JOURNAL ARTICLE CRITIQUE sample sample.pptx

JOURNAL ARTICLE CRITIQUE

1. JOURNAL ARTICLE CRITIQUE by: Wilfredo Sinoy Jr. PA 502 SOCIAL SCIENCE STATISTIC

2. Baekgaard , M., & Madsen, J. K. (2023). Anticipated administrative burdens: How proximity to upcoming compulsory meetings affect welfare recipients' experiences of administrative burden . Public Administration, 1–19 . https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12928 TITLE Comment: The title is clear and concise that provides a general idea of the research topic It could be improved by adding more specificity , clarifying the concept of anticipated administrative burdens, including the specific outcomes or aspects of the welfare recipients' experiences, and highlighting the impact or significance of the study. Perhaps it could have an alternative Title like “Examining the Impact of Proximity to Compulsory Meetings on Welfare Recipients' Experiences of Administrative Burden: A Case Study in Denmark”

3. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE OF THE STUDY The article explores the anticipation of administrative burden among welfare recipients. It investigates how the proximity to upcoming compulsory meetings with street-level bureaucrats affects welfare recipients' experiences of administrative burden. The study utilizes a large-scale dataset with responses from welfare recipients. Findings suggest that as the time to future meetings becomes shorter, welfare recipients experience more stress and stigma. However, they also experience reduced learning costs as the meetings approach. It emphasizes the psychological costs that increase as recipients have to make mental and practical preparations for complying with government demands. Understanding the anticipation of administrative burden can lead to more effective and supportive welfare systems.

4. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The problem statement clearly identifies the focus of the study: the anticipation of administrative burden among welfare recipients. It highlights the specific aspect of proximity to upcoming compulsory meetings and its potential impact on welfare recipients' experiences. The problem statement acknowledges the existing gap in the literature regarding the anticipation of administrative burden and emphasizes the need for further investigation. It provides a clear research question: How does the proximity to upcoming compulsory meetings affect welfare recipients' experiences of administrative burden? The problem statement suggests that understanding the anticipation of administrative burden is crucial for policymakers and program designers, indicating the practical implications of the study. It sets the stage for exploring the psychological costs, stress, stigma, and learning costs associated with the anticipation of administrative burden

5. HYPOTHESES The article clearly states the six (6) specific hypotheses to be tested. Each hypotheses states an expected directional relationship between the key explanatory variable (proximity to upcoming meetings) and the different dimensions of administrative burden (compliance costs, autonomy loss, mastery, stress, stigma, learning costs ). Each hypothesis appears to be testable given the data and analytical approach used in the study. The Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression model allow the researchers to empirically examine the hypothesized relationships between the variables. The article presents a clear set of testable hypotheses that are directly aligned with the research questions and the conceptual framework of administrative burden. The operational definitions of the variables also ensure the hypotheses can be adequately tested using the available data and methods . The article demonstrates a strong alignment between the research questions, hypotheses, variable definitions, and the analytical approach employed. This enhances the accuracy and clarity of the study design.

6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The study utilizes a large-scale dataset with responses from welfare recipients, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of the research question. The dataset includes information on the timing of scheduled future meetings with street-level bureaucrats and the recipients' experiences of administrative burdens, providing the necessary variables for examining the impact of proximity to meetings. The use of self-reported measures allows for capturing the subjective experiences of welfare recipients regarding administrative burden and related factors. The study employs ordinary least squares regression as the primary statistical analysis method, which is appropriate for examining the relationships between variables. The inclusion of control variables, such as socio-demographic characteristics, length of unemployment, physical health impairments, and social support, helps to minimize potential confounding factors . The article lacks detailed information on the specific welfare programs or geographical locations considered, which may limit the external validity

7. SUBJECT T he population/subject studied were Danish social benefit recipients. Key characteristics of the target population, such as unemployment length and demographic breakdown, are reported . The method of selecting the sample is clearly described. The researchers drew a random sample of current social benefit recipients from a complete list provided by the Danish government . The random sampling approach is likely to result in a representative, unbiased sample of the target population/subjects. The sample size of 2,276 (11.9% response rate) appears to be sufficiently large for the OLS regression analysis conducted, which is an appropriate method for the research design. The article does not explicitly discuss a minimum sample size guideline, but the sample seems adequate given the number of variables included in the models.

