Angrist, J. D. and Pischke, J. S. 2010. ‘The credibility revolution in empirical economics: how better research design is taking the con out of econometrics’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2): 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Angrist, J. D. and Pischke, J. S. 2014. Mastering ‘Metrics: The Path from Cause to Effect. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Benjamini, Y. and Hochberg, Y. 1995. ‘Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 289–300.Google Scholar

Brown, S. R. and Melamed, L. E. 1990. Experimental Design and Analysis. (Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, No. 74). London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Campbell, D. T. and Stanley, J. C. 1966. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand-McNally.Google Scholar

Favero, N. and Bullock, J. 2015. ‘How (not) to solve the problem: an evaluation of scholarly responses to common source bias’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1): 285–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Freedman, D. 2008. ‘On regression adjustment to experimental data’, Advances in Applied Mathematics, 40(2): 180–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gerber, A. S. and Green, D. P. 2012. Field Experiments: Design, Analysis and Interpretation. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar

Graham, J. W. 2012. Missing Data: Analysis and Design. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grimmelikhuijsen, S. and Klijn, A. 2015. ‘The effects of judicial transparency on public trust: evidence from a field experiment’, Public Administration, 93: 995–1011. doi: 10.1111/padm.12149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Groeneveld, S., Tummers, L., Bronkhorst, B., Ashikali, T., and Van Thiel, S. 2014. ‘Quantitative methods in public administration: their use and development through time’, International Public Management Journal, 18(1): 61–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guala, F. 2005. The Methodology of Experimental Economics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holland, P. W. 1986. ‘Statistics and causal inference’. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81(396): 945–60.Google Scholar

Holm, S. 1979. ‘A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure’, Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6(2): 65–70.Google Scholar

Jakobsen, M. and Jensen, R. 2015. ‘Common method bias in public management studies’, International Public Management Journal, 18(1): 3–30.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 Van Ryzin, G. 2015. ‘Motivated reasoning about public performance: an experimental study of how citizens judge Obamacare’, Paper presented to PMRA 2015 Annual Conference, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar

Jilke, S., Van Ryzin, G., and Van de Walle, A. 2015. ‘Responses to decline in marketized public services: an experimental evaluation of choice-overload’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, doi: 10.1093/jopart/muv021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirk, R. E. 2012. Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

LaLonde, R. J. 1986. ‘Evaluating the econometric evaluations of training programs with experimental data’, The American Economic Review, 76(4): 604–20.Google Scholar

Lin, W. 2013. ‘Agnostic notes on regression adjustments to experimental data: Reexamining Freedman’s critique’, The Annals of Applied Statistics, 7(1): 295–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meier, K. J. and O’Toole, L. J. 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

Morgan, S. L. and Winship, C. 2015. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference. 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Murphy, K. R., Myors, B., and Wolach, A., 2014. Statistical Power Analysis: A Simple and General Model for Traditional and Modern Hypothesis Tests. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Remler, D. K. and Van Ryzin, G. G. 2015. Research Methods in Practice: Strategies for Description and Causation. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Rubin, D. B. 1974. ‘Estimating causal effects of treatment s in randomized and non-randomized studies’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar

Stuart, E. A. 2010. ‘Matching methods for causal inference: a review and a look forward’, Statistical Science: A Review Journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 25(1): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wendorf, C. A. 2004. ‘Primer on multiple regression coding: common forms and the additional case of repeated contrasts’, Understanding Statistics, 3(1): 47–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allcott, H. 2015. ‘Site selection bias in program evaluation’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 130(3): 1117–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, D. M. and Edwards, B. C. 2014. ‘Unfulfilled promise: laboratory experiments in public management research’, Public Management Review doi: 10.1080/14719037.2014.943272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arceneaux, K. and Butler, D. M. 2015. ‘How not to increase participation in local government: the advantages of experiments when testing policy interventions’, Public Administration Review Early view.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Avellaneda, C. N. 2013. ‘Mayoral decision-making: issue salience, decision context, and choice constraint? An experimental study with 120 Latin American mayors’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 23: 631–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bækgaard, M. Baethge, C. Blom-Hansen, J., Dunlop, C., Esteve, M., Jakobsen, M., Kisida, B., Marvel, J., Moseley, A., Serritzlew, S., Stewart, P., Kjaergaard Thomsen, M. and Wolf, P. 2015. ‘Conducting experiments in public management research: a practical guide’, International Public Management Journal 18(2): 323–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Banerjee, A. V. and Duflo, E. 2014. ‘The experimental approach to development economics’, in Field Experiments and Their Critics: Essays on the Uses and Abuses of Experimentation in the Social Sciences, edited by Teele, Dawn Langan, 78–114. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Barnow, B. S. 2010. ‘Setting up social experiments: the good, the bad, and the ugly’, Zeitschrift für Arbeitsmarkt Forschung 43: 91–105.Google Scholar

