IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/pbudge/v44y2024i1p60-80.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Budget starting position matters: A “field‐in‐lab” experiment testing simulation engagement and budgetary preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Zach Mohr
  • Whitney Afonso

Abstract

Budget scholars have long theorized the impact of citizen engagement in the budget process. However, there is a void in the literature on modern types of engagement such as online budget simulations. Basic questions like what governments can do to increase the level of engagement and what effects such changes have on outcomes remain unanswered. Using a behavioral public budget and finance framework, we designed and tested an experiment with a local government budget simulation and varied the starting condition between balance, surplus, and deficit to assess the impact of starting condition on relevant outcomes of engagement and budgetary preferences. Results show that two measures of engagement and most budget preferences were influenced by the starting condition. Field‐in‐lab experiments like this one have the potential to further develop behavioral budget theory and be used to test online government platforms that are used by governments for engagement and many other purposes.

Suggested Citation

  • Zach Mohr & Whitney Afonso, 2024. "Budget starting position matters: A “field‐in‐lab” experiment testing simulation engagement and budgetary preferences," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 60-80, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:pbudge:v:44:y:2024:i:1:p:60-80
    DOI: 10.1111/pbaf.12351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/pbaf.12351
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/pbaf.12351?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:pbudge:v:44:y:2024:i:1:p:60-80. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0275-1100 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.