print

Correlational findings

Study Luechinger et al. (2013): study US 1994

Public:
Working people, USA 1992-94
Survey name:
US-NSFH II
Sample:
Respondents:
N = 7444
Non Response:
Assessment:
Interview: face-to-face
Telephone interviews are also used in NSFH II

Correlate

Authors's label
Employed in public administration
Our Classification
Operationalization
working in
1 public administration
0 private sector

Observed Relation with Happiness

Happiness Measure Statistics Elaboration / Remarks O-HL-c-sq-n-7-b Beta = -.04 ns b controlled for
I individual characteristics:
- sex
- age
- race
- marital status
- religion
- education ((log)

II State characteristics (Including interactions with Public Administration):
- real per capita income
- log(population)
- ADA (political prefernces)
- unemployment rate

III Fiscal transparancy:
index of
a: budget reported to GAAP standards
b: multi-year expenditure forecasts
c; frequency of the budget cycle
d: binding revenue forecasts
e: ligislative branch shares responsibility for revenue forecasts
f: appropriation bills written by non-partisan staff
g: passing ope-ended appropriations forbidden
h: punlishing or performance measures required


The negative effect of public administration on happiness becomes more pronounced (
and significant) when taking into account Fiscal Transparancy as seen in the effect of the interaction.

The mentioned effects remain true when additional time-invariant state-specific control variable are added to the model.
O-HL-c-sq-n-7-b Beta = -.05 ns b controlled for
I individual characteristics

II State characteristics (Including interactions with Public Administration)

III State auditing institutions:
- elected auditor
- performance audits

The negative effect of public administration on happiness becomes more pronounced (
and significant) when taking State Auditing Institutions into account as seen in the effect of the interaction.

The mentioned effects remain true when additional time-invariant state-specific control variable are added to the model.
O-HL-c-sq-n-7-b Beta = -.05 ns b controlled for
I individual characteristics:

II State characteristics (Including interactions with public)

III Balanced-budget provisions:
- carry over rules ( restrictions to carryover deficits to the next budgetary period)

The negative effect of public administration on happiness becomes more pronounced (
and significant) when taking Balanced-budget provisions into account as seen in the effect of the interaction.

The mentioned effects remain true when additional time-invariant state-specific control variable are added to the model.
O-HL-c-sq-n-7-b Beta = -.04 ns b controlled for
I individual characteristics:

II State characteristics (Including interactions with public)

III Regulatory review:
- influence of potential formal power actors

The negative effect of public administration on happiness becomes more pronounced (
and significant) when taking Regulatory Review into account as seen in the effect of the interaction.

The mentioned effects remain true when additional time-invariant state-specific control variable are added to the model.
O-HL-c-sq-n-7-b Beta = -.06 ns b controlled for
I individual characteristics

II State characteristics (Including interactions with Public Administartion)

III Fiscal transparancy

IV  Balanced-budget provisions

IV  State auditing institutions

V   Regulatory review


The negative effect of public administration on happiness becomes more pronounced when taking all interactions into account.

The mentioned effects remain true when additional time-invariant state-specific control variable are added to the model.