Understanding Micro-Level Budgeting Behavior: How Cognitive Biases Shape Politicians' Budget Preferences

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Tom Overmans, Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen
{"title":"Understanding Micro-Level Budgeting Behavior: How Cognitive Biases Shape Politicians' Budget Preferences","authors":"Tom Overmans,&nbsp;Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen","doi":"10.1111/gove.70004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Decades of research emphasized collective behaviors in public budgeting, yet individual budget preferences remain underexplored. This paper argues that both well-known and lesser-known cognitive biases distort politicians' budget judgment, resulting in biased preferences. To test this, we conducted five preregistered experiments examining the impact of five biases—anchoring, herding, mental accounting, availability bias, and loss aversion—on budget preferences. Using data from 1825 municipal budgeters in The Netherlands, we reveal significant effects of anchoring, adherence to irrelevant budget labels (mental accounting), and overspending on items that attract media attention (availability bias) or emphasize gains (loss aversion). We also find that presenting decision information through infographics holds potential for improving judgment and mitigating biases in preferences. These findings challenge the view that budgeting is purely political, highlighting the role of cognitive factors in suboptimal budget decisions. We emphasize the need for further research into biases and debiasing mechanisms to advance budget decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":48056,"journal":{"name":"Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions","volume":"38 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gove.70004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gove.70004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Decades of research emphasized collective behaviors in public budgeting, yet individual budget preferences remain underexplored. This paper argues that both well-known and lesser-known cognitive biases distort politicians' budget judgment, resulting in biased preferences. To test this, we conducted five preregistered experiments examining the impact of five biases—anchoring, herding, mental accounting, availability bias, and loss aversion—on budget preferences. Using data from 1825 municipal budgeters in The Netherlands, we reveal significant effects of anchoring, adherence to irrelevant budget labels (mental accounting), and overspending on items that attract media attention (availability bias) or emphasize gains (loss aversion). We also find that presenting decision information through infographics holds potential for improving judgment and mitigating biases in preferences. These findings challenge the view that budgeting is purely political, highlighting the role of cognitive factors in suboptimal budget decisions. We emphasize the need for further research into biases and debiasing mechanisms to advance budget decision-making.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
10.30%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Governance provides a forum for the theoretical and practical discussion of executive politics, public policy, administration, and the organization of the state. Published in association with International Political Science Association''s Research Committee on the Structure & Organization of Government (SOG), it emphasizes peer-reviewed articles that take an international or comparative approach to public policy and administration. All papers, regardless of empirical focus, should have wider theoretical, comparative, or practical significance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信