Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons School of Public Service Theses & Dissertations School of Public Service Summer 2019 Conceptualizing Governance Decision Making: A Theoretical Model of Mental Processes Derived Through Abduction Matt Loesch Old Dominion University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/publicservice_etds Part of the Political Science Commons, Public Administration Commons, and the Public Policy Commons Recommended Citation Loesch, Matt. "Conceptualizing Governance Decision Making: A Theoretical Model of Mental Processes Derived Through Abduction" (2019). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, School of Public Service, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/xvpq-e948 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/publicservice_etds/41 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Public Service at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Public Service Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONCEPTUALIZING GOVERNANCE DECISION MAKING: A THEORETICAL MODEL OF MENTAL PROCESSES DERIVED THROUGH ABDUCTION By Matt Loesch B.A., 2007, Muhlenberg College M.S., 2010, Old Dominion University A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION & POLICY OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2019 Approved By: Berhanu Mengistu (Director) Katrina Miller-Stevens (Member) Joshua Steinfeld (Member) Gail Nicula (Member) ABSTRACT CONCEPTUALIZING GOVERNANCE DECISION MAKING: A THEORETICAL MODEL OF MENTAL PROCESSES DERIVED THROUGH ABDUCTION Matt Loesch Old Dominion University, 2019 Director: Dr. Berhanu Mengistu The field of Public Policy and Administration is heavily influenced by the decisions individuals make regarding matters of governance. These types of decisions can affect a broad scope of government-related activities ranging from esoteric debates about political ideology to policy development to specific ways in which people directly interact with public services. Unfortunately, in the view of this research, there is no sufficient model for conceptualizing governance decision making. This creates the focus of inquiry for this work, which is to examine how governance decisions are conceived of and formulated. The purpose of this research is then to analyze the governance decision making processes. This is achieved by examining the available research on decision making processes and then contrasting the widely applied rational approaches with the more applicable nonrational approaches for decision making. This review will indicate that a nonrational conceptualization based on schemas, heuristics, and a societal- level shared mental model may be more instrumental in analyzing governance decisions than rational conceptualizations. The unique but necessary methodological approach of abductive logic is used to develop a theoretical foundation for this new perspective. An application of abductive principles is used to create a framework that anchors governance decisions. The result of these efforts is a model that can serve as a tool for analysis of these important and influential decisions in governance. iii Copyright ©, 2019, by Matt Loesch, All Rights Reserved iv This dissertation is dedicated to Professor Berhanu Mengistu. As his last student, I assume it was the task of having to read all of the drafts of this work that pushed him into retirement. It was an honor, Good Sir. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I think it is important to first acknowledge you, the reader, and in doing so state that I wish to issue a few disclaimers. I meant to write this work with an ideologically agnostic/indifferent tone. I, like most others, do indeed believe that some forms of governance are far superior to others, but, for the sake of intellectual exploration, I attempted to put a wide variety of different ways of thinking on equal footing. In those efforts, I also had to use many terms that already carried with them a lot of preexisting meaning and baggage, simply because no other terms could be found that more accurately reflected the concept(s) I was trying to convey. If any of the ideas presented in this work could be more precisely communicated with another term or even a new term altogether, I wish I could have made those term(s) available to you, the reader. Finally, I went to great lengths to make sure I gave credit to any and all sources I used for the creation of this work. However, if I made any errors in that process and if my committee, my proofreaders, and I all missed something, I sincerely apologize for any unintentional mischaracterizations or misattributions. Next, I wish to acknowledge Professor Berhanu Mengistu. You, Good Sir, have made possible both this dissertation and much of the academic journey that preceded it. You supported me at times when few others would, you challenged my ideas when they needed refinement, you welcomed me into your home country, you demanded better out of me when there was more to give, you consistently approached challenging situations with an eye towards empathy and compassion, and you mentored me at all of the times I needed it most. I owe you a significant debt of gratitude. I also wish to acknowledge my committee members (Dr. Katrina Miller-Stevens, Dr. Joshua Steinfeld, and Dr. Gail Nicula) for staying with me through the process and for making vi significant contributions in regards to suggestions for improvement. None of you had to help me, and none of you had to deal with the headaches of a theoretical piece that ventured into uncharted waters, but you all did, and you are all wonderful people for doing that. You all accommodated a unique methodological approach, maintained a willingness to stay open minded, and conveyed a tenacity to keep pushing for improvements. I must also acknowledge the many past professors and classmates that helped me acquire the building blocks of knowledge I needed for this work, helped me see the many different ways that people can think about things, and helped me feel ready to try to tackle a theoretical piece. I am particularly thankful of my original cohort in Psychology and the enduring and supportive relationships of that group. Those folks, like many other friends and loved ones that deserve significant acknowledgment, kept me sane, helped me stay gritty, and gave me motivation to persevere. I would be a fraction of who I am if many of those people had not been in my life. Finally, and most importantly, I wish to acknowledge and thank my parents, Robyn and Alan Loesch. Their constant dedication and substantial sacrifices made all of this work possible. They have consistently been an ideal example of unconditional love and support. I thank them for their extensive range of imparted knowledge, their positive influences, and their willingness to enthusiastically explore the fringes of ideas with me. I also greatly admire and wish to acknowledge their many years of effort as public servants and the numerous ways they have worked to improve the lives of those around them. A lucky person would hope to be fortunate enough to have them as parents, a wise person would aspire to be as knowledgeable as them, and an honorable person would endeavor to be as virtuous. vii TABLE OF CONENTS LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix Chapter I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 Overview of the Problem and Research Focus ....................................................... 4 Intellectual Merit ................................................................................................... 12 Broad Impact ......................................................................................................... 14 Problem Statement ................................................................................................ 17 Research Question ................................................................................................ 19 Overview of the Methodology and Hypothesis .................................................... 21 Chapter Summary and Looking Ahead................................................................. 25 II. LITERATURE REVIEW OF GOVERNANCE DECISION MAKING.......................... 27 Exploring Governance .......................................................................................... 27 Decision making ................................................................................................... 29 Rationality ............................................................................................................. 30 Irrationality & Sub-rationality .............................................................................. 32 Transitioning from the Rationality-Irrationality Spectrum ................................... 36 Nonrationality ....................................................................................................... 37 Shared Mental Models .......................................................................................... 40 Robustness Through Simplicity ............................................................................ 42 Heuristics & Biases ..............................................................................................