Biased, not blind: An experimental test of self‐serving biases in service users’ evaluations of performance information

Abstract

Based on literature about motivated reasoning, this article proposes that choosing a public service provider from among competing options may bias service users in a positive direction when evaluating the performance of their chosen provider. Users are expected to defend their choice through processes of goal reprioritization, meaning that they will alter the weight they assign to given pieces of information depending on the (in)convenience of that information. This article uses nine experimental studies to test this expectation on students who had recently chosen to study at one university instead of competing universities. As expected, findings show signs of biases in students’ evaluations, but the biases are small and not consistently significant. Thus, prior research may have been too pessimistic regarding the general potential of performance information in the public sector.

The relevance and reliability of performance information for accountability: A survey experiment exploring citizens' views

“…Second, when citizens interpret performance information, they consider the trend of the indicators only to a lim- Third, when citizens interpret performance information, they pay little attention to the object that is being measured. This insight is especially surprising because it is reasonable to assume that people would be more concerned about services that are closely related to them (Baekgaard 2015;Christensen 2018). Indeed, this phenomenon is evident in the education sector where people pay greater attention to information about the school their children attend than about the performance of the entire educational system.…”

“…We studied education and the police, both of which provide valuable services that potentially affect people's lives directly. Performance information will be relevant to people mainly when it is related to services with which they have daily experience and they feel have a direct impact on them (Baekgaard 2015;Christensen 2018). The descriptive statistics indicate that citizens regard information about the performance of the police as both more reliable and more influential on their lives than performance information about the education sector.…”

“…Based on this rationale, it is likely that people interpret performance information depending on the trend of the performance indicators' results. Christensen (2018) tests the influence of the self-serving bias on citizens' interpretation of performance information, meaning that users of services will alter the weight they assign to given pieces of information depending on the (in)convenience of that information. However, the findings indicate that the biases are small and not consistently significant.…”

“…To accomplish this goal, we utilize the motivated reasoning approach for information processing, which explains people's information processing by their needs, drives, motives and goals (Kunda 1990;Taber and Lodge 2006;James and Van Ryzin 2017b). For example, Baekgaard and Serritzlew (2015) emphasize the impact of citizens' prior beliefs on their interpretation of performance information, implying that political or ideological perceptions affect these interpretations (James and Moseley 2014;James and Van Ryzin 2017a;Christensen 2018). Others refer to the relevance of psychological insights when studying performance information (James et al 2016;Grimmelikhuijsen and Knies 2017;Christensen 2018).…”

“…For example, Baekgaard and Serritzlew (2015) emphasize the impact of citizens' prior beliefs on their interpretation of performance information, implying that political or ideological perceptions affect these interpretations (James and Moseley 2014;James and Van Ryzin 2017a;Christensen 2018). Others refer to the relevance of psychological insights when studying performance information (James et al 2016;Grimmelikhuijsen and Knies 2017;Christensen 2018). However, performance management mechanisms themselves may mediate or mitigate citizens' prior motives and their interpretation of the information they receive.…”