Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 398

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

When Policies Undo Themselves: Self‐Undermining Feedback as a Source of Policy Change

Jacobs, Alan M., Weaver, R. Kent·2015·Governance
DOI 10.1111/gove.12101
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Most studies of policy feedback have focused on processes of self‐reinforcement through which programs bolster their own bases of political support and endure or expand over time. This article develops a theoretical framework for identifying feedback mechanisms through which policies can become self‐undermining over time, increasing the likelihood of a major change in policy orientation. We conceptualize and illustrate three types of self‐undermining feedback mechanisms that we expect to operate in democratic politics: the emergence of unanticipated losses for mobilized social interests, interactions between strategic elites and loss‐averse voters, and expansions of the menu of policy alternatives. We also advance hypotheses about the conditions under which each mechanism is likeliest to unfold. In illuminating endogenous sources of policy change, the analysis builds on efforts by both historically oriented and rationalist scholars to understand how institutions change and seeks to expand political scientists’ theoretical toolkit for explaining policy development over time.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gove.12101

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 53 references

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Baumgartner Frank R., 2002, Policy Dynamics
  2. 10.1056/NEJMsr0807717 · doi:10.1056/nejmsr0807717
  3. Brooks Sarah M., 2005, Pension Reform: Issues and Prospects for Non‐financial Defined Contribution (NDC) Schemes
  4. Ellerman A. Denny.2003. “Ex Post Evaluation of Tradable Permits: The U.S. SO2 Cap‐andTrade Program.” Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research. · doi:10.1787/9789264015036-4-en
  5. Orren Karen, 1994, The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations
  6. 10.1001/jama.2012.14552 · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.14552
  7. Skocpol Theda, 1996, Boomerang: Clinton's Health Security Effort and the Turn Against Government in U.S. Politics
  8. Starr Paul, 2011, Remedy and Reaction: The Peculiar American Struggle Over Health Care Reform
  9. Thorpe Kenneth, 1999, Managed Care as Victim or Villain, Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 24, 949, 10.1215/03616878-24-5-949 · doi:10.1215/03616878-24-5-949
  10. Wilson James Q., 1980, The Politics of Regulation

Cited by

See all 398

Metadata

Authors
Jacobs, A. M., & Weaver, R. K.
Venue
Governance
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-07-10
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
441-457
ISSN
  • 0952-1895 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-0491
DOI
10.1111/gove.12101
OpenAlex
W2150575850
Cited by
398
References
53
FWCI
71.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: When Policies Undo Themselves: Self‐Undermining Feedback as a Source of Policy Change. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/gove.12101
The paper
Jacobs, A. M., & Weaver, R. K. (2015). When Policies Undo Themselves: Self‐Undermining Feedback as a Source of Policy Change. Governance. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12101

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.