Barrett, C. B. and Carter, M. R. 2014. ‘Retreat from radical skepticism: rebalancing theory, observational data, and randomization in development economics’, in Field Experiments and Their Critics: Essays on the Uses and Abuses of Experimentation in the Social Sciences, edited by Teele, Dawn Langan, 58–77. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Beath, A., Fontina, C. and Enikolopov, R. 2013. ‘Empowering women through development aid: evidence from a field experiment in Afghanistan’, American Political Science Review 107: 540–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Belle, N. 2015. ‘Performance-related pay and the crowding out of motivation in the public sector: a randomized field experiment’, Public Administration Review 75 (2): 230–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonetti, S. 1998. ‘Experimental economics and deception’, Journal of Economic Psychology 19: 377–95.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

Bozeman, B and Scott, P. 1992. ‘Laboratory experiments in public management and management’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2(4): 293–313.Google Scholar

Brewer, G. A. and Brewer, G. A. Jr. 2011. ‘Parsing public/private differences in work motivation and performance: an experimental study’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21(suppl 3): i347–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Butler, D. M. 2010. ‘Monitoring bureaucratic compliance: using field experiments to improve governance’, Public Sector Digest 2010 (winter): 41–4.Google Scholar

Butler, D. M. and Brockman, D. E. 2011. ‘Do politicians racially discriminate against constituents? A field experiment on state legislators’, American Journal of Political Science 55: 463–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Card, D., DellaVigna, S. and Malmendier, U. 2011. ‘The role of theory in field experiments’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 25(3): 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Colson, G. Corrigan, J. R., Grebitus, G., Loureiro, M. L. and Rousu, M. C. 2015. ‘Which deceptive practices, if any, should be allowed in experimental economics research? Results from surveys of applied experimental economists and students’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Early View 1–12. doi: 10.1093/ajae/aav067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coppock, A. and Green, D. P. 2015. ‘Assessing the correspondence between experimental results obtained in the lab and field: a review of recent social science research’, Political Science Research and Methods 3: 113–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cotterill, S. and Richardson, R. 2010. ‘Expanding the use of experiments on civic behavior: experiments with local governments as research partners’, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 628: 148–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Druckman, J. N. and Kam, C. D. 2011. ‘Students as experimental participants: a defense of the “narrow database”’, in Handbook of Experimental Political Science, edited by Druckman, James, Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H. and Lupia, Arthur, 41–57. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Duflo, E., Glennerster, R. and Kremer, M. 2006. Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit. Cambridge, National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dunning, T. 2012. Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Falk, A. and Heckman, J. J. 2009. ‘Lab experiments are a major source of knowledge in the social sciences’, Science 326(5952): 535–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fisher, R. A. 1926. ‘The arrangement of field experiments’, Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture of Great Britain 33: 503–13.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. 1935. Design of Experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar

Gerber, A. S. and Green, D. P. 2012. Field Experiments: Design, Analysis and Interpretation. New York: Norton.Google Scholar

