Issue prioritisation decisions by local politicians: the role of order effects and justification requirements

References

• Aleksovska, M. 2021. “Accountable for What? The Effect of Accountability Standard Specification on Decision-Making Behavior in the Public Sector.” Public Performance & Management Review 44 (4): 707–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2021.1900880.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aleksovska, M., T. Schillemans, and S. Grimmelikhuijsen. 2019. “Lessons from Five Decades of Experimental and Behavioral Research on Accountability: A Systematic Literature Review.” Journal of Behavioral Public Administration 2. 2. https://doi.org/10.30636/jbpa.22.66.
   Google Scholar
• Audia, P., and H. Greve. 2020. “Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Multiple Goals.” Elements in Organization Theory. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108344289.
   Google Scholar
• Belardinelli, P., N. Bellé, M. Sicilia, and I. Steccolini. 2018. “Framing Effects Under Different uses of Performance Information: An Experimental Study on Public Managers: Framing Effects Under Different uses of Performance Information: An Experimental Study on Public Managers.” Public Administration Review 78 (6): 841–851. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12969.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhanot, S. P., and E. Linos. 2020. “Behavioral Public Administration: Past, Present, and Future.” Public Administration Review 80 (1): 168–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blom‐Hansen, J., M. Baekgaard, and S. Serritzlew. 2021. “How Bureaucrats Shape Political Decisions: The Role of Policy Information.” Public Administration 99 (4): 658–678. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12709.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond, S. D., K. A. Carlson, M. G. Meloy, J. Edward Russo, and R. J. Tanner. 2007. “Information Distortion in the Evaluation of a Single Option.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 102 (2): 240–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.04.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cantarelli, P., N. Belle, and P. Belardinelli. 2018. “Behavioral Public HR: Experimental Evidence on Cognitive Biases and Debiasing Interventions.” Review of Public Personnel Administration 40 (1): 56–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X18778090.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, J., C. M. Dahlmann, A. H. Mathiasen, D. P. Moynihan, and N. B. G. Petersen. 2018. “How do Elected Officials Evaluate Performance? Goal Preferences, Governance Preferences, and the Process of Goal Reprioritization.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 28 (2): 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, J., and O. James. 2022. “Reporting Multiple Dimensions of Public Service Performance: Information Order Effects on Citizens’ Willingness to use Services.” Public Management Review 24 (1): 142–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1798708.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, J., and D. P. Moynihan. 2020. “Motivated Reasoning and Policy Information: Politicians are More Resistant to Debiasing Interventions Than the General Public.” Behavioural Public Policy 8 (1): 47–68. November. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.50.
   Google Scholar
• Cyert, R. M., and J. G. March. 1992. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. 2nd ed. Cambridge, Mass. USA: Blackwell Business.
   Google Scholar
• de Dreu, C. K. W., B. Beersma, K. Stroebe, and M. C. Euwema. 2006. “Motivated Information Processing, Strategic Choice, and the Quality of Negotiated Agreement.” Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 90 (6): 927–943. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.6.927.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deschouwer, K. 2012. The Politics of Belgium: Governing a Divided Society, 1–296. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Gavetti, G., H. R. Greve, D. A. Levinthal, and W. Ocasio. 2012. “The Behavioral Theory of the Firm: Assessment and Prospects.” Academy of Management Annals 6 (1): 1–40. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2012.656841.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greve, H. 2003. Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Innovation and Change. Cambridge: Cambrigde University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, J. A., and P. Aaes Nielsen. 2022. “How do Public Managers Learn from Performance Information? Experimental Evidence on Problem Focus, Innovative Search, and Change.” Public Administration Review 82 (5): 946–957. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13533.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hogarth, R. M., and H. J. Einhorn. 1992. “Order Effects in Belief Updating: The Belief-Adjustment Model.” Cognitive Psychology 24 (1): 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90002-J.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holm, J. M. 2018. “Successful Problem Solvers? Managerial Performance Information use to Improve Low Organizational Performance.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 28 (3): 303–320. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, S. 2019. “A Behavioral Model of Public Organizations: Bounded Rationality, Performance Feedback, and Negativity Bias.