Citizens can make mistakes in evaluating the quality of public services by misattributing responsibility for service provision. Both the traditional reform approach and the public choice theory suggest that such errors are systematically influenced by the structure of political institutions, albeit in nearly the opposite manner. To explore these competing hypotheses, this study develops a typology of evaluative errors which citizens might make and a method for decomposing evaluations into their "true" and "biased" elements, which are combined with survey data in a comparison group research design to assess the impact of metropolitan fragmentation/consolidation on citizen evaluations of government.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Dagger, Richard.1981. Metropolis, memory, and citizenshipAmerican Journal of Political Science24(November):715-37.
2.
DeHoog, Ruth Hoogland, David Lowery, and William E.Lyons. Forthcoming.
3.
Citizen satisfaction with local government services: A test of individual, jurisdictional, and city specific explanationsJournal of Politics52.
4.
Lowery, David.1985. Public opinion, fiscal illusion, and tax revolution: The political demise of the property taxPublic Budgeting and Fmance5(Autumn):76-88.
5.
Lowery, David, and William E.Lyons.1989. The impact of jurisdictional boundaries: An individual-level test of the Tiebout model. Journal of Politics51(Spring):73-97.
6.
Lyons, William E., and David Lowery.1989. Responses to dissatisfaction in urban communities: A partial test of a general model. Journal of Politics51:842-868.
7.
Ostrom, Vincent, Robert L.Bish, and Elinor Ostrom.1988. Local government in the United States.San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
