The Public Values of Political Preference

REFERENCES

• Andersen, L. B., Beck Jørgensen, T., Kjeldsen, A. M., Pedersen, L. H., & Vrangbæk, K. (2012). Public value dimensions: Developing and testing a multi-dimensional classification. International Journal of Public Administration, 35(11), 715–728. doi:10.1080/01900692.2012.670843
   Google Scholar
• Ashton, C., Danso, A., Maio, G. R., Esses, V. M., Bond, M. H., & Keung, D. K. Y. (2005). Two dimensions of political attitudes and their individual difference correlates: A cross-cultural perspective. In R. M. Sorrentino, D. Cohen, J. M. Olson, & M. Zanna (Eds.), Culture and social behavior: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 10, pp. 1–29). London, UK: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, D. E., Raiffa, H., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1988). Decision making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values and public interest: Counterbalancing economic individualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, C., & Peters, B. (1988). The politics/administration dichotomy: Death or merely change? Governance, 1(1), 79–99. doi:10.1111/gove.1988.1.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Caprara, G. V., Schwartz, S., Capanna, C., Vecchione, M., & Barbaranelli, C. (2006). Personality and politics: Values, traits, and political choice. Political Psychology, 27(1), 1–28. doi:10.1111/pops.2006.27.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Graaf, G., & Van der Wal, Z. (2010). Managing conflicting public values: Governing with integrity and effectiveness. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(6), 623–630. doi:10.1177/0275074010375298
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demir, T., & Nyhan, R. C. (2008). The politics–administration dichotomy: An empirical search for correspondence between theory and practice. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 81–96. doi:10.1111/puar.2008.68.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denhardt, R. B., & Denhardt, J. V. (2000). The new public service: Serving rather than steering. Public Administration Review, 60(6), 549–559. doi:10.1111/puar.2000.60.issue-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Etzioni, A. (1967). Mixed-scanning: A “third” approach to decision-making. Public Administration Review, 27, 385–392. doi:10.2307/973394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, S. (1988). Structure and consistency in public opinion: The role of core beliefs and values. American Journal of Political Science, 32, 416–440. doi:10.2307/2111130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorina, M. P., Abrams, S. J., & Pope, J. C. (2005). Culture war?. New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Fiske, A. P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1997). Taboo trade-offs: Reactions to transactions that transgress the spheres of justice. Political Psychology, 18, 255–297. doi:10.1111/pops.1997.18.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, C. H. (1984). Issue preferences, socialization, and the evolution of party identification. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 459–478. doi:10.2307/2110900
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, C. H., & Jackson, J. E. (1983). The dynamics of party identification. The American Political Science Review, 77(4), 957–973. doi:10.2307/1957569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fritzsche, D. J., & Oz, E. (2007). Personal values’ influence on the ethical dimension of decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 75, 335–343. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9256-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goren, P. (2005). Party identification and core political values. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 881–896. doi:10.1111/ajps.2005.49.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goss, R. P. (1996). A distinct public administration ethics? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(4), 573–597. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024328
   Google Scholar
• Green, D. P., & Palmquist, B. (1994). How stable is party identification? Political Behavior, 16(4), 437–466. doi:10.1007/BF01498826
   Google Scholar
• Heath, A., Jowell, R., & Curtice, J. (1985). How Britain votes. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19. doi:10.1111/padm.1991.69.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacoby, W. G. (2006). Value choices and American public opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 706–723. doi:10.1111/ajps.2006.50.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, E. E., & Gerard, H. (1967). Foundations of social psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Jørgensen, T. (2006). Public values, their nature, stability and change. The case of Denmark. Public Administration Quarterly, 30 (3–4), 365–398.
   Google Scholar
• Jørgensen, T., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values: An inventory. Administration & Society, 39(3), 354–381. doi:10.1177/0095399707300703
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value trade-offs. London, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, G. A. (1991). The psychology of personal constructs. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Kernaghan, K. (1976). Politics, policy and public servants: Political neutrality revisited. Canadian Public Administration, 19(3), 432–456. doi:10.1111/j.1754-7121.1976.tb01728.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krosnick, J. A. (1991). The stability of political preferences: Comparisons of symbolic and nonsymbolic attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 35, 547–576. doi:10.2307/2111553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitan, D. M. (1942). The neutrality of the public service. Public Administration Review, 2(4), 317–323. doi:10.2307/972951
   Google Scholar
• Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of” muddling through”. Public Administration Review, 19, 79–88. doi:10.2307/973677
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindblom, C. E. (1979). Still muddling, not yet through. Public Administration Review, 39, 517–526. doi:10.2307/976178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupia, A., McCubbins, M. D., & Popkin, S. L. (2000). Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality. London, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lyons, S. T., Higgins, C. A., & Duxbury, L. (2010). Work values: Development of a new three‐dimensional structure based on confirmatory smallest space analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(7), 969–1002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCann, J. A. (1997). Electoral choices and core value change: The 1992 presidential campaign. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 564–583. doi:10.2307/2111777
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Toole, L. J., Jr. (1987). Doctrines and developments: Separation of powers, the politics-administration dichotomy, and the rise of the administrative state. Public Administration Review, 47, 17–25. doi:10.2307/975468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overeem, P. (2005). The value of the dichotomy: Politics, administration, and the political neutrality of administrators. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 27(2), 311–329.
