserve energy for studying. Ultimately, these small interventions in a student’s routine counteract the narrowing effects of scarcity, allowing students to proactively reshape their routines, deriving more benefit from exam sessions.
Bibliography:
de Bruijn, EJ., Antonides, G. (2022). ‘Poverty and economic decision making: a review of scarcity theory’, Theory Decision, 92, pp 5–37. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-021-09802-7 (Accessed: 12 April 2026)
McKenzie, R.B. (2018). ‘Lionel Robbins and Scarcity’, A Brain-Focused Foundation for Economic Science, pp 45-61. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76810-6_2 (Accessed: 13 April 2026)
Mullainathan, S. and Shafir, E. (2013) Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much. New York: Times Books/Henry Holt and Co.
B.BIAS 