How Do Disadvantaged Groups Seek Information About Public Services? A Randomized Controlled Trial of Communication Technologies

• Published date: 01 July 2022
• Author: Katerina Linos,Melissa Carlson,Laura Jakli,Nadia Dalma,Isabelle Cohen,Afroditi Veloudaki,Stavros Nikiforos Spyrellis
• Date: 01 July 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13437

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited,

the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

708

Abstract: Governments and NGOs are switching to phone- and Internet-based communication technologies to

reduce costs and broaden access to public services. However, these technological shifts can backfire if they exacerbate

administrative burden in high-need communities. We conducted a randomized controlled trial in Greece evaluating

which communication mode best allows disadvantaged groups to solicit information about free services. Subjects

were 18 times more likely to use a prepaid postcard and eight times more likely to use a postcard requiring postage

than a hotline or email to seek information about free dental care. Focus groups indicate that low self-efficacy greatly

limits disadvantaged groups’ willingness to use newer technologies for bureaucratic inquiries. We demonstrate that

the administrative burden associated with technological shifts is larger than previously believed and that widespread

psychological barriers include not only the stigma of welfare receipt, but also the stigma of mishandling a conversation

with a bureaucrat.

Evidence for Practice

• Scholarship on administrative burden underestimates both the magnitude and the types of challenges

disadvantaged communities face when using new technologies to access free services.

• Even in high literacy countries with extensive Internet availability and widespread use of mobile phones for

informal social communication, the switch to new technologies for aid provision creates major challenges for

aid recipients.

• Although phone- and Internet-based communication technologies reduce costs for service providers,

they impose sizable psychological burdens on disadvantaged communities that often lack confidence and

technical skills to use these technologies for formal, bureaucratic communications.

• When designing outreach programming, service providers should consider using postcards and similar tools

that place minimal informational and technological demands on disadvantaged communities and avoid the

potential for uncomfortable interactions.

Governments and aid organizations face

many challenges in targeting and delivering

public services to disadvantaged recipients

(Brodkin and Majmundar2010; Deshpande and

Li2019). One major obstacle to service provision

is the administrative burden individuals face in

accessing information about available benefits. Over

the last decade, governments, non-governmental

organizations (NGOs), and other service providers

switched to phone and Internet-based communication

technologies to provide information on services and

program enrollment. Development agencies have

lauded this shift, arguing that digital technologies

enable governments to “overcome barriers of

geography, low physical connectivity, and limited

administrative capacity” and increase service uptake,

particularly in disadvantaged communities (World

Bank2016, 156–158). Similarly, scholars argue

that phone and Internet-based communication

technologies reduce administrative burden due to

their low cost, convenience, and potential to reduce

information barriers, minimizing distributional

disparities in public service access (Asongu and

Nwachukwu2017; Mekonnen et al.2019; Sorrentino,

Sicilia, and Howlett2018; Xu and Tang2020).

Despite this optimism, how communication

technologies shape engagement with service providers

is not well understood. Studies typically examine

the efficacy of a single communication method

(Clark et al.2020) and no systematic assessment

compares how service recipients interact with different

communication technologies (Vann et al.2018, 1).

Comparative trials are critical because people often

do not seek information as providers expect. For

instance, although Americans identify doctors as

their most preferred source of health information and

online sources as their least preferred, in practice, they

How Do Disadvantaged Groups Seek Information About

Public Services? A Randomized Controlled Trial of

Communication Technologies

Katerina Linos

Melissa Carlson

Laura Jakli

Afroditi Veloudaki

Stavros Nikiforos Spyrellis

University of California, Berkeley

Stanford University

Harvard University

Nadia Dalma

Prolepsis Institute of Preventative Medicine

Environmental and Occupational Health

Isabelle Cohen

University of Washington

National Centre for Social Research

Prolepsis Institute of Preventative Medicine

Environmental and Occupational Health

Research Article

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 82, Iss. 4, pp. 708–720. © 2021 The

Authors. Public Administration Review

published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on

behalf of American Society for Public

Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.13437.

Katerina Linos is a professor of law at

the University of California, Berkeley and

Co-director of the Miller Center for Global

Challenges and the Law. She holds a JD and a

PhD from Harvard, and researches international,

comparative, employment, and migration law

problems using empirical methods.

Email: klinos@berkeley.edu

Melissa Carlson is a postdoctoral fellow

at the Center for International Security

and Cooperation at Stanford University.

She holds a PhD in Political Science from

the University of California, Berkeley.

Her research is primarily in the field of

international relations and examines

partnerships between governments and

foreign militant groups.

Email: melcarl@stanford.edu

Laura Jakli is a Junior Fellow at the Harvard

Society of Fellows. She holds a PhD in Political

Science from the University of California,

Berkeley. Her research is primarily in the field

of comparative politics and examines how

information communication technologies

shape political identity and behavior.

Email: ljakli@fas.harvard.edu

Nadia Dalma is the Director of Research

& Statistics Support at the Prolepsis

Institute—a non-profit in the field of public

health operating throughout Greece. She

holds a PhD in Public Health from the

Medical School of Athens.

Email: n.dalma@prolepsis.gr

Isabelle Cohen is an assistant professor

at the Evans School of Public Policy and

Governance at the University of Washington.

She holds a PhD in Economics from the

University of California, Berkeley. Her research

is primarily in the field of development

economics and examines innovations and

their potential to change the implementation

of governmental and non-governmental

activities in developing countries.

Email: imcohen@uw.edu