Green, D. P. and Thorley, D. 2014. ‘Field experimentation and the study of law and policy’, Annual Review of Law and Social Science 10: 53–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guala, F. 2005. The Methodology of Experimental Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harrison, G., Lau, M. and Williams, M. 2002. ‘Estimating individual discount rates in Denmark: a field experiment’, American Economic Review 92(5): 1606–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harrison, G. W. and List, J. A. 2004. ‘Field experiments’, Journal of Economic Literature 42(4): 1009–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J. and Norenzayan, A. 2010. ‘Beyond WEIRD: towards a broadbased behavioural science’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33(2–3): 111–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hertwig, R. and Ortmann, R. 2008. ‘Deception in experiments: revisiting the arguments in its defense’, Ethics and Behavior 18 (1): 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hess, D. R., Hanmer, M. J. and Nickerson, D. M. 2015. ‘Encouraging local bureaucratic compliance with federal civil rights laws: field experiments with agencies implementing the national voter registration act’, unpublished paper. www.douglasrhess.com/uploads/4/3/7/8/43789009/hess_hanmer_nickerson_may_2015_nvra_compliance.pdf. Accessed 8 August 2015.Google Scholar

Jakobsen, M. 2013. ‘Can government initiatives increase citizen coproduction? Results of a randomized field experiment’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 23(1): 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jakobsen, M. and Andersen, S. 2013. ‘Coproduction and equity in public service delivery’, Public Administration Review 73(5): 704–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, O. 2011. ‘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. 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

John, P. (2016) Experimentation in Political Science and Public Policy The Challenge and Promise of Field Trials. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

John, P., Cotterill, S., Moseley, A., Richardson, L., Smith, G., Stoker, G. and Wales, C. 2011. Nudge, Nudge, Think, Think: Experimenting with Ways to Change Civic Behaviour. London: Bloomsbury Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levitt, S. D. and List, J. A. 2009. ‘Field experiments in economics: the past, the present, and the future’, European Economic Review 53: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

List, J. 2011. ’Why economists should conduct field experiments and 14 tips for pulling one off’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 25(3): 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

List, J. and Metcalfe, R. 2014. ‘Field experiments in the developed world: an introduction’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 30(4): 585–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Manzi, J. 2012. Uncontrolled: The Surprising Payoff of Trial-and-Error for Business, Politics, and Society. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Margetts, H. Z. 2011. ‘Experiments for public management research’, Public Management Review 13(2): 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McClendon, G. H. 2012. ‘Ethics of using public officials as field experiment subjects’, Newsletter of the APSA Experimental Section 3: 13–20.Google Scholar

Medical Research Council 1948. ‘Streptomycin treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis’, British Medical Journal 2(4582): 769–82.Google Scholar

Moher, D., Hopewell, S., Schulz, K. F., Montori, V., Gøtzsche, P. C., Devereaux, P. J., Elbourne, D., Egger, M., Altman, D. G. 2010. ‘CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials’, British Medical Journal 340: c869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moseley, A., James, O., John, P. Richardson, L. Ryan, M. and Stoker, G. 2015. ‘Can approaches shown to increase monetary donations to charity also increase voluntary donations of time? Evidence from field experiments using social information’, Unpublished working paper.Google Scholar

Moseley, A. and Stoker, G. 2015. ‘Putting public policy defaults to the test: the case of organ donor registration’, International Public Management Journal 18(2): 246–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

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

Olken, B. 2007. ‘Monitoring corruption: evidence from a field experiment in Indonesia’, Journal of Political Economy 115: 200–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Orr, L. L. 1999. Social Experiments: Evaluating Public Programs with Experimental Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Pawson, R. and Tilley, N. 1997. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Riccio, J. and Bloom, H. S. 2002. ‘Extending the reach of randomized social experiments: new directions in evaluations of American welfare-to-work and employment initiatives’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 165: 13–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rothwell, P. M. 2015. ‘External validity of randomized controlled trials: to whom do the results of this trial apply?’ The Lancet 365: 82–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rousu, M. C., Colson, G., Corrigan, J. R., Grebitus, C. and Loureiro, M. L. 2015. ‘Deception in experiments: towards guidelines on use in applied economics research’, Applied Economic Perspectives and Psychology 37(3): 524–36.Google Scholar

