Clarity Conundrum: Policy Language & Perspectives' Impacts on Perceptions of Safety Net Access for System-Involved Populations

• In Event: Administrative burdens: inequitable burdens, inequitable access.

Abstract

Mitigating take-up gaps in public benefits programs is vital for community well-being, but administrative burdens reduce participation while reinforcing stigmatizing, racialized, and gendered narratives of “deservingness.” While evidence has documented the disparate impacts of these burdens, investigating potential disparities amongst system-involved populations – particularly those targeted by the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act bans for individuals with drug-related felony convictions – remains an understudied research area. This paper investigates feedback effects through experimentally testing: a) exposure to policies describing PRWORA-modified bans versus no bans; b) exposure to a system-involved SNAP recipient’s perspective; and c) the impact of unclear versus clear modifications. Results show that exposure to modified policies significantly increases learning costs and reduces support for government efforts to alleviate administrative burdens, with non-significant, directional increases in perceptions of deservingness. Unclear policy modifications further increase learning costs compared to clear modifications. However, exposure to a recipient’s perspective significantly increases perceptions of deservingness and support for government intervention to reduce burdens. Exploratory analysis reveals that perspective exposure narrows gaps across both dimensions, but only when presented policies describing no ban or unclear modifications, highlighting complex trade-offs in designing equitable and effective policy communication that can ethically garner public support.

Author

• Jessie Harney, Colorado State University
  Presenting Author