Abstract
The study of accountability in public administration has developed largely in parallel to the study of accountability in the behavioral sciences. In an effort to bridge this divide, we present a systematic review of the experimental literature on accountability in the behavioral sciences and draw lessons for public administration. We summarize the findings of 266 experiments exploring the effects of accountability mechanisms, presented in 211 articles published between 1970 and 2016. These findings are organized in four broad themes: effects of accountability on decision-making, behavior, and outcomes; and effects of the specific characteristics of accountability mechanisms. The review shows numerous desirable effects of accountability on individual decision-making and behaviors. This is of high relevance to public administration studies on accountability as it sheds light on causal mechanisms and allows for a balanced perspective on positive and negative effects of various types of accountability mechanisms. It is however not always possible to translate findings from behavioral research directly to public administration settings. We discuss the meaning and value of our findings for public administration studies and develop an agenda for future behavioral research on public sector accountability.
Highlights
The study of accountability in public administration has developed largely in parallel to the study of accountability in the behavioral sciences
Studies have for instance focused on the various types of public sector accountability (Behn, 2001; Bovens, 2010; Koop, 2014; Romzek, LeRoux, & Blackmar, 2012; Romzek & Dubnick, 1987), and different normative issues related to accountability (Dubnick, 2005; Halachmi, 2002; Halachmi, 2014; Mulgan, 2014)
There is a tradition of experimental research in social psychology and other behavioral disciplines investigating how various accountability pressures affect individual decision-making and behavior
Summary
Accountability scholars in public administration have pursued a less focused research agenda than their colleagues in the behavioral sciences with more diverging conceptualizations, definitions and measurements. The long tradition of using experimentation to research accountability in the behavioral sciences allows public administration scholars to apply tried and tested experimental scenarios, designs, and manipulations. These tools can serve as a learning tool, helping to develop public administration’s own experimental perspective on accountability (cf James et al, 2017). A meta-analysis integrates comparable findings from various studies and helps to establish, amongst others, effect sizes and robustness of findings (Field & Gillett, 2010; Hunter & Schmidt, 2004) This presupposes that effects have been tested in several experiments which limits the scope and focuses attention. Perhaps of greatest importance for the public sector are the large number of experiments showing positive effects of accountability on decision quality and consistency
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
