Journal of Behavioral Public Administration 2020-03-30T14:08:12+00:00 Sebastian Jilke Open Journal Systems <p><em>Journal of Behavioral Public Administration (JBPA)</em> is a peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary open access journal that focuses on behavioral and experimental research in public administration, broadly defined.&nbsp; JBPA encourages submissions of both basic scholarly and applied work conducted by academics or practitioners.</p> Editorial 2020-02-17T19:42:39+00:00 Sebastian Jilke Kenneth Meier Gregg Van Ryziin 2020-02-16T19:38:03+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Sector bias in public programs: US nonprofit hospitals 2020-02-29T13:27:59+00:00 Kenneth J. Meier Seung-ho An <p>This study investigates whether the public perceives nonprofit organizations as different from private for-profit and public organizations and whether introducing new performance management systems would provide positive credits to the organization. Using two randomized survey experiments on US hospitals (one with an adult sample and the other with a student sample), we replicate the study of Hvidman &amp; Andersen (2016) in Denmark with an extension of adding a nonprofit organization cue. The results show no sectoral differences among the hospitals and no positive feedback for adopting a new performance management system.</p> 2020-02-28T22:21:39+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Interpreting expectations: Normative and predictive expectations from the citizens’ viewpoint 2020-03-01T13:30:37+00:00 Morten Hjortskov <p>Citizens’ expectations are a primary source of information for politicians and public managers when developing public policies in democracies. Moreover, expectations are thought to have extensive influence on how citizens evaluate the resulting policy. If politicians want citizens who are satisfied with public services, they need to address these expectations. Theories of expectation formation tell us that two general forms of expectations exist: predictive and normative. Predictive expectations are about how a future service <em>will</em> be, whereas normative expectations concern how it <em>should</em>be. But do citizens make this distinction? If they perceive and express their expectations differently than the theory predicts, it might affect the knowledge that we have on citizen expectations and their effects. This study investigates whether citizens have different interpretations of expectations and whether making them aware of the distinctions between predictive and normative expectations causes them to change their expectations. Results show that citizens interpret expectations very differently and that experimentally posing different questions about expectations at the same time merely increases the effect. The implications for the assessment of citizen expectations are discussed.</p> 2020-02-29T20:50:44+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Using Behavioral Science to help fight the Coronavirus 2020-03-30T14:08:12+00:00 Peter D. Lunn Cameron A. Belton Ciarán Lavin Féidhlim P. McGowan Shane Timmons Deirdre A. Robertson <p>This rapid, narrative review summarizes useful evidence from behavioral science for fighting the COVID-19 outbreak. We undertook an extensive, multi-disciplinary literature search covering five issues: handwashing, face touching, self-isolation, public-spirited behavior, and responses to crisis communication. The search identified more than 100 relevant papers. We find effective behavioral interventions to increase handwashing, but not to reduce face touching. Social supports and behavioral plans can reduce the negative psychological effects of isolation, potentially reducing the disincentive to isolate. Public-spirited behavior is more likely with frequent communication of what is “best for all”, strong group identity, and social disapproval of noncompliance. Effective crisis communication involves speed, honesty, credibility, empathy, and promoting useful individual actions. Risks are probably best communicated through numbers, with ranges to describe uncertainty – simply stating a maximum may bias public perception. The findings aim to be useful not only for government and public health authorities, but for organizations and communities.</p> 2020-03-29T15:35:49+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Revealing the “Hidden welfare state”: How policy information influences public attitudes about tax expenditures 2020-02-17T09:02:52+00:00 Matt Guardino Suzanne Mettler <p>In this article, we explore how specific policy information shapes public opinion toward the “hidden welfare state” of tax expenditures. These politically and socioeconomically consequential policies—most of which bestow their greatest benefits on upper-income people—are complex and opaque, and scholars’ understanding of citizen attitudes toward them is limited. In response, we use a randomized, general population, online survey experiment to test the effects of providing people with varying amounts and kinds of information about three policies. We find that learning the basic design and rationale of key tax expenditures tends to increase public support for them. However, when informed of the distributive effects of the two policies that favor upper-income people, subjects become much less supportive of these