How to communicate effectively with policymakers: Combine insights from psychology and policy studies

Palgrave Communications

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Cairney, Paul ^a   Kwiatkowski, Richard ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^b CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85046085512     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20551045     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/s41599-017-0046-8     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. Alter A, Oppenheimer D (2008) Effects of fluency on psychological distance and mental construal. Psychol Sci 19(2):161-167
2. Alter A, Oppenheimer D (2009) Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personal Social Psychol Rev 13(3):219-235
3. Arnaud G (2012) The contribution of psychoanalysis to organization studies and management: an overview. Organ Stud 33(9):1121-1135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612448153
4. Avolio BJ, Walumbwa FO, Weber TJ (2009) Leadership: current theories, research, and future directions. Annu Rev Psychol 60:421-449
5. Baddeley A (2003) Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nat Rev Neurosci 4(10):829-839. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1201
6. Baddeley A (2012) Working memory: theories, models, and controversies. Annu Rev Psychol 63(1):1-29. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100422
7. Baumgartner F (2017) Endogenous disjoint change. Cogn Syst Res 44:69-73
8. Baumgartner F, Jones B (1993) Agendas and instability in American politics, 1st edn. Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL
9. Baumgartner F, Jones B, Mortensen P (2014) Punctuated-equilibrium theory: explaining stability and change in public policymaking. In: Sabatier P, Weible C (eds) Theories of the policy process, 3rd edn. Westview Press, Chicago
10. Bedi A, Schat ACH (2013) Perceptions of organizational politics: a meta-analysis of its attitudinal, health, and behavioural consequences. Can Psychol/Psychol Can 54(4):246-259. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034549
11. Bion WR (1961) Experiences in groups and other papers. Tavistock Publications, London
12. Bion WR (1970) Attention andInterpretation: a scientific approach to insight in Psycho-Analysis and Groups (First). Tavistock Publications, London
13. Birkland T (1997) After disaster: agenda setting, public policy, and focusing events. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC
14. Botterill L, Hindmoor A (2012) Turtles all the way down: bounded rationality in an evidence-based age. Policy Stud 33(5):367-379
15. Brader T (2011) The political relevance of emotions: "reassessing" revisited. Political Psychol 32(2):337-346. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00803.x
16. Buckingham, L. (2011) Projective identification revisited a thread in the labyrinth: returning to melanie klein' s concept of projective identification. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0118.2011.01256.x
17. Cairney P (2012a) Understanding public policy. Palgrave, Basingstoke
18. Cairney P (2012b) 'Complexity theory in political science and public policy'. Political Stud Rev 10:346-58
19. Cairney P (2015) 'How can policy theory have an impact on policy making?'. Teach Public Adm 33(1):22-39
20. Cairney P (2016) The politics of evidence-based policymaking. Palgrave, London
21. Cairney P, Heikkila T (2014) A comparison of theories of the policy process. In: Sabatier P, Weible C (eds) Theories of the policy process, 3rd edn. Westview Press, Chicago
22. Cairney P, Jones M (2016) 'Kingdon's multiple streams approach: what is the empirical impact of this universal theory? Policy Stud J 44(1):37-58
23. Cairney P, Oliver K (2017) Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy?. Health Res Policy Syst 15:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0192-x
24. Cairney P, Oliver K, Wellstead A (2016) To bridge the divide between evidence and policy: reduce ambiguity as much as uncertainty, Public Adm Rev 76(3):399-402. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12555
25. Cairney P, Weible C (2015) Comparing and contrasting Peter Hall's paradigms and ideas with the advocacy coalition framework. In: Howlett M, Hogan J (eds) Policy paradigms in theory and practice. Palgrave, London
26. Cairney P, Weible C (2017) The new policy sciences, Policy Sciences, 50(4):619-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-017-9304-2
27. Cassidy MF, Buede D (2009) Does the accuracy of expert judgment comply with common sense: caveat emptor. Manag Decis 47(3):454-469. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910946714
28. Chilcot J (2016) Iraq inquiry report, executive summary of the report of the inquiry, vol 1
29. Cialdini R (1983) Influence. Harper Collins, London
30. Cowan N (2001) The magical number 4 in short term memory. A reconsideration of storage capacity. Behav Brain Sci 24(4):87-186. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922
31. Cowan N (2010) The magical mystery four: how is working memory capacity limited, and why? Curr Dir Psychol Sci 19(1):51-57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721409359277
32. Davidson B (2017) Storytelling and evidence-based policy: lessons from the grey literature. Pal Commun, 3, 1-10. https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201793
33. Dearing JW, Rogers EM (1996) Agenda Setting. Sage, London
34. De Vignemont F, Singer T (2006) 'The empathic brain: how, when and why?'. Trends Cogn Sci 10(10):435-441
35. Dillard JP, Li R, Meczkowski E, Yang C, Shen L (2016) Fear responses to threat appeals: functional form, methodological considerations, and correspondence between static and dynamic data. Commun Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650216631097
36. Ferris GR (2005) Development and validation of the political skill inventory. J Manag 31(1):126-152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304271386
37. Ferris GR, Treadway DC, Perrewe PL, Brouer RL, Douglas C, Lux S (2007) Political skill in organizations. J Manag 33(3):290-320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300813
38. Fiske S (2011) Envy up, scorn down: how status divides us. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY
39. Foulkes SH, Anthony EJ (1957) Group psychotherapy: The analytic approach
40. Frank R (1988) Passions within reason: the strategic role of the emotions. Norton, NewYork, NY
41. Gigerenzer G (2001) The adaptive toolbox. In: Gigerenzer G, Selten R (eds) Bounded rationality. MIT press, Cambridge, MA
42. Gregg AP, Mahadevan N, Sedikides C (2016) The SPOT effect: people spontaneously prefer their own theories. Q J Exp Psychol 218:1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1099162.
43. Haidt J (2001) The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychol Rev 108(4):814-834
44. Haidt J (2007) The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science 316:998-100
45. Haidt J (2012) The righteous mind: why good people are divided by politics and religion. Pantheon, New York, NY
46. Hall P (1993) Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain'. Comp Polit 25(3):275-96
47. Haste H (2012) Where do we go from here in political psychology? An introduction by special issue editor. Political Psychol 33(1):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2011.00868.x
48. Houghton DP (2008) Invading and occupying Iraq: some insights from political psychology. Peace Confl: J Peace Psychol 14(2):169-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10781910802017297
49. Jasanoff S, Simmet H (2017) No funeral bells: public reason in a 'post-truth' age. Social Stud Sci 47(5):751-770
50. Jenkins-Smith H, Nohrstedt D, Weible C (2014) The advocacy coalition framework: foundations, evolution, and ongoing research' process. In: Sabatier P, Weible C (eds) Theories of the policy process, 3rd edn. Westview Press, Chicago
51. Jones B (2001) Politics and the architecture of choice: bounded rationality and governance. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
52. Jones B (2017) Behavioral rationality as a foundation for public policy studies. Cogn Syst Res 43:63-75
53. Jones M, Crow D (2017) How can we use the 'science of stories' to produce effective scientific stories? Pal Commun
54. Kahneman D (2012) Thinking fast and slow (UK edition). Penguin, London
55. Kam CD (2005) Who toes the party line? Cues, values, and individual differences. Political Behav 27(2):163-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-005-1764-y
56. Kapoutsis I, Papalexandris A, Nikolopoulos A, Hochwarter WA, Ferris GR (2011) Politics perceptions as moderator of the political skill - job performance relationship: A two-study, cross-national, constructive replication. J Vocat Behav 78(1):123-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.09.009
57. Kingdon J (1984) Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Harper Collins, New York, NY
58. Kwiatkowski R (2011) Politicians and power: MPs in the UK parliament. In: Weinberg A (ed) The Psychology of Politicians, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 39-58. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139026482.004
59. Kwiatkowski R (2016) Mind games. House Mag 8:34-35
60. Larrick RP (2016) The social context of decisions. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav 3:441-467
61. Lewis P (2013) Policy thinking, fast and slow: a social intuitionist perspective on public policy processes, American Political Science Association 2013 Annual Meeting. SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2300479
