Distinct Effects of Transparency on Decision-making within the Scope of the Prison System
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51341/cgg.v26i2.3058Keywords:
Transparency, Decision-making, Perception of legitimacy, Prison SystemAbstract
Objective: To understand how the citizen's preferences can regulate the effects of levels of transparency in decision-making with conflicting choices of public policies within the Prison System.
Method: Supported by behavioral theories, a survey experiment was developed based on speeches by parliamentarians, given in the Chamber of Deputies, related to decision-making in the Prison System. Research participants pointed out their preferences and analyzed the transparency of decision-making promoted by an external source, prioritizing two public policies: the adoption of Alternative Sanctions and Measures and the Construction of More Prisons.
Originality/Relevance: Use of behavioral theories at the national level to point out possible positive and negative effects of a public policy of transparency, indicating incremental production of knowledge.
Results: It was demonstrated that citizens tended to perceive a greater degree of transparency and legitimacy when their preferences were aligned with the choices made in the political arena, revealing the limits of the transparency promoted and how a public transparency policy can work.
Theoretical/Methodological Contributions: The study contributes by demonstrating situations in which the behavior of citizens can affect the perception of transparency in decision-making within the scope of the Prison System using the transparency of decision-making as an independent variable and behavioral theories.
Downloads
References
Abreu, M. N. S., Siqueira, A. L., & Caiaffa, W. T. (2009). Regressão logística ordinal em estudos epidemiológicos. Revista de Saúde Pública, 43(1), 183-194. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89102009000100025
Adeoye, O., & Ran, B. (2023). Government transparency: paradoxes and dilemmas. Public Management Review, https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2181981
Andrews, C. W., & Vries, M. S. de. (2021). O método experimental na Administração Pública: algumas lições das replicações na Psicologia. Revista de Administração Pública, 55(5), 1017–1033. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220200746
Beyers, J., & Arras, S. (2020). Stakeholder consultations and the legitimacy of regulatory decision-making: A survey experiment in Belgium. Regulation & Governance, (Jun), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12323
Bohman, J., & Rehg, W. (1997). Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. In: Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bouwman, R., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2016). Experimental public administration from 1992 to 2014: A systematic literature review and ways forward. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(2), 2110-131. 10.1108/IJPSM-07-2015-0129
Brehm, J. W. (1956). Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52(3), 384-389. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0041006
Cabral, S., & Santos, M. F. (2018). Accountability Mechanisms in Public Services: Activating New Dynamics in a Prison System. International Public Management Journal, 21(5), 795-821. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2016.1141815
Cucciniello, M., Porumbescu, G. A., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2017). 25 Years of Transparency Research: Evidence and Future Directions. Public Administration Review, 77(February), 32-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12685
Dallari, D. A. (1984). Ser cidadão. Lua Nova, 1(2), 61-64.
de Fine Licht, J. (2014a). Magic Wand or Pandora's Box? How transparency in decision making affects public perceptions of legitimacy, 1-67.
de Fine Licht, J. (2014b). Policy area as a potential moderator of transparency effects: An experiment. Public Administration Review, 74(3), 361-371. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12194
de Fine Licht, J., Naurin, D., Esaiasson, P., & Gilljam, M. (2014). When Does Transparency Generate Legitimacy? Experimenting on a Context-Bound Relationship. Governance, 27(1), 111-134. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12021
de Fine Licht, K., & de Fine Licht, J. (2020). Artificial intelligence, transparency, and public decision-making. AI & SOCIETY. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-00960-w
Drew, C., & Nyerges, T. (2004). Transparency of environmental decision making: a case study of soil cleanup inside the Hanford 100 area. Journal of Risk Research, 7(1), 33-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/1366987042000151197
Festinger, L. 1985 [1957]. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Filgueiras, F. (2011). Além da transparência: Accountability e política da publicidade. Lua Nova, (84), 353-364.
Fiske, A. P. (1992). The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99(4), 689-723. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.4.689
Fiske, A. P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1997). Taboo Trade-offs: Reactions to Transactions That Transgress the Spheres of Justice. Political Psychology, 18(2), 255-297. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00058
Gifford F. E., & Reisig, M. D. (2019). A Multidimensional Model of Legal Cynicism. Law and Human Behavior, 43(4), 383-396. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000330
Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2012). Transparency and trust. An experimental study of online disclosure and trust in government. (Dissertation). 1-291.
