Ammons, D. N. and Roenigk, D. J. 2015. ‘Benchmarking and interorganizational learning in local government’. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25(1), 309–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Askim, J. 2007. ‘How do politicians use performance information? An analysis of the Norwegian local government experience’, International Review of Administrative Sciences 73(3): 453–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Askim, J., Johnsen, A., and Christophersen, K. A. 2008. ‘Factors behind organizational learning from benchmarking: experiences from Norwegian municipal benchmarking networks’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18(2): 297–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bækgaard, M. and Serritzlew, S. 2016. ‘Interpreting performance information: motivated reasoning or unbiased comprehension’, Public Administration Review 76(1): 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bevan, G. and Hood, C. 2006. ‘What’s measured is what matters: targets and gaming in the English healthcare system’, Public Administration 84(3): 517–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boyne, G. A., James, O., John, P., and Petrovsky, N. 2009. ‘Democracy and government performance: holding incumbents accountable in English local governments’, Journal of Politics 71(4): 1273–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chanley, V. A., Rudolph, T. J., and Rahn, W. M. 2000. ‘The origins and consequences of public trust in government: a time series analysis’, Public Opinion Quarterly 64(3): 239–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Charbonneau, É. and Van Ryzin, G. G. 2015. ‘Benchmarks and citizen judgments of local government performance: findings from a survey experiment’, Public Management Review 17(2): 288–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dowding, K. M. and John, P. 2012. Exits, Voices and Social Investments: Citizens’ Reaction to Public Services. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Espeland, W. N. and Sauder, M. 2007. ‘Rankings and reactivity: how public measures recreate social worlds’, American Journal of Sociology 133(1): 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gerber, A. and Green, D. 1999. ‘Misperceptions about perceptual bias’, Annual Review of Political Science 2(1): 189–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Jilke, S., Olsen, A. L., and Tummers, L. 2017. ‘Behavioral public administration: combining insights from public administration and psychology’, Public Administration Review 77(1): 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G. and Meijer, A. J. 2014. ‘The effects of transparency on the perceived trustworthiness of a government organization: evidence from an online experiment’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 24(1): 137–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D., and Yamamoto, T. 2014. ‘Causal inference in conjoint analysis: understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments’, Political Analysis 22(1): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hansen, K. M., Olsen, A. L., and Bech, M. 2015. ‘Cross-national yardstick comparisons: a choice experiment on a forgotten voter heuristic’, Political Behavior 37(4): 767–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hatry, H. P. 1999. Performance Measurement: Getting Results. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar

Herbst, S. 1993. Numbered Voices: How Opinion Polling Has Shaped American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Hibbing, J. R., Smith, K. B., and Alford, J. R. 2014. ‘Differences in negativity bias underlie variations in political ideology’, Behavioral and Brain Science 37: 297–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hood, C. 2006. ‘Transparency in historical perspective’. In Hood, C. and Heald, D. (Eds.), Transparency: The Key to Better Governance? 3–23. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hood, C. 2010. The Blame Game: Spin, Bureaucracy and Self-Preservation in Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hvidmand, U. and Andersen, S. 2015. ‘Perceptions of public and private performance: evidence from a survey experiment’, Public Administration Review.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, O. 2011a. ‘Performance measures and democracy: information effects on citizens in field and laboratory experiments’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21: 399–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, O. 2011b. ‘Managing citizens’ expectations of public service performance: evidence from observation and experimentation in local government’, Public Administration 89(4): 1419–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, O., Jilke, S., Petersen, C., and Van de Walle, S. 2016. ‘Citizens’ blame of politicians for public service failure: experimental evidence about blame reduction through delegation and contracting’, Public Administration Review 76(1): 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, O. and John, P. 2007. ‘Public management at the ballot box: performance information and electoral support for incumbent English local governments’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 17(4): 567–80.Google Scholar

James, O. and Moseley, A. 2014. ‘Does performance information about public services affect citizens’ perceptions, satisfaction, and voice behaviour? Field experiments with absolute and relative performance information’, Public Administration 92(2): 493–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, O. and Van Ryzin, G. G. 2017a. ‘Incredibly good performance: an experimental study of source and level effects on the credibility of government’, American Review of Public Administration 47(1): 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, O. and Van Ryzin, G. G. 2017b. ‘Motivated reasoning about public performance: an experimental study of how citizens judge the Affordable Care Act’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 27(1): 197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kroll, A. 2013. ‘The other type of performance information: non-routine feedback, its relevance and use’, Public Administration Review 73(2): 265–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lacetera, N., Pope, D. G., and Sydnor, J. R. 2012. ‘Heuristic thinking and limited attention in the car market’, American Economic Review 102(5): 2206–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lau, R. R. 1982. ‘Negativity in political perception’, Political Behavior 4(4): 353–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lau, R. R. 1985. ‘Two explanations for negativity effects in political behavior’, American Journal of Political Science 29(1): 119–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Leeper, T. J. and Slothuus, R. 2014. ‘Political parties, motivated reasoning, and public opinion formation’, Political Psychology 35(S1): 129–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levin, I. P. and Gaeth, G. J. 1988. ‘How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product’, Journal of Consumer Research 16: 374–78.Google Scholar

Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., and Gaeth, G. J. 1998. ‘All frames are not created equal: a typology and critical analysis of framing effects’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 76(2): 149–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lodge, M and Taber, C. S. 2013. The Rationalizing Voter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malhotra, N. and Margalit, Y. 2010. ‘Short-term communication effects or longstanding dispositions? The public’s response to the financial crisis of 2008’. The Journal of Politics 72(03): 852–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marvel, J. D. 2015. ‘Public opinion and public sector performance: Are individuals’ beliefs about performance evidence-based or the product of anti-public sector bias?’ International Public Management Journal 18(2): 209–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moynihan, D. P. 2008. The Dynamics of Performance Management: Constructing Information and Reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Moynihan, D. P. and Pandey, S. K. 2010. ‘The big question for performance management: why do managers use performance information?’ Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20(4): 849–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mussweiler, T. 2003. ‘Comparison processes in social judgement: mechanisms and consequences’, Psychological Review, (110)3: 472–89.Google Scholar

Olsen, A. L 2013a. ‘Leftmost-digit-bias in an enumerated public sector? An experiment on citizens’ judgment of performance information’, Judgment and Decision Making 8(3): 365–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olsen, A. L. 2013b. ‘The politics of digits: evidence of odd taxation’, Public Choice 154 1–2): 59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olsen, A. L. 2015a. ‘Citizen (dis)satisfaction: an equivalence framing study’, Public Administration Review 75(3): 469–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olsen, A. L. 2015b. ‘“Simon said”, we didn’t jump’, Public Administration Review 75(2): 469–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olsen, A. L. 2015c. ‘The numerical psychology of performance information – implications for citizens, managers, and policy makers’, Public Performance & Management Review 39(1): 100–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olsen, A. L. 2015d. ‘Negative performance information causes asymmetrical evaluations and elicits strong responsibility attributions’, 111th Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, September 2015.Google Scholar

Olsen, A. L. 2017a. ‘Human interest or hard numbers? Experiments on citizens’ selection, exposure, and recall of performance information’, Public Administration Review http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/puar.12638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olsen, A. L. 2017b. ‘Compared to what? experimental evidence on social and historical reference points in performance evaluation’, Forthcoming in Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Perrin, B. 1998. ‘Effective use and misuse of performance measurement’, American Journal of Evaluation 19(3): 367–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Petersen, M. B., Skov, M., Serritzlew, S., and Ramsøy, T. 2012. ‘Motivated reasoning and political parties: evidence for increased processing in the face of party cues’, Political Behavior 35(4): 831–54.Google Scholar

Pope, D. and Simonsohn, U. 2011. ‘Round numbers as goals evidence from baseball, SAT takers, and the lab’, Psychological Science 22(1): 71–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Rabin, M. 1998. ‘Psychology and economics’, Journal of Economic Literature 36(1): 11–46.Google Scholar

Rozin, P. and Royzman, E. B. 2001. ‘Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion’, Personality and Social Psychology Review 5(4): 296–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Simon, H. A. 1939. ‘The administrator in search of statistics’, Public Management, 21: 106–9.Google Scholar

Simon, H. A. 1955. ‘A behavioral model of rational choice’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 69(1): 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Soroka, S. N. 2006. ‘Good news and bad news: asymmetric responses to economic information’, Journal of Politics 68(2): 372–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stone, D. A. 1997. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. New York: WW Norton.Google Scholar

Tummers, L., Olsen, A. L., Jilke, S., and Grimmelikhuijsen, S. 2016. ‘Introduction to the virtual issue on behavioral public administration’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Virtual Issue (3): 1–3.Google Scholar

Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. 1991. ‘Loss aversion in riskless choice: a reference-dependent model’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1039–61.Google Scholar

Van Dooren, W., Bouckaert, G. and Halligan, J. 2015. Performance Management in the Public Sector. London, Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Ryzin, G. G. 2011. ‘Outcomes, process, and trust of civil servants’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(4): 745–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Ryzin, G. G. and Lavena, C. F. 2013. ‘The credibility of government performance reporting’, Public Performance & Management Review, 37(1): 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weaver, R. K. 1986. ‘The politics of blame avoidance’, Journal of Public Policy 6(4): 371–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar