The transmission of S&T talent evaluation policies and individual irrational behavior——An analysis based on the behavioral public policy

Abstract

Abstract: The S&T talent evaluation policy is an important part of the science and technology talent policy. Focusing on the evaluation of S&T talents, governments have successively issued a series of policy documents, which have pointed out the direction and laid the foundation for improving the evaluation system of S&T talents in the new era. However, there are still some significant problems in the science and technology evaluation system. Based on literature review, emotional cognition and behavior guidance of S&T talents are the key variables. From the perspective of the behavioral public policy analysis framework, this paper tries to carry out the shortcomings of the scientific and technological talent evaluation policy, from the policy objectives of scientific research burden reduction, evaluation guidance and talent management. Furthermore, a research framework for explaining the irrational behavior of scientific and technological talents is constructed.
In terms of emotions, this paper analyzes the transaction burden, talent evaluation, academic environment, and sorts out the internal factors that emotions induce irrational behaviors of scientific and technological talents. In terms of behavior, this paper collects the central level scientific and technological talent evaluation policies from 2007 to 2021, 391 policy samples, and used content analysis and word frequency statistics for research. Based on the framework of tools, narrative, and feedback, we focus on the analysis of scientific research burden reduction, evaluation guidance, and talent management.
It is found that: (1) The emotional cognition of scientific and technological talents stems from the burden of formalism, the preference of talent evaluation, and the environment of either promotion or departure. The transactional burden of non-technology issues accounted for most of the scientific research time and energy of scientific and technological talents. Under the pressure of talent evaluation and the pressing environment, the negative emotions of scientific and technological talents gradually accumulated and broke out to varying degrees. (2) The S&T talent evaluation policy toolbox is dominated by whip-type tools, supplemented by boosting tools to give full play to the behavioral guidance of scientific and technological talents. (3) The narrative framework of the evaluation policy for S&T talents has shown stages changes, in which the role of S&T talents has undergone the transformation of "heroes", "bad guys" and "micro-bad guys and macro-victims". (4) The S&T talent evaluation policy realizes the behavior guidance and attitude shaping of micro-individuals through carrot-type tools and evangelism-type tools. (5) The deficiencies of policy tools, the fault of narrative effect and the deviation of individual perception constitute the policy source of negative emotion cognition and irrational behavior of scientific and technological talents.
The theoretical significance of this paper is to use the framework of behavioral public policy analysis to explore scientific and technological policy research ideas in the Chinese context, enriching the research perspective on the optimization of scientific and technological innovation systems and mechanisms. Its marginal contributions are as follows: (1) It systematically integrates the academic research framework on behavioral public policy, and analyzes the evaluation policy of scientific and technological talents based on this. (2) It analyzes the impact of scientific and technological innovation policies on micro-individuals from the perspective of the evaluation policy of scientific and technological talents. (3) The S&T talents, a group of "high-tech, high-quality, and high-pressure", are analyzed from the perspective of behavioral science, which is different from the basic assumptions of the public in traditional behavioral public policies.

Key words: S&T talent evaluation, behavioral public policy, emotional cognition, behavioral guidance

Zhang Xichun, Zhu Shaotang, Li Shenghui. The transmission of S&T talent evaluation policies and individual irrational behavior——An analysis based on the behavioral public policy[J]. Science Research Management, 2022, 43(8): 183-191.