62. Lewis R, Donaldson-Feilder E (2012) Perspectives on leadership in 2012: implications for HR. http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/research/perspectives-leadership-2012.aspx
63. Lindblom C (1959) The science of muddling through. Public Adm Rev 19:79-88
64. Lindblom C (1964) Contexts for change and strategy: a reply. Public Adm Rev 24(3):157-8
65. Lodge M, Taber C (2005) The automaticity of affect for political leaders, groups, and issues. Political Psychol 26(3):455-482
66. McBeth M, Jones M, Shanahan E (2014) The narrative policy framework. In: Sabatier P, Weible C (eds) Theories of the policy process, 3rd edn. Westview Press, Chicago
67. Menges JI, Kilduff M (2015) Group emotions: cutting the gordian knots concerning terms, levels ofanalysis, and processes. Acad Manag Ann 9(1):845-928. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2015.1033148
68. Miller G (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev 101(2):343-352. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158
69. Parkhurst J (2016) The politics of evidence: from evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. Routledge, London
70. Perez O (2015) Can experts be trusted and what can be done about it? Insights Biases Heuristics Lit 1:1-32. September 2014
71. Pielke Jr R (2007) The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
72. Prati LM, Perrewe PL, Ferris GR (2009) Emotional intelligence as moderator of the surface acting - strain relationship. J Leadersh Organ Stud 15(4):368-380. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051808328518
73. Quattrone G, Tversky A (1988) Contrasting rational and psychological analysis of political choice. Am Political Sci Rev 82:719-736
74. Rock D (2008) SCARF: a brain-based model for collaborating with and influencing others. NeuroLeadership J 1(1):44-52. https://doi.org/10.1109/18.796373
75. Sabatier P (1998) The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe. J Eur Public Policy 5(1):98-130
76. Sabatier P, Hunter S, McLaughlin S (1987) The devil shift: perceptions and misperceptions of opponents. The Western Political Quarterly, 40(3):449-476
77. Sabatier P, Jenkins-Smith H (eds) (1993) Policy change and learning: an advocacy coalition approach. Westview Press, Boulder, CO
78. Schein Edgar H (1969) Process consultation: Its role in organization development
79. Schneider A, Ingram H, deLeon P (2014) Democratic policy design: social construction of target populations In: Sabatier P, Weible C (eds) Theories of the policy process, 3rd edn. Westview Press, Cambridge, MA
80. Simon H (1957) Models of man: social and rational. John Wiley, New York, NY
81. Simon H (1976) Administrative behavior, 3rd edn. Macmillan, London
82. Smith K, Stewart E (2017) Academic advocacy in public health: disciplinary 'duty' or political 'propaganda'?. Social Sci Med 189:35-43. September
83. Stoker G (2010) Translating experiments into policy. Ann Am Acad Political Social Sci 628:47-58
84. Stone D (1989) Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. Political Sci Q 104:281-300
85. Storbeck J, Clore GL (2007) On the interdependence of cognition and emotion. Cogn Emot 21(6):1212-1237. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930701438020
86. True JL, Jones BD, Baumgartner FR (2007) Punctuated equilibrium theory. In: Sabatier P(ed) Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd edn. Westview Press, Cambridge, MA
87. Tuckett D, Nikolic N (2017) The role of conviction and narrative in decision-making under radical uncertainty. Theory Psychol 27(4):501-523
88. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn Psychol 5:207-32
89. Van Stekelenburg J, Klandermans B (2013) The social psychology of protest. Curr Sociol 61(5-6):886-905
90. Weible C (2007) An advocacy coalition framework approach to stakeholder analysis: understanding the political context of California marine protected area policy. J Public Adm Res Theory 17(1):95-117
91. Weible (2014) Introduction. In: Sabatier P, Weible C (eds) Theories of the policy process. 3rd edn. Westview Press, Cambridge, MA
92. Weible C, Heikkila T, deLeon P, Sabatier P (2012) Understanding and influencing the policy process. Policy Sci 45(1):1-21
93. Wildavsky A (1980) The art and craft of policy analysis. MacMillan, London
94. Winne PH, Nesbit JC (2010) The psychology of academic achievement. Annu Rev Psychol 61(1):653-678. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100348
95. Witte Kim, Allen Mike (2000) A meta-analysis of fear appeals: implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Educ Behav 27(5):591-615
96. Zahariadis N (2014) Pythia's cave: ambiguity and multiple streams In: Sabatier P, Weible C (eds) Theories of the policy process, 3rd edn Westview Press, Cambridge, MA