Linking Decision Roles to Knowledge Utilization in US State Governments: A Mixed‐Method Study

ABSTRACT The current movement for evidence‐based policymaking advocates the use of scientific knowledge in government. However, in practice, civil servants often prioritize different types of knowledge depending on their decision‐making roles and the context. Using survey responses from 259 civil servants across three US state governments and 36 semistructured interviews, we employ a mixed‐method approach to understand how civil servants strategically utilize various types of knowledge to meet different role requirements and decision‐making responsibilities. Consistent with our hypotheses, our findings indicate that civil servants involved in policy and legislative roles value political knowledge more, while those in contracting roles place greater importance on experiential knowledge. Contrary to our hypothesis, while civil servants in budgeting roles value political knowledge more than their counterparts in other decision roles, they show no such preference for scientific knowledge. Our qualitative interviews provide possible mechanisms for this unexpected finding.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Administration Review
Published
2026-07-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70164
Primary Topic
Public Policy and Administration Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Linking Decision Roles to Knowledge Utilization in US State Governments: A Mixed‐Method Study

Chengxin Xu, Cheng Yuan, S Wang
Public Administration Review
Public Policy and Administration Research
article

Linking Decision Roles to Knowledge Utilization in US State Governments: A Mixed‐Method Study

Chengxin Xu, Cheng Yuan, S Wang
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT The current movement for evidence‐based policymaking advocates the use of scientific knowledge in government. However, in practice, civil servants often prioritize different types of knowledge depending on their decision‐making roles and the context. Using survey responses from 259 civil servants across three US state governments and 36 semistructured interviews, we employ a mixed‐method approach to understand how civil servants strategically utilize various types of knowledge to meet different role requirements and decision‐making responsibilities. Consistent with our hypotheses, our findings indicate that civil servants involved in policy and legislative roles value political knowledge more, while those in contracting roles place greater importance on experiential knowledge. Contrary to our hypothesis, while civil servants in budgeting roles value political knowledge more than their counterparts in other decision roles, they show no such preference for scientific knowledge. Our qualitative interviews provide possible mechanisms for this unexpected finding.

Public Administration Review
University of Minnesota (US), University of Illinois System (US), University of Illinois Chicago (US), Twin Cities Orthopedics (US), Institute of Public Affairs (PL), Seattle University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Public Policy and Administration Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.