IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bpubpo/v10y2026i2p400-437_10.html

Positive public sector stereotypes and their impact on public service delivery: an audit experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Szydlowski, Gabriela
  • de Boer, Noortje
  • Tummers, Lars

Abstract

There are both negative and positive stereotypes about public sector workers. Most studies focus on negative stereotypes, like the idea that public servants are lazy. We, however, do the opposite. We focus on a positive stereotype: public sector workers are seen as caring and helpful. We test the effects of positive stereotypes on the quality of public service delivery. Using a pre-registered audit experiment in elderly care in the Netherlands and Belgium, we find that activating a pro-social stereotype does not affect the outcome of public service quality in terms of response rate and information provision. However, it does improve the bureaucratic process: public sector workers are friendlier toward citizens. They say around 12% more ‘thank you’ in their replies. Moreover, the citizens’ gender affects the response rate: female citizens receive around 10% more replies. Concluding, we show that positive stereotyping can improve parts of the quality of public service delivery but not all.

Suggested Citation

  • Szydlowski, Gabriela & de Boer, Noortje & Tummers, Lars, 2026. "Positive public sector stereotypes and their impact on public service delivery: an audit experiment," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 400-437, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bpubpo:v:10:y:2026:i:2:p:400-437_10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2398063X24000277/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:bpubpo:v:10:y:2026:i:2:p:400-437_10. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bpp .

    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.