Suchergebnisse

Based on literature about motivated reasoning, this article proposes that choosing a public service provider from among competing options may bias service users in a positive direction when evaluating the performance of their chosen provider. Users are expected to defend their choice through processes of goal reprioritization, meaning that they will alter the weight they assign to given pieces of information depending on the (in)convenience of that information. This article uses nine experimental studies to test this expectation on students who had recently chosen to study at one university instead of competing universities. As expected, findings show signs of biases in students' evaluations, but the biases are small and not consistently significant. Thus, prior research may have been too pessimistic regarding the general potential of performance information in the public sector.

AbstractA growing body of evidence shows that politicians use motivated reasoning to fit evidence with prior beliefs. In this, they are not unlike other people. We use survey experiments to reaffirm prior work showing that politicians, like the public they represent, engage in motivated reasoning. However, we also show that politicians are more resistant to debiasing interventions than others. When required to justify their evaluations, politicians rely more on prior political attitudes and less on policy information, increasing the probability of erroneous decisions. The results raise the troubling implication that the specialized role of elected officials makes them more immune to the correction of biases, and in this way less representative of the voters they serve when they process policy information.

Public administration researchers have found that unfavorable state actions can trigger negative emotions in citizens, but the behavioral consequences of these emotions have been understudied. We draw on psychological insights to predict how discrete emotional responses to unfavorable interactions with the state (specifically: administrative decisions to deny access to public benefits) will predict citizens' coping behaviors, such as whether they voice grievances, file complaints, and seek information. We test our hypotheses using a survey of applicants of a notoriously burdensome, means-tested tuition-free college program in Oklahoma, USA. In line with our theoretical framework, we find anger increases opposition behaviors in reaction to losses of access to the program, whereas shame reduces opposition among citizens. We also find that fear increases information-seeking and resistance behaviors. The results demonstrate the role of discrete emotions in predicting state-directed citizen behaviors, but also provide the groundwork for applying the discrete emotions framework to other actors, such as public managers and street-level bureaucrats.

AbstractPublic services represent a key means by which societies seek to reduce inequalities. However, some people may experience administrative procedures as more burdensome than others, creating inequality within programs intended to be equity‐enhancing. Prior work has found human capital (e.g., education and conditions like scarcity) to affect burden and take‐up. We build on this by examining the role of health in the form of attention disorders, pain, anxiety, and depression in the context of tax reporting in Denmark and college financial aid in Oklahoma, USA. Across cases, attention disorders and pain are associated with more burdensome experiences and in the financial aid case, they are associated with reduced take‐up as well. Individuals suffering from multiple health problems have the most negative experiences and lowest take‐up. The results suggest that extra support may be needed for people suffering from health problems in order to reduce inequities in experiences and outcomes.

AbstractWhile related fields have turned to personality to understand human behavior, we know relatively little about its role and impact in public administration. We review how personality has been studied in public administration and offer an empirical test of how it relates to policymaker attitudes about administrative arrangements. Using the "Big Five" framework and a sample of elected politicians, we conduct two studies showing how personality is associated with policymaker tolerance of the administrative burdens that social welfare recipients experience. Politicians with high conscientiousness are more tolerant of burdens, suggesting that they expect similar attention to detail from others. Conversely, politicians who score higher on the trait of openness to experience are less tolerant of burdens, implying that greater empathy toward the experience of others reduces burden tolerance. These relationships hold even after controlling for political ideology, the standard explanation for burden tolerance in welfare programs.

AbstractState actions impact the lives of citizens in general and government benefit recipients in particular. However, little is known about whether experiences of psychological costs among benefit recipients can be relieved by reducing compliance demands in interactions with the state. Across three studies, we provide evidence that reducing demands causes relief. In a survey experiment, we show that psychological costs experienced by Danish unemployment insurance recipients change in response to information about actual reduced compliance demands. In two field studies, we exploit survey data collected around a sudden, exogenous shock (the COVID-19 lockdown of the Danish society in March 2020), which led to immediate reductions in compliance demands in Denmark's active labor market policies. We test whether two groups of benefit recipients experienced reduced psychological costs in response to these sudden reductions in compliance demands imposed by the state. Across all studies, we find that the reduction of compliance demands is associated with an increased sense of autonomy, and in two of the three studies, it is associated with reduced stress. Overall, our findings suggest that psychological costs experienced by benefit recipients are indeed affected by state actions in the form of compliance demands.

State actions impact the lives of citizens in general and government benefit recipients in particular. However, little is known about whether experiences of psychological costs among benefit recipients can be relieved by reducing compliance demands in interactions with the state. Across three studies, we provide evidence that reducing demands causes relief. In a survey experiment, we show that psychological costs experienced by Danish unemployment insurance recipients change in response to information about actual reduced compliance demands. In two field studies, we exploit survey data collected around a sudden, exogenous shock (the COVID-19 lockdown of the Danish society in March 2020), which led to immediate reductions in compliance demands in Denmark's active labor market policies. We test whether two groups of benefit recipients experienced reduced psychological costs in response to these sudden reductions in compliance demands imposed by the state. Across all studies, we find that the reduction of compliance demands is associated with an increased sense of autonomy, and in two of the three studies, it is associated with reduced stress. Overall, our findings suggest that psychological costs experienced by benefit recipients are indeed affected by state actions in the form of compliance demands.

State actions impact the lives of citizens in general and government benefit recipients in particular. However, little is known about whether experiences of psychological costs among benefit recipients can be relieved by reducing compliance demands in interactions with the state. Across three studies, we provide evidence that reducing demands causes relief. In a survey experiment, we show that psychological costs experienced by Danish unemployment insurance recipients change in response to information about actual reduced compliance demands. In two field studies, we exploit survey data collected around a sudden, exogenous shock (the COVID-19 lockdown of Danish society in March 2020), which led to immediate reductions in compliance demands in Denmark's active labor market policies. We test whether two groups of benefit recipients experienced reduced psychological costs in response to these sudden reductions in compliance demands imposed by the state. Across all studies, we find that the reduction of compliance demands is associated with an increased sense of autonomy, and in two of the three studies it is associated with reduced stress. Overall, our findings suggest that psychological costs experienced by benefit recipients are indeed affected by state actions in the form of compliance demands.

State actions impact the lives of citizens in general and government benefit recipients in particular. However, little is known about whether experiences of psychological costs among benefit recipients can be relieved by reducing compliance demands in interactions with the state. Across three studies, we provide evidence that reducing demands causes relief. In a survey experiment, we show that psychological costs experienced by Danish unemployment insurance recipients change in response to information about actual reduced compliance demands. In two field studies, we exploit survey data collected around a sudden, exogenous shock (the COVID-19 lockdown of Danish society in March 2020), which led to immediate reductions in compliance demands in Denmark's active labor market policies. We test whether two groups of benefit recipients experienced reduced psychological costs in response to these sudden reductions in compliance demands imposed by the state. Across all studies, we find that the reduction of compliance demands is associated with an increased sense of autonomy, and in two of the three studies it is associated with reduced stress. Overall, our findings suggest that psychological costs experienced by benefit recipients are indeed affected by state actions in the form of compliance demands. ; State actions impact the lives of citizens in general and government benefit recipients in particular. However, little is known about whether experiences of psychological costs among benefit recipients can be relieved by reducing compliance demands in interactions with the state. Across three studies, we provide evidence that reducing demands causes relief. In a survey experiment, we show that psychological costs experienced by Danish unemployment insurance recipients change in response to information about actual reduced compliance demands. In two field studies, we exploit survey data collected around a sudden, exogenous shock (the COVID-19 lockdown of the Danish society in March 2020), which led to immediate reductions in compliance demands in Denmark's active labor market policies. We test whether two groups of benefit recipients experienced reduced psychological costs in response to these sudden reductions in compliance demands imposed by the state. Across all studies, we find that the reduction of compliance demands is associated with an increased sense of autonomy, and in two of the three studies, it is associated with reduced stress. Overall, our findings suggest that psychological costs experienced by benefit recipients are indeed affected by state actions in the form of compliance demands.

In times of severe international crises, such as wars and terrorist attacks, citizens tend to 'rally-around-the-flag' and increase their support for political leaders. We ask if the rallying effects identified in the literature extend to the societal lockdowns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19-related lockdowns differ from crises studied in the existing literature because they are political crisis responses with severe and immediate negative effects on the economy. Using daily responses right before and after the announcement of the Danish lockdown on March, 11 2020, we study trust in democratic institutions among unemployed Danes over the first three weeks of a large-scale societal lockdown. OLS estimates show that trust in the Danish Prime Minister's administration was higher immediately after the lockdown announcement. This increase lasted throughout the entire period of measurement (until the end of March). We find similarly increased trust in other institutions, most significantly the judicial system, the media, and the public sector at large, whereas findings for trust in parliament are mixed. Interrupted time series estimates point to the same conclusions albeit they produce estimates with more noise. Overall, our findings are consistent with the idea that citizens tend to 'rally around the flag' in times of crisis and furthermore suggest that increased trust tends to spill over to institutions that are not involved in crisis management decisions. ; In times of severe international crises, such as wars and terrorist attacks, citizens tend to 'rally around the flag' and increase their support for political leaders. We ask if the rallying effects identified in the literature extend to the societal lockdowns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19-related lockdowns differ from crises studied in the existing literature because they are political crisis responses with severe and immediate negative effects on the economy. Using daily responses right before and after the announcement of the Danish lockdown on March 11, 2020, we study trust in democratic institutions among unemployed Danes over the first three weeks of a large-scale societal lockdown. OLS estimates show that trust in the Danish Prime Minister's administration was higher immediately after the lockdown announcement. This increase lasted throughout the entire period of measurement (until the end of March). We find similarly increased trust in other institutions, most significantly the judicial system and the public sector at large, whereas findings for trust in parliament and the media are less clear. Interrupted time series estimates point to the same conclusions albeit they produce estimates with more noise. Overall, our findings are consistent with the idea that citizens tend to 'rally around the flag' in times of crisis and furthermore suggest that increased trust tends to spill over to institutions that are not involved in crisis management decisions.