Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-zr99j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-09-13T04:15:53.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can Social Pressure Foster Responsiveness? An Open Records Field Experiment with Mayoral Offices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 August 2020

Bryant J. Moy
Bryant J. Moy*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Washington University, Campus Box 1063, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130
*
Corresponding author. Email: bryant.moy@wustl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines the extent to which social pressures can foster greater responsiveness among public officials. I conduct a non-deceptive field experiment on 1400 city executives across all 50 states and measure their level of responsiveness to open records requests. I use two messages to prime social pressure. The first treatment centers on the norm and duty to be responsive to the public’s request for transparency. The second treatment is grounded in the peer effect literature, which suggests that individuals change their behavior in the face of potential social sanctioning and accountability. I find no evidence that mayors are affected by priming the officials’ duty to the public. The mayors who received the peer effects prime were 6–8 percentage points less likely to respond, which suggests a “backfire effect.” This paper contributes to the growing responsiveness literature on the local level and the potential detrimental impact of priming peer effects.

Keywords

social pressurepublic officialsopen records

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Experimental Political Science , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , Summer 2021 , pp. 117 - 127
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Experimental Research Section of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

I thank Betsy Sinclair, Andrew Reeves, Jacob Montgomery, Margit Tavits, and the reviewers for their helpful comments. The data and code required to replicate the analysis in the article are available at the Journal of Experimental Political Science Dataverse within the Harvard Dataverse Network, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/EHVA7Y (Moy, 2020). To protect the anonymity of the public officials who participated in the experiment, covariates are removed from the replication data. The editorial office was able to reproduce the findings from the restricted data. The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

