The moment you decide, you divide
How politicians assess procedural fairness
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6258684 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Peter Esaiasson (0000-0001-8572-5462, Department of Political Science University of Gothenburg Sweden, corresponding author), Patrik Öhberg (0000-0002-7433-8552, SOM Institute University of Gothenburg Sweden) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 59 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 714-730 |
| Publication date | 2020-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | European Journal of Political Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0304-4130 • E-ISSN: 1475-6765 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/1475-6765.12370 |
| OpenAlex | W2981471137 |
| Language | ES |
| Citations received | 17 |
| References cited | 61 |
Are politicians more rational decision makers than citizens? This article contributes to the ongoing debate by examining how politicians and citizens assess the fairness of the process leading to a controversial policy decision. It contains theories as to why it is tempting to match the favourability of policy decision with a fairness assessment of the preceding process, and how politicians and citizens differ in their approach to the task. Having derived three hypotheses, parallel scenario experiments are run in large samples of Swedish politicians and citizens, in which the outcome and fairness of a policy decision process are manipulated. As predicted, it is found that both politicians and citizens match the favourability of the decision with the assessment of the process, that these self‐serving biases are stronger among politicians, and that policy engagement accounts for the group‐level difference
Decision process · Economics · Management science · Microeconomics · Outcome (game theory · Political science · Process (computing · Public economics · Public relations · Task (project management · Computer Science · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Psychology · Public Policy and Administration Research · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Psychology
Motivated reasoning and policy information
I Don’t Like It Unless It’s for Me
Support for electoral system reform among voters and politicians
Trustees, Delegates, and Direct Democracy
A bridge over sustainable water
Top politicians’ motivations to seek counter-attitudinal information
How Do Politicians’ Own Opinions Affect Their Information Intake? A Survey Experiment among Belgian and Canadian Elected Representatives
How the political elite make decisions
A cure worse than the disease? Exploring the health-economy trade-off during Covid-19
Election campaigns and the cyclical nature of emotions—How politicians engage in affective polarization
Procedures Matter
In the Eyes of the Beholder? Understanding Policymakers' Perceptions of Corruption
Decision‐makers, advisers or educable subjects? Policymakers' perceptions of citizen participation in a Nordic democracy
Political Judgment Above Transparency? Results From a Mixed Method Study About Politicians' Close Cooperation With Interest Organizations
Why top politicians are pessimistic or optimistic about democracy and its evolution
The Expertise Paradox
Understanding and Reducing Biases in Elite Beliefs About the Electorate
Stealth Democracy
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Policy, Office, or Votes?
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Representing the Advantaged
Cognitive Dissonance
Political Representation in France
Ordinary People in Extraordinary Times
Negativity in Democratic Politics
Public Opinion and Public Policy
Attitude Strength
The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
The effects of trust in authority and procedural fairness on cooperation.
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Democracy and the Market
A Theory of Justice
Virtue for Pluralists
Why People Obey the Law
Democracy and Its Critics
Connections Between the Ivory Tower and the Multicolored World
A Study of Thinking. J. S. Bruner , J. J. Goodnow , G. A. Austin
What Should Be Done with Equity Theory
Advancing Electoral Integrity
Uninformed Why People Seem to Know So Little about Politics and What We Can Do about It
Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation
Losers' Consent
The ‘ultimate attribution error’? A review of the literature on intergroup causal attribution
The Fairness of National Decision‐making Procedures
Are Outcome Fairness and Outcome Favorability Distinguishable Psychological Constructs? A Meta-Analytic Review
The Consensual Basis of Conflictual Power
Party-constrained Policy Responsiveness
Why Politicians Like Electoral Institutions
Four Systems of Policy, Politics, and Choice
Do Politicians Take Risks Like the Rest of Us? An Experimental Test of Prospect Theory Under MPs
When Do the Ends Justify the Means? Evaluating Procedural Fairness
Electoral Confidence, Overconfidence, and Risky Behavior
The Quality of Democracy
Will citizens take no for an answer? What government officials can do to enhance decision acceptance
Election studies the Swedish way
Needs/Wants Dichotomy and Regime Responsiveness
Party Representatives’ Adaptation to Election Results
Responsiveness Beyond Policy Satisfaction
Explaining Explanations
The Causal Effects of Elite Position‐Taking on Voter Attitudes
Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs
The Role of Evidence in Politics
Reconsidering the Role of Procedures for Decision Acceptance
Psychological Perspectives on Legitimacy and Legitimation
The case for motivated reasoning
Rethinking Representation
The Swedish elections of 1985
Partisan losers' effects
Bias in Perceptions of Public Opinion among Political Elites
Setting the Rules of the Game
Nonrepresentative Representatives
When Due Process Is of No Consequence
| Unique citing works | 17 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2,83 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2026 (7) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 17 |