ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B

心理学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (2): 240-256.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00240

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    


张书维1, 申翊人1, 周洁2()   

  1. 1 中山大学中国公共管理研究中心、政治与公共事务管理学院, 广州 510275
    2 中国科学院心理研究所行为科学重点实验室, 北京 100101
  • 收稿日期:2019-07-03 发布日期:2019-12-24 出版日期:2020-02-25
  • 通讯作者: 周洁
  • 基金资助:
    * 国家社会科学基金青年项目(18CGL043)

Social license of public decision from the behavioral public administration perspective: Transparency effect and its moderation

ZHANG Shuwei1, SHEN Yiren1, ZHOU Jie2()   

  1. 1 Center for Chinese Public Administration Research; School of Government, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275 China
    2 Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101 China
  • Received:2019-07-03 Online:2019-12-24 Published:2020-02-25
  • Contact: ZHOU Jie


公共管理的本质是公共决策。“公共决策的社会许可”指当地民众对于公共决策的持续接受和支持程度, 是公共决策合法性的基石。本研究借助“行为公共管理学”的理论视角, 通过两个调查实验(N = 354 + 354), 一个现场调查(N = 520), 全面考察公共决策透明(过程透明和内容透明)与社会许可之间的因果关系, 进而明确这一关系的作用边界。结果发现:1) 决策过程透明与内容透明正向影响社会许可; 2) 政府信任调节决策内容透明与社会许可的关系; 3) 结果依赖调节两类透明与社会许可的关系。基于这些结果, 作者总结出正性的“决策透明效应”以及“谨慎的不介意”和“有选择的忽视”之双缓冲作用, 即“一提两抑”, 以更好地理解公共决策的社会许可机制。

关键词: 行为公共管理学, 内容透明, 过程透明, 政府信任, 结果依赖, 社会许可


The essence of public administration is public decision-making. Social license of public decision (SLPD) refers to the extent to which local people accept and support a public decision from government or public authorities. Lack of this license not only hinders the efficiency of government policy, but also affects the decision-making authority and long-term goals of society. Moreover, government transparency is regarded as an important factor to eliminate public decision-making dilemma and enhance administrative legitimacy both in value and democratic practices.

This research explored the causal relationship between transparency of government decision-making (i.e., transparency in process and transparency in rational) and SLPD from the perspective of Behavioral Public Administration (BPA), which is a bridge linking Public Administration and Psychology. In other words, BPA is a new interdisciplinary sub-field of Public Administration from Psychology. The research of BPA mainly focuses on the process between government decision-making and citizen experience. In addition, based on the concept of bounded rationality and heuristic judgment as well as system justification theory, we built and tested the moderating roles of trust in government and outcome dependence between transparency of government decision-making and SLPD in two models. Outcome dependence is the extent to which someone is dependent on a powerful authority (i.e., the representative of a system) when that authority controls valued resources whose social and/or material outcome the person desires.

This research includes three studies, two survey experiments (N = 354 + 354) and one field survey (N = 520). The studies were conducted in China. The results showed that:

First, transparency of governmental decision-making positively influenced SLPD. That is, for both transparency in process and transparency in rationale of government decision-making, the higher the transparency is, the higher the SLPD is.

Second, trust in government moderated the relationship between transparency in rational and SLPD. Specifically, the positive relationship between transparency in rational and SLPD gets weakened when the trust in government is higher.

Third, outcome dependence moderated the relationship between transparency of governmental decision-making and SLPD. Specifically, the positive relationship between two types of transparency and SLPD gets weakened when the outcome dependence is higher.

Therefore, “Transparency effects” of SLPD was proposed through the present research. In addition, “cautious indifference” was used to indicate the moderating role of trust in government, and “selective neglect” was used to indicate the moderating effect of outcome dependence. The theoretical contributions were embodied in three aspects: (1) defining a new concept (i.e., SLPD); (2) introducing a new perspective (i.e., BPA); (3) discovering a new mechanism (i.e., transparency effect and its moderators). Regarding the practical implications, this research could shed light on the transparency practice, and provides empirical evidence to government for further enhancing the legitimacy of public decisions.

Key words: Behavioral Public Administration, transparency in rational, transparency in process, trust in government, outcome dependence, social license