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 29 (1): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, O., A. Leth Olsen, D. Moynihan, and G. G. van Ryzin. 2020. Behavioral Public Performance: How People Make Sense of Government Metrics. 1st ed. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108761338.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, B. D., and F. R. Baumgartner. 2005. The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Penguin Psychology. London: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1996. “On the Reality of Cognitive Illusions.” Psychological Review 103 (3): 582–591, discusion 592-596. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.582.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunda, Z. 1990. “The Case for Motivated Reasoning.” Psychological Bulletin 108 (3): 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, H., P. M. Herr, F. R. Kardes, and C. Kim. 1999. “Motivated Search: Effects of Choice Accountability, Issue Involvement, and Prior Knowledge on Information Acquisition and Use.” Journal of Business Research 45 (1): 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(98)00067-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lerner, J. S., and P. E. Tetlock. 1999. “Accounting for the Effects of Accountability.” Psychological Bulletin 125 (2): 255–275. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lerusse, A., and S. van de Walle. 2022a. “Buying from Local Providers: The Role of Governance Preferences in Assessing Performance Information.” Public Administration Review 82 (5): 835–849. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13491.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lerusse, A., and S. van de Walle. 2022b. “Public Officials’ Interpretation of Conflicting Performance Information: Goal Reprioritization or Unbiased Decision-Making?” Public Management Review 25 (10): 2003–2026. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2085777.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• March, J. G., and H. Alexander Simon. 1958. Organizations. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Mayo, C. W., and W. H. Crockett. 1964. “Cognitive Complexity and Primacy-Recency Effects in Impression Formation.” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 68:335–338. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0041716.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milton, L., and T. Charles. 2000. “Three Steps Toward a Theory of Motivated Political Reasoning.” In Elements of Reason, edited by A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, and S. L. Popkin, 183–213. 1st ed. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805813.009.
   Google Scholar
• Nagtegaal, R., L. Tummers, M. Noordegraaf, and V. Bekkers. 2020. “Designing to Debias: Measuring and Reducing Public Managers’ Anchoring Bias.” Public Administration Review 80 (4): 565–576. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roch, S. G. 2006. “Discussion and Consensus in Rater Groups: Implications for Behavioral and Rating Accuracy.” Human Performance 19 (2): 91–115. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1902_1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheffer, L., P. John Loewen, S. Soroka, S. Walgrave, and T. Sheafer. 2018. “Nonrepresentative Representatives: An Experimental Study of the Decision Making of Elected Politicians.” American Political Science Review 112 (2): 302–321. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055417000569.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1971. “Designing Organizations for an Information-Rich World.” In Computers, Communications, and the Public Interest, edited by M. Greenberger, 38–72. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taber, C. S., and M. Lodge. 2006. “Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 755–769. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetlock, P. E. 1983. “Accountability and the Perseverance of First Impressions.” Social Psychology Quarterly 46:285–292. https://doi.org/10.2307/3033716.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetlock, P. E. 1992. “The Impact of Accountability on Judgment and Choice: Toward a Social Contingency Model.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 331–376. Vol. 25. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60287-7.
   Google Scholar
• van der Voet, J. 2023. “Search in Response to Negative Performance Feedback: Problem-Definition and Solution-Generation.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 33 (1): 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Voet, J., and A. Lerusse. 2024. “Performance Information and Issue Prioritization by Political and Managerial Decision-Makers: A Discrete Choice Experiment.” Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory. April, muae011. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vis, B. 2019. “Heuristics and Political Elites’ Judgment and Decision-Making.” Political Studies Review 17 (1): 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929917750311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voet Joris van, D., and D. Rimkutė. 2022. “A Behavioral View on Responsibility Attribution in Multi‐Level Governance: Upward and Downward Responsibility Attribution in Response to Performance Below Aspirations.” Public Administration, November, padm.12892. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar