Does performance information about public services affect citizens' perceptions, satisfaction, and voice behaviour? Field experiments with absolute and relative performance information
This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving. http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-820227.html#terms
Reason for embargo
We evaluate a theory of the effects of publishing performance information on citizens' collective voice to local providers about public service performance and the perceptions and attitudes that influence their voice. Field experiments show that information about low absolute and relative performance of local government household waste recycling services lowers citizens' perceptions of performance, and information about high absolute and relative performance raises perceived performance. Relative information makes citizens judge local providers as being more responsible for outcomes in the case of high performance, suggesting that systems for comparative performance reporting increase local accountability for outcomes. Negativity bias is evident, with information about low absolute performance reducing citizens' satisfaction but information about high performance not raising satisfaction. Information about low performance did not trigger collective voice protest behaviour as hypothesized, suggesting that providers who need citizens' collective voice the most do not get it. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Economic and Social Research Council
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: 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, which has been published in final form at doi: 10.1111/padm.12066. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.
Vol. 92, pp. 493 - 511
RES 189 25 0027