{"id":{"repo_id":"vcu","oai_identifier":"oai:scholarscompass.vcu.edu:etd-1699"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vcu/oai:scholarscompass.vcu.edu:etd-1699","repository":{"repo_id":"vcu","name":"Virginia Commonwealth University","base_url":"https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"THE INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENTLY FRAMED INFORMATION ON DECISION MAKING IN THE PUBLIC BUDGETING PROCESS: DOES BUDGET REFORM MEAN A DAMN?","abstract":"Public budgeting has become a central artifact of American government – the principal means for establishing and implementing policy. Modern public budgeting was introduced in the early Twentieth Century as an adaptation of objects of revenue and expenditure budgeting used in commercial businesses. Since then - over a hundred years - a series of budget reform movements have sought to overcome a major drawback to this model: the lack of a direct link between revenues and expenditures and any measure of the quality or quantity of public benefits derived from budget allocations. While a number of major budget reforms have come and gone (or came and stayed), that provided additional information on government activities linked to allocations, little research has been done to assess whether this new information has actually been used in the legislative budget decision making process, and if so, whether it influenced final budget decisions. Framing theory holds that information about a problem presented in different ways will be perceived as a different problem by decision-makers. Using framing theory as a theoretical basis, a laboratory experiment was conducted, where groups using budgets differently framed budget documents deliberated over an identical budget scenario. It was found that the nature of the debate did vary based on type of framed budget, but that the final allocations were not significantly different.This document was prepared using Microsoft WORD 2003","abstract_html":"Public budgeting has become a central artifact of American government – the principal means for establishing and implementing policy. Modern public budgeting was introduced in the early Twentieth Century as an adaptation of objects of revenue and expenditure budgeting used in commercial businesses. Since then - over a hundred years - a series of budget reform movements have sought to overcome a major drawback to this model: the lack of a direct link between revenues and expenditures and any measure of the quality or quantity of public benefits derived from budget allocations. While a number of major budget reforms have come and gone (or came and stayed), that provided additional information on government activities linked to allocations, little research has been done to assess whether this new information has actually been used in the legislative budget decision making process, and if so, whether it influenced final budget decisions. Framing theory holds that information about a problem presented in different ways will be perceived as a different problem by decision-makers. Using framing theory as a theoretical basis, a laboratory experiment was conducted, where groups using budgets differently framed budget documents deliberated over an identical budget scenario. It was found that the nature of the debate did vary based on type of framed budget, but that the final allocations were not significantly different.This document was prepared using Microsoft WORD 2003","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Malarkey, Robert Dennis"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Political Science & Public Administration","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Dr. Blue Wooldridge","Dr. Tracy Tuten Ryan"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2008,"date_issued":"2008-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2008-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:54:11Z","subjects":["Performance Budget","Program Budget","Line Item Budget","framing","budget","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"languages":[],"rights":["© The Author"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/700"],"render_values":[{"text":"https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/700","href":"https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/700","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.25772/9J4Z-MC50","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Dr. Blue Wooldridge","Dr. Tracy Tuten Ryan"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Malarkey, Robert Dennis"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-07-09T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Political Science & Public Administration"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Performance Budget","Program Budget","Line Item Budget","framing","budget","Social and Behavioral Sciences"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["© The Author"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://doi.org/10.25772/9J4Z-MC50","https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/700"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Public budgeting has become a central artifact of American government – the principal means for establishing and implementing policy. Modern public budgeting was introduced in the early Twentieth Century as an adaptation of objects of revenue and expenditure budgeting used in commercial businesses. Since then - over a hundred years - a series of budget reform movements have sought to overcome a major drawback to this model: the lack of a direct link between revenues and expenditures and any measure of the quality or quantity of public benefits derived from budget allocations. While a number of major budget reforms have come and gone (or came and stayed), that provided additional information on government activities linked to allocations, little research has been done to assess whether this new information has actually been used in the legislative budget decision making process, and if so, whether it influenced final budget decisions. Framing theory holds that information about a problem presented in different ways will be perceived as a different problem by decision-makers. Using framing theory as a theoretical basis, a laboratory experiment was conducted, where groups using budgets differently framed budget documents deliberated over an identical budget scenario. It was found that the nature of the debate did vary based on type of framed budget, but that the final allocations were not significantly different.This document was prepared using Microsoft WORD 2003"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["THE INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENTLY FRAMED INFORMATION ON DECISION MAKING IN THE PUBLIC BUDGETING PROCESS: DOES BUDGET REFORM MEAN A DAMN?"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Dr. Blue Wooldridge","Dr. Tracy Tuten Ryan"],"dc:creator":["Malarkey, Robert Dennis"],"dc:date.available":["2014-07-09T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["Public budgeting has become a central artifact of American government – the principal means for establishing and implementing policy. Modern public budgeting was introduced in the early Twentieth Century as an adaptation of objects of revenue and expenditure budgeting used in commercial businesses. Since then - over a hundred years - a series of budget reform movements have sought to overcome a major drawback to this model: the lack of a direct link between revenues and expenditures and any measure of the quality or quantity of public benefits derived from budget allocations. While a number of major budget reforms have come and gone (or came and stayed), that provided additional information on government activities linked to allocations, little research has been done to assess whether this new information has actually been used in the legislative budget decision making process, and if so, whether it influenced final budget decisions. Framing theory holds that information about a problem presented in different ways will be perceived as a different problem by decision-makers. Using framing theory as a theoretical basis, a laboratory experiment was conducted, where groups using budgets differently framed budget documents deliberated over an identical budget scenario. It was found that the nature of the debate did vary based on type of framed budget, but that the final allocations were not significantly different.This document was prepared using Microsoft WORD 2003"],"dc:identifier":["https://doi.org/10.25772/9J4Z-MC50","https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/700"],"dc:rights":["© The Author"],"dc:subject":["Performance Budget","Program Budget","Line Item Budget","framing","budget","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"dc:title":["THE INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENTLY FRAMED INFORMATION ON DECISION MAKING IN THE PUBLIC BUDGETING PROCESS: DOES BUDGET REFORM MEAN A DAMN?"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Political Science & Public Administration"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:54:11Z"}