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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 23 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.