IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpd/articl/v4y2021i1jbpa.41.149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Compared to whom? Social and historical reference points and performance appraisals by managers, students, and the general public

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda Rutherford

    (Indiana University)

  • Thomas Rabovsky

    (Indiana University)

  • Megan Darnley

    (Indiana University)

Abstract

Experimental studies in public administration often focus on samples of non-practitioner groups. In these cases, it is unclear whether findings from non-practitioner groups are generalizable to public managers. Some literature suggests that bureaucrats are likely to hold biases similar to the rest of the population while other research argues that bureaucratic expertise and training allow practitioners to make decisions in more strategic or rational ways. This study works within the literature of performance information to test for differences in responses to the same experiment among college students, citizens, and public managers in the context of U.S. K-12 education. Some differences were detected across groups, though results reveal largely similar findings which have implications for when and how scholars might rely on non-practitioner samples to consider the attitudes and behaviors of bureaucrats or elected policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda Rutherford & Thomas Rabovsky & Megan Darnley, 2021. "Compared to whom? Social and historical reference points and performance appraisals by managers, students, and the general public," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 4(1).
  • Handle: RePEc:bpd:articl:v:4:y:2021:i:1:jbpa.41.149
    DOI: 10.30636/jbpa.41.149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journal-bpa.org/index.php/jbpa/article/download/149/95
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30636/jbpa.41.149?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donald Moynihan, 2018. "A great schism approaching? Towards a micro and macro public administration," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 1(1).
    2. Sean Nicholson-Crotty & Jill Nicholson-Crotty & Sean Webeck, 2019. "Are public managers more risk averse? Framing effects and status quo bias across the sectors," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    3. Carolyn Heinrich & Alessandro Maffioli & Gonzalo Vázquez, 2010. "A Primer for Applying Propensity-Score Matching," SPD Working Papers 1005, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Strategic Planning and Development Effectiveness (SPD).
    4. Derrick M. Anderson & Barry C. Edwards, 2015. "Unfulfilled Promise: Laboratory experiments in public management research," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(10), pages 1518-1542, November.
    5. Étienne Charbonneau & Gregg G. Van Ryzin, 2015. "Benchmarks and Citizen Judgments of Local Government Performance: Findings from a survey experiment," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 288-304, February.
    6. T.K. Das & Bing‐Sheng Teng, 1999. "Cognitive Biases and Strategic Decision Processes: An Integrative Perspective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 757-778, November.
    7. Charles R. Schwenk, 1984. "Cognitive simplification processes in strategic decision‐making," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 111-128, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "The effect of cognitive diversity on the illusion of control bias in strategic decisions: An experimental investigation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 430-439.
    2. Samson, Kelly & Bhanugopan, Ramudu, 2022. "Strategic human capital analytics and organisation performance: The mediating effects of managerial decision-making," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 637-649.
    3. Neckermann, Jule, 2020. "Over-Confidence Bias in strategischen Entscheidungsprozessen: Entstehung, Konsequenzen und Lösungsansätze [Over-Confidence Bias in Strategic Decision-Making: Antecedents and Consequences]," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 5(3), pages 392-409.
    4. Friederike Neugebauer & Frank Figge & Tobias Hahn, 2016. "Planned or Emergent Strategy Making? Exploring the Formation of Corporate Sustainability Strategies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 323-336, July.
    5. Das, Willy & Das, Satyasiba, 2018. "Role of Heuristic Principles On Crowd-Funder's Investment Decision Making," 6th International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship. New Business Models and Institutional Entrepreneurs: Leading Disruptive Change (Dubrovnik, 2018), in: 6th International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship. New Business Models and Institutional Entrepreneurs: Leading Disrupt, pages 443-452, Governance Research and Development Centre (CIRU), Zagreb.
    6. Carolyn‐Dung Thi Thanh Tran & Brian Dollery, 2021. "All in the Mind: Citizen Satisfaction and Financial Performance in the Victorian Local Government System," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 31(1), pages 51-64, March.
    7. Cucchiarini, Veronica & Scicchitano, Sergio & Viale, Riccardo, 2024. "The Entrepreneur's Cognitive and Behavioral Journey: Understanding Heuristics and Bias under Risk and Uncertainty," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1390, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    8. Rydén, Pernille & Ringberg, Torsten & Wilke, Ricky, 2015. "How Managers' Shared Mental Models of Business–Customer Interactions Create Different Sensemaking of Social Media," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 1-16.
    9. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    10. Dinesh Dhakal & David O’Brien & Peter Mueser, 2021. "Government Policy and Performance of Agricultural Cooperatives: A Case Study in Chitwan District, Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-20, November.
    11. Uz Akdogan, Idil, 2020. "Understanding the dynamics of foreign reserve management: The central bank intervention policy and the exchange rate fundamentals," International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 41-55.
    12. Arapi-Gjini, Arjola & Möllers, Judith & Herzfeld, Thomas, 2020. "Measuring dynamic effects of remittances on poverty and inequality with evidence from Kosovo," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 58(4), pages 283-308.
    13. Fasolo, Barbara & Heard, Claire & Scopelliti, Irene, 2024. "Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: an integrative review, framework, and research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125404, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Walid Cheffi, 2008. "Etude Des Roles De La Comptabilite De Gestion Pour Les Managers : Le Cas D'Un Grand Groupe Automobile," Post-Print halshs-00522472, HAL.
    15. Solomon Asfaw & Silvio Daidone & Benjamin Davis & Josh Dewbre & Alessandro Romeo & Paul Winters & Katia Covarrubias & Habiba Djebbari, 2012. "Analytical Framework for Evaluating the Productive Impact of Cash Transfer Programmes on Household Behaviour – Methodological Guidelines for the From Protection to Production Project," Working Papers 101, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    16. Plamen Nikolov & Hongjian Wang & Kevin Acker, 2020. "Wage premium of Communist Party membership: Evidence from China," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 309-338, August.
    17. Bin Tang & Yue Wang & Yujuan Gao & Shijin Wu & Haoyang Li & Yang Chen & Yaojiang Shi, 2020. "The Effect of Boarding on the Mental Health of Primary School Students in Western Rural China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-17, November.
    18. Gerard P. Hodgkinson & Barbara Burkhard & Nicolai J. Foss & Dietmar Grichnik & Riikka M. Sarala & Yi Tang & Marc Van Essen, 2023. "The Heuristics and Biases of Top Managers: Past, Present, and Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1033-1063, July.
    19. Mercedes Bleda & Elisabeth Krull & Jonatan Pinkse & Eleni Christodoulou, 2023. "Organizational heuristics and firms' sensemaking for climate change adaptation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 6124-6137, December.
    20. Momi Dahan & Tehila Kogut & Moshe Shalem, 2009. "Do Economic Policymakers Practice what they Preach? The Case of Pension Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 2783, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sample comparisons; Survey experiment; Information framing; Perceived performance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General

    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:bpd:articl:v:4:y:2021:i:1:jbpa.41.149. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sebastian Jilke (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://journal-bpa.org .

    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.