Auspurg, K. and Hinz, T. 2014. Factorial Survey Experiments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Andrews, R., Boyne, G. and Walker, R. 2006. ‘Strategy content and organizational performance: an empirical analysis’, Public Administration Review, 66(1): 52–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bishop, G. and Smith, A. 2001. ‘Response-order effects and the early Gallup split-ballots’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(4): 479–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bishop, G. and Smith, A. 1991. ‘Gallup split ballot experiments’, The Public Perspective, July/August: 25–7.Google Scholar

Blair, G. and Imai, K. 2012. ‘Statistical analysis of list experiments’, Political Analysis, 20: 47–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bohannon, J. 2011. ‘Social science for pennies’, Science, 334(6054): 307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bouwman, R. and Grimmelikhuijsen, S. 2016. ‘Experimental public administration from 1992 to 2014: a systematic literature and ways forward’, International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brewer, G. and Walker, R. 2010. ‘The impact of red tape on governmental performance: an empirical analysis’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(1): 233–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bullock, J., Stritch, J. and Rainey, H. 2015. ‘International comparison of public and private employees’ work motives, attitudes, and perceived rewards’, Public Administration Review, 75(3): 489–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cantril, H. 1944. Gauging Public Opinion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chaudhuri, A. and Christofides, T. 2007. ‘Item count technique in estimating the proportion of people with a sensitive feature’, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 137(2): 589–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christenson, D. P. and Glick, D. M. 2012. ‘Crowdsourcing panel studies and real-time experiments in MTurk’, The Political Methodologist, 20(2): 27–32.Google Scholar

Christensen, R. and Stritch, J. 2016. ‘Prosocial Dr. Jekyll, meet Deviant Mr. Hyde: exploring the confluence of other-oriented public values and self-centered narcissism’. Paper presented at The Public Values Consortium Workshop, Arizona State University.Google Scholar

Droitcour, J., Caspar, R., Hubbard, M., Parsley, T., Visscher, W. and Ezzati, T. 1991. ‘The item count technique as a method of indirect questioning: a review of its development and a case study application’, in Measurement Errors in Surveys, eds. Briemer, P., Groves, R., Lyberg, L., Mathiowetz, N. and Sudman, S., 185–210. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Gaines, B. and Kuklinski, J. 2011. ‘Treatment effects’, in Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, eds. Druckman, J., Green, D., Kuklinski, J. and Lupia, A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gaines, B., Kuklinski, J. and Quirk, P. 2007. ‘The logic of the survey experiment reexamined’, Political Analysis, 15: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Glynn, A. 2013. ‘What can we learn with statistical truth serum? Design and analysis of the list experiment’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 77: 159–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodman, J., Cryder, C. and Amar, C. 2013. ‘Data collection in a flat world: the strengths and weaknesses of mechanical Turk samples’, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26(3): 213–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gossen, S. 2014. Social Desirability in Survey Research: Can the List Experiment Provide the Truth? PhD Dissertation. Phillips-University Marburg.Google Scholar

Green, D. and Holger, K. 2012. ‘Modeling heterogeneous treatment effects in survey experiments with Bayesian additive regression trees’. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3): 491–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Green, P., Krieger, A. and Wind, Y. 2001. ‘Thirsty years of conjoint analysis: reflections and prospects’, in Marketing Research Modelling: Progress and Prospects, eds. Wind, Y. and Green, P., 117–39. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Green, P. and Rao, V. 1971. ‘Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgemental data’, Journal of Marketing Research, 8: 355–63.Google Scholar

Groeneveld, S., Tummers, L., Bronkhorst, B., Ashikali, T. and Van Thiel, S. 2015. ‘Quantitative methods in public administration: their use and development through time’, International Public Management Journal, 18(1): 61–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hainmueller, J., Hangartner, D. and Yamamoto, T. 2015. ‘Validating vignette and conjoint survey experiments against real-world behavior’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(8): 2395–2400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

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

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

Huff, C. and Tingley, D. 2015. ‘“Who are these people?” Evaluating the demographic characteristics and political preferences of MTurk survey respondents’, Research & Politics, 2(3): 2053168015604648.CrossRefGoogle 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

Jasso, G. 2006. ‘Factorial survey methods for studying beliefs and judgments’, Sociological Methods & Research, 34(3): 334–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jilke, S. 2015. ‘Choice and equality: are vulnerable citizens worse off after liberalization reforms?’ Public Administration, 93(1): 68–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jilke, S., Meuleman, B. and Van de Walle, S. 2015. ‘We need to compare, but how? Measurement equivalence in comparative public administration’, Public Administration Review, 75(1): 36–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jilke, S. and Tummers, L. 2016. ‘Cues of deservingness and street-level decision making: evidence from a conjoint experiment among US teachers’. Paper presented at IRSPM 2016 in Hong Kong.Google Scholar