Arnold, R. Douglas. 1990. The Logic of Congressional Action. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1991. Constituency Opinion and Congressional Policy Making: The Reagan Defense Buildup. American Political Science Review 85: 457–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Aaron, James, Denny, Matthew, Desmarais, Bruce and Wallach, Hanna. 2017. Transparency by Conformity: A Field Experiment Evaluating Openness in Local Governments. Public Administration Review 77(1): 67–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, Michael, Alvaro, Eusebio, Grandpre, Joseph and Voulodakis, Michael. 2002. Revisiting the Theory of Psychological Reactance: Communicating Threats to Attitudinal Freedom. In The Persuasion Handbook: Developments in Theory and Practice, eds. Dillard, James Price and Pfau, Michael. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppock, Alexander. 2019. Avoiding Post-Treatment Bias in Audit Experiments. Journal of Experimental Political Science 6(1): 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, Mia. 2017. How Responsive are Political Elites? A Meta-Analysis of Experiments on Public Officials. Journal of Experimental Political Science 4(3): 241–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuillier, David and Davis, Charles N.. 2010. The Art of Access: Strategies for Acquiring Public Records. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dillard, James Price and Shen, Lijiang. 2005. One the Nature of Reactance and its Role in Persuasive Health Communication. Communication Monographs 72(2): 144–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einstein, Katherine Levine and Glick, David M.. 2017. Cities in American Federalism: Evidence on State-Local Government Conflict from a Survey of Mayors. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 47(4): 599–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felsenthal, Carol. 2016. Rahm’s Emails: Billionaire Friends, Curt Replies, and Plenty of Loopholes. Chicago Magazine.Google Scholar
Fitzsimons, Gavan J. and Lehmann, Donald R.. 2004. Reactance to Recommendations: When Unsolicited Advice Yields Contrary Responses. Marketing Science 23(Winter): 82–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geraghty, Sarah and Velez, Melanie. 2011. Bringing Transparency and Accountability to Criminal Justice Institutions in the South. Stanford Law and Policy Review 22: 455–488.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan and Green, Donald. 2012. Field Experiments: Design, Analysis, and Interpretation. 1 ed. New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., Green, Donald P. and Larimer, Christopher W.. 2008. Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment. American Political Science Review 102(1): 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, Robert E. 2003. Democratic Accountability: The Distinctiveness of the Third Sector. European Journal of Sociology 44(3): 359–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, J. David and Mays, Jeffrey. 2018. Mayor de Blasio’s Emails, Uncensored and Unforgiving. New York Times.Google Scholar
Green, Donald P. and Gerber, Alan S.. 2008. Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Voter Turnout. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
Green, Donald P. and Gerber, Alan S. 2010. Introduction to Social Pressure and Voting: New Experimental Evidence. Political Behavior 32(3): 331–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guisinger, Alexandra. 2009. Determining Trade Policy: Do Voters Hold Politicians Accountable? International Organization 63(Summer): 533–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harmon, Nikolaj, Fisman, Raymond and Kamenica, Emir. 2019. Peer Effects in Legislative Voting. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 11(4): 156–80.Google Scholar
Holden, Richard, Keane, Michael and Lilley, Matthew. 2019. Peer Effects on the United States Supreme Court. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3339242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Michael and Birrell, James. 1979. Government Health Warnings and the “Boomerang” Effect. Psychological Reports 44(April): 643–647.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Key, V.O. Jr. 1961. Public Opinion and Democracy. New York, NY: Knopf.Google Scholar
Kousser, Thad, Lewis, Jeffrey B. and Masket, Seth E.. 2007. Ideological Adaptation? The Survival Instinct of Threatened Legislators. The Journal of Politics 69(3): 828–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowande, Kenneth. 2018. Who Polices the Administrative State. American Political Science Review 112(November): 874–890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowande, Kenneth. 2019. Politicization and Responsiveness in Executive Agencies. Journal of Politics 81(1): 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, James and Olsen, Johan P.. 2011. The Logic of Appropriateness. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Science, ed. Goodin, Robert E.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
March, James G. and Olsen, Johan P.. 1989. Rediscovering Institutions. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
March, James G. and Olsen, Johan P.. 1995. Democratic Governance. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Masket, Seth. 2008. Where You Sit is Where You Stand: The Impact of Seating Proximity on Legislative Cue-Taking. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 3: 301–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mladenka, Kenneth. 1981. Citizen Demands and Urban Services: The Distribution of Bureaucratic Response in Chicago and Houston. American Journal of Political Science 25(4): 693–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, Jacob, Nyhan, Brendan and Torres, Michelle. 2018. How Conditioning on Posttreatment Variables Can Ruin Your Experiment and What to Do about It. American Journal of Political Science 62(3): 760–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moy, Bryant. 2020. Replication Data for: Can Social Pressure Foster Responsiveness? An Open Records Field Experiment with Mayoral Offices. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ EHVA7Y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panagopoulos, Costas. 2014a. I’ve Got My Eyes on You: Implicit Social-Pressure Cues and Prosocial Behavior. Political Psychology 35(1): 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panagopoulos, Costas. 2014b. Watchful Eyes: Implicit Observability Cues and Voting. Journal of Evolution and Human Behavior 35(4): 279–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringold, Debra Jones. 2002. Boomerang Effects in Response to Public Health Interventions: Some Unintended Consequences in the Alcoholic Beverage Market. Journal of Consumer Policy 25(January): 27–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saltzstein, Grace Hall. 1992. Bureaucratic Responsiveness: Conceptual Issues and Current Research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART 2(1): 63–88.Google Scholar
Scott, Colin. 2006. Spontaneous Accountability. In Public Accountability, Designs, Dilemmas and Experiences, ed. Dowdle, Michael W.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 174–191.Google Scholar
Sovey, Allison J. and Green, Donald P. 2011. Instrumental Variables Estimation in Political Science: A Readers’ Guide. American Journal of Political Science 55(1): 188–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terechshenko, Zhanna, Crabtree, Charles, Eck, Kristine and Fariss, Christopher J. 2019. Evaluating the Influence of International Norms and Shaming on State Respect for Rights: An Audit Experiment with Foreign Embassies. International Interactions 45(4): 720–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Woodrow. 1913. The New Freedom: A Call for the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People. Doubleday: Page & Company.Google Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 1995. The Public as Thermostat: Dynamics of Preferences for Spending. American Journal of Political Science 39: 981–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolburg, Joyce M. 2006. College Students’ Responses to Antismoking Messages: Denial, Defiance, and Other Boomerang Effects. Journal of Consumer Affairs 40(2): 294–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Abby K. and Lewis, David E.. 2017. Agency Performance Challenges and Agency Politicization. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 27(4): 581–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Moy Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/EHVA7Y
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Moy supplementary material

Moy supplementary material 1

Download Moy supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 729.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Moy supplementary material

Moy supplementary material 2

Download Moy supplementary material(File)
File 45.7 KB