Are managers susceptible to framing effects? An experimental study of professional judgment of performance metrics

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are managers susceptible to framing effects? An experimental study of professional judgment of performance metrics

AU - Fuenzalida, Javier

AU - Van Ryzin, Gregg G.

AU - Olsen, Asmus Leth

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © Copyright © 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Evidence suggests that citizens evaluate government performance differently when equivalent performance information is presented with either a positive or negative framing—but do experienced public managers also suffer from this framing effect? To address this question, we conducted an experiment with 191 public service professionals in the U.S. in which we experimentally varied the framing of performance information about customer satisfaction, job satisfaction and goal achievement for various federal government agencies. Our findings show that public service professionals—just like ordinary citizens—are susceptible to framing effects. Specifically, they tend to evaluate federal agency performance more negatively when percentages of “job dissatisfaction” and “targets not met” were presented, as opposed to logically equivalent percentages of “job satisfaction” and “targets met.” The pattern is the same for “customer dissatisfaction” versus “customer satisfaction” rates, although the results are not statistically significant. These findings provide a deeper understanding about the use of government performance information, as well as how such information is comprehended and perhaps misunderstood by decision makers.

AB - Evidence suggests that citizens evaluate government performance differently when equivalent performance information is presented with either a positive or negative framing—but do experienced public managers also suffer from this framing effect? To address this question, we conducted an experiment with 191 public service professionals in the U.S. in which we experimentally varied the framing of performance information about customer satisfaction, job satisfaction and goal achievement for various federal government agencies. Our findings show that public service professionals—just like ordinary citizens—are susceptible to framing effects. Specifically, they tend to evaluate federal agency performance more negatively when percentages of “job dissatisfaction” and “targets not met” were presented, as opposed to logically equivalent percentages of “job satisfaction” and “targets met.” The pattern is the same for “customer dissatisfaction” versus “customer satisfaction” rates, although the results are not statistically significant. These findings provide a deeper understanding about the use of government performance information, as well as how such information is comprehended and perhaps misunderstood by decision makers.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85086344678&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85086344678&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10967494.2020.1752338

DO - 10.1080/10967494.2020.1752338

M3 - Article

SN - 1096-7494

VL - 24

SP - 314

EP - 329

JO - International Public Management Journal

JF - International Public Management Journal

IS - 3

ER -