policies. Moreover, policy-specific information appears to help subjects align their preferences with their immediate material interests. Learning the upward tilt of tax expenditures especially makes lower- and middle-income people less supportive of the policies. Our results suggest that if political elites, government administrators and news media routinely offered clear information about tax expenditures, public opinion toward the hidden welfare state would be more firmly grounded. By virtue of their design, these policies discourage public awareness of their mechanisms and distributive effects. Still, greater informational outreach regarding complicated and arcane tax expenditures could bolster public accountability for government actions that favor economically narrow and privileged segments of the population.</p> 2020-02-16T21:00:51+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Testing the open government recipe: Are vision and voice good governance ingredients? 2020-02-17T09:02:59+00:00 Alex Ingrams Wesley Kaufmann Daan Jacobs <p><span lang="EN-GB">Existing research shows that open government can result in better governance outcomes. However, there remains a gap in our understanding of how open government’s two component dimensions of transparency and participation – “vision” and “voice” – affect governance outcomes, and how they relate to each other within public decision-making. We use a survey experiment to test the impact of transparency and participation on a range of governance outcomes (satisfaction, perception of fairness, and trust) in a municipal decision-making process. The findings show that both transparency and participation positively affect these governance outcomes. However, we do not find support for an interaction effect of transparency and participation. Implications for research and practitioners are discussed. </span></p> 2020-02-16T20:59:55+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Follow the crowd: Social information and crowdfunding donations in a large field experiment 2020-03-26T14:06:05+00:00 Claire van Teunenbroek René Bekkers <p>Purposely guiding human decision making with a discrete suggestion, ‘nudging’, is increasingly popular. One particularly promising nudge is to provide decision makers with information about the decisions of others, also referred to as social information. Social information is often applied in fundraising campaigns to increase individual donations. A discrete suggestion such as the donation amount of others can result in donors donating similar amounts. We examined effects of social information in a relatively new context, namely crowdfunding. Crowdfunding is a new online fundraising tool. Our study, based on a large natural field experiment (n = 24,070), tests to what extent social information affects online donation behavior and how its effects vary throughout the duration of a campaign. We show that social information increases the individual donation amount by 17%, which is close to the average of 14% found in previous studies. However, social information did not attract more donors: the participation rate was not affected. Our study is the first to pinpoint the stage of the funding campaign at which the effect of social information is most pronounced. We found that social information is most effective in increasing donations at the beginning of crowdfunding campaigns. All materials for this article are available at</p> 2020-03-25T23:01:18+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Does a business-like approach to diversity in nonprofit organizations have a chilling effect on stakeholders? 2019-12-02T05:54:27+00:00 Ines Jurcevic Rachel Fyall <p>Despite widespread commitment to promoting diversity in the nonprofit sector, increasing diversity poses a continued challenge for many nonprofits. Even nonprofits with explicit diversity statements often struggle to diversify their organizations. One potential impediment to achieving diversity may result from the framing and communication of diversity values within nonprofits. We evaluate the reactions of hypothetical stakeholders to two forms of diversity framing – instrumental and moral frames – focusing on potential divergence amongst racial-minority and White perspectives. Experiment 1 demonstrates that Black and Latino participants feel marginally more dehumanized and anticipate racial minorities will feel more devalued in an organization espousing the moral (compared to instrumental) diversity frame. In contrast, Whites feel less valued, more dehumanized, and perceive organizations as less authentically dedicated to diversity when viewing an organization that espouses the instrumental (compared to moral) frame. Experiment 2 extends these results demonstrating that Whites who are particularly concerned about their place in future job markets are more likely to feel devalued by instrumental frames to diversity. We discuss how these results diverge from existing findings of similar frames applied to business, rather than nonprofit, contexts. These findings extend our understanding of the implications of outcome-oriented versus moral frames within nonprofit organizations as well as informing understanding of how diversity frames may offer divergent signals to underrepresented and non-underrepresented stakeholders.</p> 2019-12-01T18:02:47+00:00 Copyright (c) 2019