Grimmelikhuijsen, S., & Meijer, A. J. (2014). Effects of transparency on the perceived trustworthiness of a government organization: Evidence from an online experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(1), 137-157. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus048
Grimmelikhuijsen, S., & Welch, E. W. (2012). Developing and Testing a Theoretical Framework for Computer-Mediated Transparency of Local Governments. Public Administration Review, 72(4), 562-572. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02532.x
Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Herkes, F., Leistikow, I., Verkroost, J., Vries, F. de, & Zijlstra, W. G. (2019). Can decision transparency increase citizen trust in regulatory agencies? Evidence from a representative survey experiment. Regulation & Governance, (August), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12278
Hawkins, D., Brook, L., Hansen, I., Hoopes, N., & Tidwell, T. (2019). Do Citizens See Through Transparency? Evidence from Survey Experiments in Peru. British Journal of Political Science, 49(1), 205-228. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123416000466
Heald, D. (2006). Varieties of transparency. In: Transparency: The key to better governance? ed. Christopher Hood and David Heald, 25-43. Oxford Univ. Press.
Jilke, S., Petrovsky, N., Meuleman, B., James, O. (2017). Measurement equivalence in replications of experiments: when and why it matters and guidance on how to determine equivalence. Public Management Review, 19(9), 1293-1310. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1210906
Mansbridge, J. (2009). A selection model of political representation. Journal of Political Philosophy, 17(4), 369-398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00337.x
Marino, P. de B. L. P., Sucupira, G. I. C. S., de Siqueira, W. R., & Bermejo, P. H. de S. (2017). Public transparency in the brazilian context: An integrative review. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, 299(1), 261-274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65930-5_22
Marôco, J. (2011). Análise estatística com o SPSS Statistics. 5a ed. Lisboa: Ed. Sílabo.
Martino, L. M. S. (2014). Teoria da Comunicação: Ideias, Conceitos e Métodos. 5a ed. Rio de Janeiro: Vozes.
Michener, G. (2019). "Gauging the Impact of Transparency Policies. Public Administration Review, 79(1), 136-139. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.13011
Murphy, K., Tyler, T. R., & Curtis, A. (2009). Nurturing Regulatory Compliance: Is Procedural Justice Effective When People Question the Legitimacy of the Law? Regulation & Governance, 3(April), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01043.x
Nederhand, J., & Edelenbos, J. (2022). A Q Methodology on the views of politicians. Public Admin Rev. 83, 522-536. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.13556.
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
Porumbescu, G., Meijer, A., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2022). Government Transparency: State of the Art and New Perspectives. Elements in Public Policy. Cambridge Univ. Press.
Quivy, R., & Campenhoudt, L. V. (2005). Manual de investigação em ciências sociais. 4 ed. Lisboa: Gradiva.
Ribeiro, E., & Borba, J. (2015). Protesto político na América Latina: Tendências recentes e determinantes individuais. Opinião Pública, 21(1), 188-216. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-0191211188
Rudnicki, D., Schäfer, G., & Silva, J. C. da. (2017). As máculas da prisão: estigma e discriminação das agentes penitenciárias. Revista Direito GV, 13(2), 608–627. https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-6172201724
Sacramento, A. R. S., & Pinho, J. A. G. de. (2016). The process of implementing answerability in contemporary Brazil. Revista de Administração Pública, 50(2), 193-213. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7612147614
Schmidt, V. A. (2013). "Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and Throughput." Political Studies, 6(1): 2-22. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00962.x
Tetlock, P E, Kristel, O. V, Elson, S. B., & Lerner, J. S. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(5), 853-870. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.5.853
Tetlock, P. E. (2003). Thinking the unthinkable: Sacred values and taboo cognitions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(7), 320-324. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00135-9
Tyler, T. R. (1997). The Psychology of Legitimacy: A Relational Perspective on Voluntary Deference to Authorities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1(4), 323-345. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr010
Tyler, T. R. (2000). Social Justice: Outcome and Procedure. International Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 117-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/002075900399411
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological Perspectives on Legitimacy and Legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology, 57(1), 375-400. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190038
Walker, R. M., James, O., & Brewer, G. A. (2017). Replication, experiments and knowledge in public management research. Public Management Review, 19(9), 1221-1234. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1282003
Worthy, B. (2010). More Open but Not More Trusted? The Effect of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 on the United Kingdom Central Government. Governance, 23(4), 561-582. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2010.01498.x
Zuccolotto, R., Teixeira, M. A. C., & Riccio, E. L. (2015). Transparência: reposicionando o debate. Revista Contemporânea de Contabilidade, 12(25), 137-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/2175-8069.2015v12n25p137
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The authors hold the copyright to their article and grant the Journal of Accounting, Management and Governance the exclusive rights of first publication (including communication to the public and reproduction), with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC).
This license allows third parties to remodel, adapt, and create from the published work, as long as it is for non-commercial purposes, giving due credit for authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted to enter into additional separate agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publish in an institutional repository, on a personal website, publish a translation, or publish a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal, provided there is no commercial use/distribution.
