What kinds of information do state legislators consider in their legislative deliberations? This article examines four dimensions of the content of the written information state representatives in Indiana, Massachusetts, and Oregon used in 1989: whether it was policy or political information, one-sided or multisided, in agreement or disagreement with the position of the legislator using it, and whether it had any hard or soft scientific content. Legislators are found to use information heavily dosed with political preferences, and they tend to look only at one side of an issue - the one with which they agree. However, they also use a substantial amount of scientific information.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Austen-Smith, David, and William H. Riker.1987. Asymmetric information and the coherence of legislation. American Political Science Review81:897-918.
2.
Bendor, Jonathan, Serge Taylor, and Roland Van Gaalen .1987. Politicians, bureaucrats, and asymmetric information. American Journal of Political Science31:796-828.
3.
Calvert, Randall L.1985. The value of biased information: A rational choice model of political advice. Journal of Politics47:530-55.
4.
Caplan, Nathan.1977. Social research and national policy: What gets used, by whom, for what purposes, and with what effects? International Social Science Journal28:186-94.
5.
Cherryholmes, Cleo, and Michael Shapiro .1969. Representatives and roll calls. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill .
6.
Cook, Thomas D., and Donald T. Campbell.1979. Quasi-experimentation. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
7.
Crozier, Ray.1989. Postdecisional justification: The case of De Lorean. In Process and structure in human decision making, edited by Henry Montgomery and Ola Svenson.New York: Wiley.
8.
Davis, Howard R., and Susan E. Salasin .1978. Strengthening the contribution of social R&D to policy making. In Knowledge and policy: The uncertain connection, edited by Laurence E. Lynn, Jr.Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
9.
Derthick, Martha, and Paul J. Quirk.1985. The politics of deregulation. Washington, DC: Brookings.
10.
Dexter, Lewis Anthony.1956. What do congressmen hear: The mail. Public Opinion Quarterly20:16-27.
11.
—. 1957. The representative and his district. Human Organization16:2-13.
12.
Efron, Bradley.1982. The jackknife, the bootstrap and other re-sampling plans . Philadelphia, PA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
13.
Eisner, Marc Allen, and Kenneth J. Meier .1990. Presidential control versus bureaucratic power: Explaining the Reagan revolution in anti-trust. American Journal of Political Science34:269-87.
14.
Hicks, Ronald Lee.1979. Sunset legislation. In Evaluation in legislation , edited by Franklin Zwieg.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
15.
Huckshorn, Robert J.1965. Decision-making stimuli in the state legislative process . Western Political Quarterly18:164-85.
16.
Huitt, Ralph K.1970. Political feasibility. In Policy analysis in political science, edited by Ira Sharkansky.Chicago: Markham.
17.
Jenkins-Smith, Hank C.1990. Democratic politics and policy analysis. Pacific Grove, CA: Brook/Cole.
18.
Jones, Charles O.1976. Why congress can't do policy analysis. Policy Analysis2:251-64.
19.
Kay, J.A.1989. Research and policy: The IFS experience. Policy Studies9:20-26.
20.
Keynes, John Maynard.1936. The general theory of employment, interest and money. London: Macmillan.
21.
Kingdon, John W.1977. Models of legislative voting. Journal of Politics39:563-95.
22.
—. 1984. Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
23.
Kish, Leslie, and Martin Richard Frankel.1974. Inference from complex samples. Journal of the Royal Statistical SocietyB36:1-37.
24.
Kovenock, David.1973. Influence in the U.S. House of Representatives: A statistical analysis of communications. American Politics Quarterly1:407-64.
25.
Lindblom, Charles E., and David K. Cohen.1979. Usable knowledge. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
26.
Lynn, Laurence E., Jr.1989. Policy analysis in the bureaucracy: How new? How effective? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management8:373-77.
27.
MacRae, Duncan, Jr. , and James H. Wilde.1979. Policy analysis for public decisions. North Scituate, MA: Duxbury.
28.
Matthews, Donald R.1960. U.S. Senators and their world. New York: Vintage.
29.
Matthews, Donald R., and James A. Stimson.1975. Yeas and nays. New York: Wiley.
30.
Montgomery, Henry.1983. Decision rules and the search for a dominance structure . In Analyzing and aiding decision processes, edited by P. C. Humphreys, Ola Svenson, and A. Vari.Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishers.
31.
—. 1989. From cognition to action: The search for dominance in decision-making. In Process and structure in human decision making, edited by Henry Montgomery and Ola Svenson.New York: Wiley.
32.
Mooney, Christopher Z.1990. Pushing paper: The flow and use of written information in state legislative decision-making. Ph.D. diss. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
33.
—. 1991. Information sources in state legislative decision-making . Legislative Studies Quarterly16:445-55.
34.
—. Forthcoming. Strategic information search in state legislative decision-making . Social Science Quarterly.
35.
Nelson, Carnot E., Jeanne Roberts, Cynthia M. Maederer, Bruce Wertheimer, and Beverly Johnson .1987. The utilization of social science information by policymakers. American Behavioral Scientist30:569-77.
36.
Nisbett, Richard, and Lee Ross.1980. Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
37.
Porter, H. Owen.1974. Legislative experts and outsiders: The two-step flow of communication. Journal of Politics36:703-30.
38.
Rosenthal, Alan.1981. Legislative life. New York: Harper & Row.
39.
Sabatier, Paul A., and Susan Hunter.1989. The incorporation of causal perceptions into models of elite belief systems. Western Political Quarterly42: 229-61.
40.
Sabatier, Paul, and David Whiteman.1985. Legislative decision making and substantive policy information. Legislative Studies Quarterly10:395-421.
41.
Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and John T. Tierney .1986. Organized interests and American democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
42.
Schneier, Edward.1970. The intelligence of Congress: Information and public policy patterns. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science388:14-24.
43.
Schulman, Paul R.1988. The politics of "ideational policy."Journal of Politics50:263-91.
44.
Simon, Herbert A.1983. Reason in human affairs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
45.
Sniderman, Paul M., Michael G. Hagen, Philip E. Tetlock, and Henry E. Brady.1986. Reasoning chains: Causal models of policy reasoning in mass publics. British Journal of Political Science16:405-30.
46.
Sylvan, Donald A., Ashok Goel, and B. Chandrasekaran .1990. Analyzing political decision making from an information processing perspective. American Journal of Political Science34:74-123.
47.
Tyszka, Tadeusz.1989. Preselection, uncertainty of preferences, and information processing in human decision making. In Process and structure in human decision making, edited by Henry Montgomery and Ola Svenson.New York: Wiley.
48.
Webb, Eugene J., Donald T. Campbell, Richard D. Schwartz, and Lee Sechrest.1966. Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally.
49.
Webber, David J.1984. Political conditions motivating legislators' use of policy information. Policy Studies Review4:110-18.
50.
—. 1987. Legislators' use of policy information. American Behavioral Scientist30:612-31.
51.
Weiss, Carol.1977. The enlightenment function. Policy Analysis3:531-45.
52.
—. 1978. Improving the linkage between social research and public policy. In Knowledge and policy: The uncertain connection, edited by Laurence E. Lynn, Jr.Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
53.
—. 1989. Congressional committees as users of analysis. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management8:411-31.
54.
Ziegler, Harmon, and Michael A. Baer.1969. Lobbying: Interaction and influence in American state legislatures. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