Salovey, P. and Williams-Piehota, P. 2004. ‘Field experiments in social psychology message framing and the promotion of health protective behaviors’, American Behavioral Scientist 47(5): 488–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Salsburg, D. 2001. The Lady Tasting Tea: How Statistics Revolutionized Science in the Twentieth Century. New York WH Freeman.Google Scholar

Shadish, William R., Cook, T. D. Thomas D., and Campbell, Donald T. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar

Shafir, E. (ed.) 2013. The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sherman, L. W. and Rogan, D. P. 1995. ‘Deterrent effects of police raids on crack houses: a randomized, controlled experiment’, Justice Quarterly 12: 755–81.Google Scholar

Sherman, L., Rogan, D., Edwards, T., Whipple, R., Shreve, D., Witcher, D., Trimble, W., The Street Narcotics Unit, Velke, R., Blumberg, M., Beatty, A. and Bridgeforth, C. 1995. ‘Deterrent effects of police raids on crack houses: a randomized, controlled experiment’, Justice Quarterly 12: 755–81.Google Scholar

Sherman, L. W. and Weisburd, D. 1995. ‘General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime hot spots: a randomized, controlled trial’, Justice Quarterly 12(4): 635–48.Google Scholar

Soloman, P., Cavanaugh, M. M. and Draine, J. 2009. Randomized Controlled Trials: Design and Implementation for Community Based Psychosocial Interventions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Teele, D. L. 2015. ‘Reflections on the ethics of field experiments’, in Field Experiments and Their Critics: Essays on the Uses and Abuses of Experimentation in the Social Sciences, edited by Teele, Dawn Langan, 115–40. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Torgerson, D. J. and Torgerson, C. J. 2008. Designing Randomized Trials in Health, Education and the Social Sciences. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vivalt, E. 2015. ‘Heterogeneous treatment effects in impact evaluation’, American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings 105: 467–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Worthy, B., John, P. and Vannoni, M. 2015. ‘Information requests and local accountability: an experimental analysis of local parish responses to an informational campaign’, Unpublished paper.Google Scholar

Yates, F. 1964. ‘Sir Ronald Fisher and the design of experiments’, Biometrics 20: 307–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

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

Alatas, V., Cameron, L., Chaudhuri, A., Erkal, N., and Gangadharan, L. 2009. ‘Subject pool effects in a corruption experiment: a comparison of Indonesian public servants and Indonesian students’, Experimental Economics 12 (1): 113–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, C. A. and Bushman, B. J. 1997. ‘External validity of “trivial” experiments: the case of laboratory aggression’, Review of General Psychology 1 (1): 19–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, D. M. and Edwards, B. C. 2015. ‘Unfulfilled promise: laboratory experiments in public administration research’, Public Management Review 17 (10): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aronson, E., Brewer, M. B., and Carlsmith, M. J. 1985. ‘Experimentation in social psychology’, in Lindzey, G. and Aronson, E. (eds.) Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 2. New York: Random House, pp. 441–86.Google Scholar

Baekgaard, M., Baethge, C., Blom-Hansen, J., Dunlop, C., Esteve, M., M. J., Kisida, B., et al. 2015. ‘Conducting experiments in public management research: a practical guide’, International Public Management Journal 18 (2): 323–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., and McCabe, K. 1995. ‘Trust, reciprocity, and social history’, Games and Economic Behavior 10 (1): 122–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bock, O., Nicklisch, A., and Baetge, I. 2012. ‘Hroot: Hamburg registration and organization online tool’, WiSo-HH Working Paper Series, no. 1.Google Scholar

Bozeman, B. and Scott, P. 1992. ‘Laboratory experiments in public policy and management’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2 (3): 293–313.Google Scholar

