File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.52372/jps38401
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85181691169
- Find via
Supplementary
-
Citations:
- Scopus: 0
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Secondary Benefits of Manipulation Checks: Three Illustrations From Behavioral Public Administration
Title | Secondary Benefits of Manipulation Checks: Three Illustrations From Behavioral Public Administration |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | behavioral public administration experiments incentives internet recruitment of subjects manipulation checks public sector bias |
Issue Date | 2023 |
Citation | Journal of Policy Studies, 2023, v. 38, n. 4, p. 1-8 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Manipulation checks in behavioral public administration are commonly used and reported to determine if the experimental and control group have received different treatments. This paper uses three experiments to argue that manipulation checks for experimental treatments can have secondary benefits that can be used to improve the quality of behavioral work in the field. The three cases address the importance of using more clear terms in experimental manipulations (government v. public), using different on-line platforms to recruit experimental subjects (Mechanical Turk, Prolific, and Data.Spring), and whether larger payments more produce more attentive subjects. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/346859 |
ISSN | 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.380 |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Meier, Kenneth | - |
dc.contributor.author | An, Seung Ho | - |
dc.contributor.author | Davis, Jourdan | - |
dc.contributor.author | Park, Joohyung | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-09-17T04:13:45Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-09-17T04:13:45Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Journal of Policy Studies, 2023, v. 38, n. 4, p. 1-8 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2799-9130 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/346859 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Manipulation checks in behavioral public administration are commonly used and reported to determine if the experimental and control group have received different treatments. This paper uses three experiments to argue that manipulation checks for experimental treatments can have secondary benefits that can be used to improve the quality of behavioral work in the field. The three cases address the importance of using more clear terms in experimental manipulations (government v. public), using different on-line platforms to recruit experimental subjects (Mechanical Turk, Prolific, and Data.Spring), and whether larger payments more produce more attentive subjects. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Policy Studies | - |
dc.subject | behavioral public administration | - |
dc.subject | experiments | - |
dc.subject | incentives | - |
dc.subject | internet recruitment of subjects | - |
dc.subject | manipulation checks | - |
dc.subject | public sector bias | - |
dc.title | Secondary Benefits of Manipulation Checks: Three Illustrations From Behavioral Public Administration | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.52372/jps38401 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85181691169 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 38 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 4 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 1 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 8 | - |