References

[1] Richard, H., Thaler, et al. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, And Happiness[M]. Business Economics, 2008.
[2] 吕小康, 武迪, 隋晓阳, 等. 从“理性人”到“行为人”:公共政策研究的行为科学转向[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018,26(12):2249-2259.
Lü Xiaokang et al. From rational man to behavioral man: The behavioral turn of public policy[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018,26(12):2249-2259.
[3] 胡鞍钢, 杭承政. 论建立“以人民为中心”的治理模式——基于行为科学的视角[J]. 中国行政管理, 2018(1):13-17.
Hu Angang, Hang Chengzheng. Promoting China's state governance modernization:from perspecitve of behavioral science and meticulous governance[J]. Chinese Public Administration, 2018(1):13-17.
[4] 句华. 助推理论与政府购买公共服务政策创新[J]. 西南大学学报(社会科学版), 2017,43(2):74-80.
Ju hua. Boosting theory and policy innovation of government purchasing public services[J]. Journal of Southwest University(Social Sciences Edition), 2017,43(2):74-80.
[5] 卿志琼. 同情介入决策的实验研究:基于“狡猾的收废品老伯”实验[J]. 南开管理评论, 2010,13(4):92-98.
Qing Zhiqiong. The experimental study on sympathy stepping in the decision: an experiment of collecting wastrels of the cunning old man[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2010,13(4):92-98.
[6] 卿志琼. 禀赋效应、财政幻觉与公共政策——拆迁中情绪事件的行为经济学分析[J]. 南开学报(哲学社会科学版), 2011(6):127-136.
Qing Zhiqiong. Endoument effect, fiscal illusion and public policy: a behavioral economics analysis on the contentious events in demolition of houses[J]. Nankai Journal(Phi& Soc Sci), 2011(6):127-136.
[7] 张书维, 王宇, 周蕾. 行为公共政策视角下的助推与助力:殊途同归[J]. 中国公共政策评论, 2018,15(2):20-38.
Zhang Shuwei, Yu Wang, Lei Zhou. "Nudge" and "Boost" from the behavioral public policy perspective: all roads lead to Rome[J]. Chinese Public Policy Review, 2018,15(2):20-38.
[8] 郭跃, 何林晟, 苏竣. “工具-叙事-反馈”:一个行为公共政策的研究框架[J]. 中国行政管理, 2020(5):71-78.
Guo Yue, He Linsheng, Su Jun. Instruments, narrative and feedback: a framework of behavioral public policy[J]. Chinese Public Administration, 2020(5):20-38.
[9] 孙志建. 迈向助推型政府监管:机理、争论及启示[J]. 甘肃行政学院学报, 2018(4):57-66.
Sun Zhijian. Toward nudging-oriented government: the action mechanism of nudging and its enlightenments[J]. Journal of Gansu Administration Institute, 2018(4):57-66.
[10] 桑斯坦. 为什么助推[M]. 中信出版社, 2015.
Cass Sunstein. Why Nudge?[M]. China Citic Press, 2015.
[11] Hukkinen J, Rochlin R. A Salt on the Land: A Narrative Analysis of the Controversy over Irrigation-Related Salinity and Toxicity in California\"s San Joaquin Valley[J]. Policy Sciences, 1990,23(4):307-329.
[12] 明翠琴. 政策科学中的叙事政策框架及其研究前沿[J]. 陕西行政学院学报, 2019,33(2):11-20.
Ming Cuiqin. Research frontier and narrative policy framework in policy science[J]. Journal of Shanxi Academy of Governance, 2019,33(2):11-20.
[13] 朱春奎, 李玮. 叙事政策框架研究进展与展望[J]. 行政论坛, 2020,27(2):67-74.
Zhu Chunkui, Li wei. Research progress and prospect of narrative policy framework[J].Administration Tribune, 2020,27(2):67-74.
[14] 李文钊. 叙事式政策框架:探究政策过程中的叙事效应[J]. 公共行政评论, 2017,10(3):141-163.
Li Wenzhao. Narrative Policy Framework: Exploring the Narrative Impact on the Policy Process[J]. Journal of Public Administration, 2017,10(3):141-163.
[15] Mettler S, Sorelle M. Policy Feedback Theory[M]. Theories of the Policy Process, 2018.
[16] Paul P. When Effect Becomes Cause: Policy Feedback and Political Change[J]. World Politics, 1993,45(4):595-628.
[17] Hood C C. The tools of government[M]. The Tools of Government, 1983.
[18] McDonnell L M, Elmore R F. Getting the Job Done: Alternative Policy Instruments[J]. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1987, 3(2):133-152.
[19] Tummers L. Public Policy and Behavior Change[J]. Public Administration Review, 2019,79(6):925-930.
[20] Jones M, Mcbeth M. The Science of Stories: Applications of the Narrative Policy Framework in Public Policy Analysis[M]. Palgarve Macmillan, 2014.