Jilke, S., Van Ryzin, G. and Van de Walle, S. 2015. ‘Responses to decline in marketized public services: an experimental evaluation of choice-overload’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, online first.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kaufmann, W. and Feeney, M. K. 2012. ‘Objective formalization, perceived formalization and perceived red tape’, Public Management Review, 14(8): 1195–1214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, S. H. and Kim, S. 2013. ‘National culture and social desirability bias in measuring public service motivation’, Administration & Society, online first.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kjeldsen, A. M. and Botcher Jacobsen, C. 2013. ‘Public service motivation and employment sector: attraction or socialization?’ Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(4): 899–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuklinski, J., Cobb, M. and Gilens, M. 1997. ‘Racial attitudes and the “new South”’, Journal of Politics, 59(2): 323–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marvel, J. 2015. ‘Unconscious bias in citizen’s evaluations of public sector performance’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, online first.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meier, K. and O’Toole, L. 2013. ‘Subjective organizational performance and measurement error: common source bias and spurious relationships’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 23(2): 429–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nielsen, P. and Bækgaard, M. ‘Performance information, blame avoidance, and politicians’ attitudes to spending and reform: evidence from an experiment’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25(2): 545–69.Google Scholar

Miller, J. 1984. A New Survey Technique for Studying Deviant Behavior. PhD dissertation. George Washington University.Google Scholar

Miller, J. L., Rossi, P. H., Simpson, J. E. and Simpson, J. O. N. E. 1991. ‘Felony punishments : a factorial survey of perceived justice in criminal sentencing’, Criminal Sentencing, 82(2).Google Scholar

Mutz, D., 2011. Population-Based Survey Experiments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Noelle-Neumann, E. 1970. ‘Wanted: rules for wording structured questionnaires’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(2): 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Oppenheimer, D., Meyvis, T. and Davidenko, N. 2009. ‘Instructional manipulation checks: detecting satisficing to increase statistical power’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45: 867–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Paolacci, G. and Chandler, J. 2014. ‘Inside the Turk: understanding mechanical Turk as a participant pool’, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(3): 184–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Payne, S. 1951. The Art of Asking Questions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Presser, S. and Schuman, H. 1980. ‘The measurement of a middle position in attitude surveys’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 44(1): 70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raghavarai, D., Wiley, J. and Chitturi, P. 2010. Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis: Models and Design. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rossi, P. H. and Nock, S. L. 1982. Measuring Social Judgments: The Factorial Survey Approach. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Sniderman, P. M. 2011. ‘The logic and design of the survey experiment: an autobiography of a methodological innovation’, in Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, eds. Druckman, J., Green, D., Kuklinski, J. and Lupia, A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Steijn, B. 2008. ‘Person-environment fit and public service motivation’, International Public Management Journal, 11(1): 13–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Suri, S. and Watts, S. 2011. ‘Cooperation and contagion in web-based, networked public goods experiments’, PLoS ONE, 6(3): e16836.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Tourangeau, R., Rips, L., and Rasinski, K. 2000. The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tummers, L., Weske, U., Bouwman, R. and Grimmelikhuijsen, S. 2016. ‘The impact of red tape on citizen satisfaction: an experimental study’, International Public Management Journal, 19(3): 320–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Loon, N. M. 2016. ‘Is public service motivation related to overall and dimensional work-unit performance as indicated by supervisors?’ International Public Management Journal, 19(1): 78–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Ryzin, G. 2007. ‘Pieces of a puzzle: linking government performance, citizen satisfaction, and trust’, Public Performance & Management, Review, 30(4): 521–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Ryzin, G. 2013. ‘An experimental test of the expectancy-disconfirmation theory of citizen satisfaction’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 32(3): 567–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van de Walle, S., Van Roosbroek, S. and Bouckaert, G. 2008. ‘Trust in the public sector: is there any evidence for a long-term decline?’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 74(1): 47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van de Walle, S., and Van Ryzin, G. 2011. The order of questions in a survey on citizen satisfaction with public services: lessons from a split-ballot experiment’, Public Administration, 89(4): 1436–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vogel, D. and Kroll, A. 2016. ‘The stability and change of PSM-related values across time: testing theoretical expectations against panel data’, International Public Management Journal, 19(1): 53–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Walker, R., Andrews, R., Boyne, G., Meier, K. and O’Toole, L. 2010. ‘Wakeup call: strategic management, network alarms, and performance’, Public Administration Review, 70(5): 731–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weibel, A., Rost, K. and Osterloh, M. 2010. ‘Pay for performance in the public sector – benefits and (hidden) costs’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2): 387–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar