Abstract
ABSTRACTGovernment performance measurement is often faulted for focusing on outputs, while citizens are said to demand more information on outcomes to hold government accountable. To compare the influence of these measures, we randomized 774 participants to receive outcome or output information about a real HIV prevention program, with or without cost information, in a survey experiment. Citizens expressed less support for spending on the program when shown outcomes (infections prevented), rather than outputs (people served). Showing participants the high cost of treating HIV/AIDS boosted support for program spending, but did not make outcome information more persuasive. We interpret these results as partly a reaction to the high per-unit cost of an outcome in an HIV prevention program. But it may reflect a tendency of citizens simply to misinterpret less costly outputs, including serving more people, as if these were outcomes. This bias has implications for performance reporting and accountability.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.