Brennan, M. and Charbonneau, J. 2009. ‘Improving mail survey response rate using chocolate and replacement questionnaires’, Public Opinion Quarterly 73 (2): 368–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brewer, G. A. and Brewer, G. A. Jr. 2011. ‘Parsing public/private differences in work motivation and performance: an experimental study’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21 (suppl 3): i347–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, D., Schonger, M., and Wickens, C. 2015. ‘oTree – an open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments – otree.pdf’, www.otree.org/oTree.pdf (accessed November 29).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cook, K. S. and Yamagishi, T. 2008. ‘A defense of deception on scientific grounds’, Social Psychology Quarterly 21 (3): 215–21.Google Scholar

De Fine Licht, J. 2014. ‘Policy area as a potential moderator of transparency effects: an experiment’, Public Administration Review 74 (3): 361–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Delfgaauw, J. and Dur, R. 2010. ‘Managerial talent, motivation, and self-selection into public management’, Journal of Public Economics 94 (9): 654–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dickson, E. S. 2011. ‘Economics vs. psychology experiments: stylization, incentives, and deception’, in Druckman, , Green, , Kuklinski, , and Lupia, (eds.), pp. 58–70.Google Scholar

Dobbins, G. H., Lane, I. M., and Steiner, D. D. 1988. ‘A note on the role of laboratory methodologies in applied behavioral research: don’t throw out the baby with the bath water’, Journal of Organizational Behavior 9 (3): 281–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Druckman, J. N., Green, D. P., Kuklinski, J. H., and Lupia, A. 2011. Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Druckman, J. N. and Kam, C. D. 2011. ‘Students as experimental participants: a defense of the narrow data base’, in Druckman, , Green, , Kuklinski, , and Lupia, (eds.), pp. 41–57.Google Scholar

Druckman, J. N. and Leeper, T. J. 2012. ‘Learning more from political communication experiments: pretreatment and its effects’, American Journal of Political Science 56 (4): 875–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Esteve, M., Urbig, D., van Witteloostuijn, A., and Boyne, G. 2016. ‘Prosocial behavior and public service motivation’, Public Administration Review 76 (1): 177–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Esteve, M., van Witteloostuijn, A., and Boyne, G. 2015. ‘The effects of public service motivation on collaborative behavior: evidence from three experimental games’, International Public Management Journal 18 (2): 171–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fischbacher, U. 2007. ‘Z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments’, Experimental Economics 10 (2): 171–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gailmard, S. and Patty, J. W. 2012. ‘Formal models of bureaucracy’, Annual Review of Political Science, 15: 353–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gill, D. and Prowse, V. 2015. A Novel Computerized Real Effort Task Based on Sliders. (http://users.ox.ac.uk/~nuff0229/GillProwseSliders.pdf).Google Scholar

Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D. I., Scheinkman, J. A., and Soutter, C. L. 2000. ‘Measuring trust’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 115 (3): 811–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Greiner, B. 2015. ‘Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE’, Journal of the Economic Science Association 1 (1): 114–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grimmelikhuijsen, S. and Klijn, A. 2015. ‘The effects of judicial transparency on public trust: evidence from a field experiment’, Public Administration 93(4): 995–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Porumbescu, G., Hong, B., and Im, T. 2013. ‘The effect of transparency on trust in government: a cross-national comparative experiment’, Public Administration Review 73 (4): 575–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harrison, G. W. and List, J. A. 2004. ‘Field experiments’, Journal of Economic Literature 42 (4): 1009–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hertwig, R. and Ortmann, A. 2001. ‘Experimental practices in economics: a methodological challenge for psychologists?’ Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3): 383–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Iyengar, S. 2011. ‘Laboratory experiments in political science’, in Druckman, , Green, , Kuklinski, , and Lupia, (eds.), pp. 73–88.Google Scholar

James, O. 2011. ‘Performance measures and democracy: information effects on citizens in field and laboratory experiments’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21 (3): 399–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, S. H. and Kim, S. 2014. ‘National culture and social desirability bias in measuring public service motivation’, Administration and Society, published online first.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kittel, B., Luhan, W. J., and Morton, R. B. (eds.) 2012. Experimental Political Science: Principles and Practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Knott, J. H., Miller, G. J., and Verkuilen, J. 2003. ‘Adaptive incrementalism and complexity: experiments with two-person cooperative signaling games’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13 (3): 341–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kruglanski, A. W. 1975. ‘The human subject in the psychology experiment: fact and artifact’, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 8: 101–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levitt, S. D. and List, J. A. 2007. ‘What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world?’ The Journal of Economic Perspectives 21 (2): 153–74.Google Scholar

