The Myth of Academics’ Non-interference in Legislatures
| Author | Adam Zelizer |
| Date | 01 May 2022 |
| DOI | 10.1177/14789299221076700 |
| Published date | 01 May 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Experiments with Politicians: Ethics, Power, and the Boundaries of Political Science |
https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299221076700
Political Studies Review
2022, Vol. 20(2) 228 –235
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/14789299221076700
journals.sagepub.com/home/psrev
The Myth of Academics’ Non-
interference in Legislatures
Adam Zelizer
Abstract
This essay discusses the history and ethics of academics’ intervention in the legislative process.
Academics, and even our professional associations, have explicitly worked to change legislative
operations through advocacy and consulting. I argue that subjecting such interventions to the
research process to evaluate their effects makes them more ethical and transparent. Research is
monitored and guided by professional associations, institutional review boards, and journals in ways
that advocacy and consulting are not. If academics are already intervening in legislative processes,
such efforts will be more fruitful if conducted as part of a research program. This program, which
I call “evidence-based legislating,” aims to improve the evaluation of legislative processes just as
the movement for evidence-based policymaking reshaped academics’ and lawmakers’ approach to
policy evaluation.
Keywords
policy evaluation, field experiments, research ethics
Accepted: 4 January 2022
You can grumble all you want about those idiots in the Congress. But if you’re not helping to
educate the idiots, you’re not doing your job.
—Dr Vernon Ehlers, physicist, professor, and US Representative (1993–2011) (Slotnik, 2017).
Field experiments are an underrepresented but growing part of research on
legislatures.1 While field experiments are common in many fields of political science
and have even been adopted by government offices like the US Office of Evaluation
Sciences and the Behavioural Insights Team (formerly of the UK Cabinet Office), legis-
lative experiments face unique pushback on ethical grounds. Objections have come not
only from policymakers and the public, but also from a potentially surprising direction:
other political scientists.
Harris School of Public Policy, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
Corresponding author:
Adam Zelizer, Harris School of Public Policy, The University of Chicago, 1307 E. 60th Street, Chicago, IL
60637, USA.
Email: adam.zelizer@gmail.com
1076700PSW0010.1177/14789299221076700Political Studies ReviewZelizer
research-article2022
Symposia and New Ideas
To continue reading
Request your trial