The policy acknowledgement gap: Explaining (mis)perceptions of government social program use

Abstract

Nearly, all Americans have received social policy benefits, yet many do not acknowledge “using government social programs.” Why? Work on the submerged state proposes that people who receive social assistance through market mechanisms do not realize that the benefits they get are the result of government policy, and therefore, they do not acknowledge receiving government assistance. Others point to motivated reasoning or social desirability bias to explain the gap between acknowledging and using social programs. We classify the existing literature into three broad explanations—delivery, definition, and desirability—and propose that each may be responsible for people's inability to accurately report using government social programs. We test these mechanisms with original survey experiments. The results of this study provide support for the theory that multiple mechanisms are at work in shaping social policy acknowledgment, but they confirm that a partisan acknowledgement gap exists across a variety of conditions, and it persists despite treatments designed to minimize it. The study has significant implications for the conditions under which partisanship and policy usage coalesce to undermine support for government social expenditures, and it helps to explain the persistence of a “makers vs. takers” logic in American politics.

Policy Feedback & Research Methods: How Qualitative Research Designs With Marginalized Groups Inform Theory

“…Bruch et al (2010) take the discussion further to consider authority structures, which include paternalistic designs that enforce obligations and promote civic marginality. Visibility of policies has also been identified as important, sending messages regarding the importance of a given population or social issues to governments (see for example Pierson, 1993;Rosenthal, 2023;SoRelle & Shanks, 2023). And yet, understanding the messages that policies send may be better captured through thick descriptions.…”

Editorial introduction: Exploring the frontier of policy theory research

“…Despite its importance, the political consequences of preemption have not been fully explored. In the second article “The policy feedback effects of preemption,” SoRelle and Fullerton (2024) use the policy feedback theory (Jacobs et al., 2022; Schober, 2023) to analyze these consequences, explaining how federal‐state and state‐local preemption can have distinct effects that influence the political actions of policymakers, organized interests, and the public. This article fills a gap in the preemption literature and extends policy feedback theory, suggesting a research direction to better understand the politics of this commonly used policy tool.…”