8. INSTRUMENT The author provide discussion on the instruments used to measure the different dimensions of administrative burden, citing previous research that developed and validated these scales . The purpose and content of each instrument (compliance costs, autonomy loss, mastery, stress, stigma, learning costs) was discussin the "Data and participants" section. The instruments appear appropriate for measuring the intended variables based on the conceptual framework of administrative burden . the researcher use coefficient omega values to indicate the internal consistency reliability of the scales use in the instruments. The instruments were not developed specifically for this study, but were adapted from previous research. the causal impact of financial scarcity on psychological well-being (see Madsen, Baekgaard and Kvist 2022 )

9. DESIGN & PROCEDURE The study employs a quantitative research design to investigate the relationship between proximity to upcoming compulsory meetings and welfare recipients' experiences of administrative burden. It also provides detailed information on the procedure about the sample selection, data collection process, and statistical analysis techniques employed to test the hypotheses. The study seems to be well-documented, with the authors providing a detailed methodology that could allow for replication by other researchers . The article does not explicitly describe the control procedures used in the study. However , it does provide some details about the study design. Even though the study does not provide a detailed description of the control procedures, it does outline the key elements of the research design and analytical approach used to isolate the effects of proximity to upcoming meetings on administrative burden experiences.

10. RESULT The article presents appropriate descriptive and inferential statistics to support the analysis and findings . Descriptive Statistics: - Table 2 provides descriptive statistics for all the variables included in the analysis, including means, standard deviations, and ranges. This gives the reader a good overview of the characteristics of the sample.   Inferential Statistics: The main results are presented in Table 3, which reports the ordinary least squares regression coefficients and standard errors for the effects of proximity to upcoming meetings on the different dimensions of administrative burden. The authors use appropriate statistical significance levels (p<0.1, p<0.05, p<0.01) to indicate the strength of the relationships. They also report the adjusted R-squared values for each model, providing information on the overall model fit.   Additional Analyses : The authors conducted robustness checks using alternative model specifications, such as additive indexes and a single confirmatory factor model. The results of these supplementary analyses are reported in the text and in the supplementary appendices, further strengthening the credibility of the findings

11. RESULT The tests of significance described in the article appear to be appropriate given the hypotheses and research design of the study . The key hypotheses tested in the study are : H1: As the time to an upcoming meeting becomes shorter, experiences of compliance costs will increase . Result: Hypothesis 1 on compliance costs was not supported (p=0.122) H2: As the time to an upcoming meeting becomes shorter, experiences of autonomy loss will increase. As the time to an upcoming meeting becomes shorter, recipients feel less able to control their own lives. As the time to an upcoming meeting becomes shorter, experiences of stress will increase. As the time to an upcoming meeting becomes shorter, experiences of stigma will increase. As the time to an upcoming meeting becomes shorter, experiences of learning costs will decrease . The result are: Hypothesis 1 on compliance costs was not supported ( p=0.122) Hypothesis 2 on autonomy loss was not statistically significant with controls, but was significant without controls (p=0.122 with controls, p=0.037 without ). Hypothesis 3 on mastery (feeling less able to control one's life) was supported at the 90% level (p=0.051 ). Hypothesis 4 on stress was supported (p=0.043 ). Hypothesis 5 on stigma was supported (p=0.019 ). Hypothesis 6 on learning costs was supported (p=0.034).

12. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION The authors explicitly state which hypotheses were supported or not supported based on the regression results . The article does discuss how the findings relate to and compare with previous research on administrative burden and citizen-state interactions. The authors cite relevant literature and point out how their results both confirm and extend existing knowledge . The generalizations made by the authors appear consistent with the reported results. They are careful to qualify their conclusions and acknowledge the limitations of the study context . The article does discuss potential uncontrolled variables and limitations that could impact the results, such as the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic context . The article provides recommendations for potential policy and practice changes, such as making meetings voluntary or ensuring continuity with caseworkers . The recommendations are based on both the statistical significance of the results as well as the practical significance in terms of the implications for administrative burden experienced by welfare recipients. The authors avoid conflating the two . The discussion and conclusions sections of the article comprehensively address all of these key elements, providing a thorough and thoughtful interpretation of the findings and their broader significance.

13. RESEARRCH METHODS/METHODOLOGY cont.... Dependent Variables: The study measured several dependent variables related to the experiences of administrative burden among benefit recipients. These variables included compliance costs, psychological costs (autonomy loss, stress, stigma), mastery, and learning costs. The researchers used validated scales and factor analysis to measure these variables. Controls : The study included control variables such as socio-demographic characteristics (age, gender, ethnic origin, educational level, cohabitation, children in the household) and length of unemployment. Analysis: The researchers conducted statistical analysis, including confirmatory factor analysis and regression analysis, to examine the relationship between proximity to meetings and the dependent variables. They tested several hypotheses related to compliance costs, psychological costs, mastery, and learning costs .

14. Thank you!!!