Lucas, J. W. 2003. ‘Theory-testing, generalization, and the problem of external validity’, Sociological Theory 21 (3): 236–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Luechinger, S., Stutzer, A., and Winkelmann, R. 2010. ‘Self-selection models for public and private sector job satisfaction’, Research in Labor Economics 30: 233–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maccoby, E. E. and Maccoby, N. 1954. ‘The interview: a tool of social science’, in Lindzey, and Aronsen, (eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology, pp. 449–87.Google Scholar

Margetts, H. Z. 2011. ‘Experiments for public management research’, Public Management Review 13 (2): 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCarty, N. and Meirowitz, A. 2007. Political Game Theory: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCubbins, M. D., Noll, R. G., and Weingast, B. R. 1987. ‘Administrative procedures as instruments of political control’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3 (2): 243–77.Google Scholar

Milgram, S. 1974. Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar

Morrow, J. D. 1994. Game Theory for Political Scientists. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Morton, R. B. 1999. Methods and Models. A Guide to the Empirical Analysis of Formal Models in Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morton, R. B. and Williams, K. C. 2010. Experimental Political Science and the Study of Causality: From Nature to the Lab. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Niskanen, W. A. 1971. Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine Atherton.Google Scholar

Nutt, P. C. 2006. ‘Comparing public and private sector decision-making practices’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16 (2): 289–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ostrom, E. and Walker, J. 2005. Trust and Reciprocity: Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust, Vol. 6. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Pott, C. R. 1991. ‘Will economics become an experimental science?’ Southern Economic Journal 57: 450–61.Google Scholar

Remus, W. 1986. ‘Graduate students as surrogates for managers in experiments on business decision making’, Journal of Business Research 14 (1): 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Roth, A. E. 1995. ‘Introduction to experimental economics’, in Kagel, J. H. and Roth, A. E. (eds.), The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 3–109.Google Scholar

Scott, P. G. 1997. ‘Assessing determinants of bureaucratic discretion: an experiment in street-level decision making’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 7 (1): 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sell, J. 2008. ‘Introduction to deception debate’, Social Psychology Quarterly 71 (3): 213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar

Shepsle, K. A. 1992. ‘Bureaucratic drift, coalitional drift, and time consistency: a comment on Macey’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 8 (1): 111–18.Google Scholar

Smith, J. 2016. ‘The motivational effects of mission matching: a lab-experimental test of a moderated mediation model’, Public Administration Review, 76(4): 626–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, V. L. 1976. ‘Experimental economics: induced value theory’, The American Economic Review 66 (2): 274–9.Google Scholar

Smith, V. L. 1982. ‘Microeconomic systems as an experimental science’, The American Economic Review 72 (5): 923–55.Google Scholar

Tepe, M. 2016. ‘In public servants we trust? A behavioral experiment on public service motivation and trust among students of public administration, business sciences and law’, Public Management Review 18 (4): 508–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van de Walle, S. and Van Ryzin, G. 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

Webster, M. and Sell, J. 2014. Laboratory Experiments in the Social Sciences. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Weingast, B. R. and Moran, M. J. 1983. ‘Bureaucratic discretion or congressional control? Regulatory policymaking by the federal trade commission’, Journal of Political Economy 91 (5): 765–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wilde, L. 1981. ‘On the use of laboratory experiments in economics’, in Pitt, Joseph. (ed.), The Philosophy of Economics. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 137–43.Google Scholar

Wilson, R. and Eckel, C. 2011. ‘Trust and social exchange’, in Druckman, , Green, , Kuklinski, , and Lupia, (eds.), pp. 243–57.Google Scholar

Woon, J. 2012. ‘Laboratory tests of formal theory and behavioral inference’, in Kittel, , Luhan, , and Morton, (eds.), pp. 54–71.Google Scholar