   Google Scholar
• Overeem, P. (2008). Beyond heterodoxy: Dwight Waldo and the politics–administration dichotomy. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 36–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riker, W. (1982). Liberalism against populism: A confrontation between the theory of social democracy and the theory of social choice. San Francisco, CA: WH Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Rohr, J. A. (2000). “Regime Values.” In J. M. Shafritz (Ed), Defining Public Administration (pp. 420–421). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values (Vol. 438). New York, NY: Free press.
   Google Scholar
• Rokeach, M. (1985). Inducing change and stability in belief systems and personality structures. Journal of Social Issues, 41(1), 153–171. doi:10.1111/josi.1985.41.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rokeach, M., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1989). Stability and change in American value priorities, 1968–1981. American Psychologist, 44(5), 775–784.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbloom, D. (2008). The politics–administration dichotomy in US historical context. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 57–60. doi:10.1111/puar.2008.68.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutgers, M. R. (2008). Sorting out public values? On the contingency of value classification in public administration. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 30(1), 92–113.
   Google Scholar
• Rutgers, M. R. (2012, June). A pantheon of public values: A historical and conceptual approach to the normativity of facts and values. A paper presented at The Public Values Consortium Biennial Workshop, Chicago, IL. Available online at http://www.narcis.nl/publication/RecordID/oai:uva.nl:376695
   Google Scholar
• Schreurs, P. (2005). Symposium—the value (s) of public administration: Dedicated to Amande Nina Wianne. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 27(2), 301–310.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25(1), 1–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 550–562. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.550
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, S. H., Caprara, G. V., & Vecchione, M. (2010). Basic personal values, core political values, and voting: A longitudinal analysis. Political Psychology, 31(3), 421–452. doi:10.1111/pops.2010.31.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 519–542. doi:10.1177/0022022101032005001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selden, S. C., Brewer, G. A., & Brudney, J. L. (1999). Reconciling competing values in public administration: Understanding the administrative role concept. Administration & Society, 31(2), 171–204. doi:10.1177/00953999922019085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1985). Human nature in politics: The dialogue of psychology with political science. The American Political Science Review, 79, 293–304. doi:10.2307/1956650
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skitka, L. J., & Tetlock, P. E. (1993). Providing public assistance: Cognitive and motivational processes underlying liberal and conservative policy preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1205–1223. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.6.1205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, D. A. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. New York, NY: WW Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Svara, J. H. (1998). The politics-administration dichotomy model as aberration. Public Administration Review, 58, 51–58. doi:10.2307/976889
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svara, J. H. (2001). The myth of the dichotomy: Complementarity of politics and administration in the past and future of public administration. Public Administration Review, 61(2), 176–1. doi:10.1111/puar.2001.61.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svara, J. H. (2008). Beyond dichotomy: Dwight Waldo and the intertwined politics–administration relationship. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 46–52. doi:10.1111/puar.2008.68.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetlock, P. E. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(4), 819–827. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.4.819
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetlock, P. E. (2000). Coping with trade-offs: Psychological constraints and political implications. In A. Lupia, & M. D. McCubbins (Eds.), Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality (pp. 239–263). London, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Wal, Z., De Graaf, G., & Lasthuizen, K. (2008). What’s valued most? Similarities and differences between the organizational values of the public and private sector. Public Administration, 86(2), 465–482. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2008.00719.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Wal, Z., Nabatchi, T., & De Graaf, G. (2013). From galaxies to universe: A cross-disciplinary review and analysis of public values publications from 1969 to 2012. The American Review of Public Administration, 45 (1), 13–28.0275074013488822.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Wal, Z., & Van Hout, E. T. J. (2009). Is public value pluralism paramount? The intrinsic multiplicity and hybridity of public values. International Journal of Public Administration, 32(3–4), 220–231. doi:10.1080/01900690902732681
   Google Scholar
• Van Wart, M. (1998). Changing public sector values (Vol. 1045). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Waldo, D. (1984). The perdurability of the politics–administration dichotomy. In J. Rabin, & J. S. Bowman (Eds.), Politics and administration: Woodrow Wilson and American public administration (pp. 219–233). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, M. (1946). Bureaucracy. In Max Weber: Essays in sociology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, W. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2(2), 197–222. doi:10.2307/2139277
   Google Scholar
• Witesman, E., & Walters, L. (2013). Public service values: A new approach to the study of motivation in the public sphere. Public Administration. doi:10.1111/padm.12000
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, K., & Holzer, M. (2005). Re-approaching the politics/administration dichotomy and its impact on administrative ethics. Public Integrity, 7(2), 110–127.
   Google Scholar