The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
THE POLITICAL EVOLUTION OF PRINCIPAL-AGENT MODELS
Abstract
▪ Abstract With tools borrowed from the economic analysis of insurance, principal-agency theory has allowed political scientists new insights into the role of information asymmetry and incentives in political relationships. It has given us a way to think formally about power as the modification of incentives to induce actions in the interests of the principal. Principal-agency theory has evolved significantly as political scientists have sought to make it more applicable to peculiarly political institutions. In congressional oversight of the bureaucracy, increasing emphasis has been placed on negotiation of administrative procedures, rather than the imposition of outcome-based incentives, as originally conceived. Awareness of the problem of credible commitment has impelled more dramatic reformulations, in which agents perform their function only when their interests conflict with those of the principal, and they are guaranteed some degree of autonomy. The ‘political master’ finds himself in the position of the ‘dilettante’ who stands opposite the ‘expert,’ facing the trained official who stands within the management of administration. ( Weber 1958 )
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Moral Hazard and Observability
Holmstrom, B. (1979) · The Bell Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/3003320 · Cited by 8,311
Schelling, T. C. (1960) · Cited by 7,672
North, D. C., & Weingast, B. R. (1989) · The Journal of Economic History · doi:10.1017/s0022050700009451 · Cited by 5,300
From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology
(2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203759240 · Cited by 3,393
Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols versus Fire Alarms
McCubbins, M. D., & Schwartz, T. (1984) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2110792 · Cited by 2,936
From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology
Timasheff, N. S., Gerth, H. H., & Mills, C. W. (1958) · The American Catholic Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/3709392 · Cited by 2,284
Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control
(1987) · The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jleo.a036930 · Cited by 2,224
The New Economics of Organization
Moe, T. M. (1984) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2110997 · Cited by 1,974
Weingast, B. R., & Moran, M. J. (1983) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/261181 · Cited by 1,431
(2025) · Principles of Behavioral Economics · doi:10.1017/9781009422314.012 · Cited by 1,290
Cited by
Chater, N., & Loewenstein, G. (2023) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x22002023 · Cited by 710
Indignation or resignation: The implications of transparency for societal accountability
Bauhr, M., & Grimes, M. (2014) · Governance · doi:10.1111/gove.12033 · Cited by 524
Political Astroturfing on Twitter: How to Coordinate a Disinformation Campaign
Keller, F. B., Schoch, D., Stier, S., & Yang, J. (2020) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2019.1661888 · Cited by 378
“To better understand how the patterns of the two types of campaigns should differ, we turn to principal-agent theory (Miller, 2005; Ross, 1973).”
BackgroundModern Police Tactics, Police-Citizen Interactions, and the Prospects for Reform
Mummolo, J. (2018) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/694393 · Cited by 161
The Institutional Basis of Democratic Accountability
Olsen, J. P. (2013) · West European Politics · doi:10.1080/01402382.2012.753704 · Cited by 159
Metadata
- Authors
- Miller, G. J.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Political Science
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2005-06-15
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 203-225
- ISSN
- 1094-2939 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-1577
- OpenAlex
- W2105736111
- Cited by
- 865
- References
- 33
- FWCI
- 36.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: THE POLITICAL EVOLUTION OF PRINCIPAL-AGENT MODELS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.polisci.8.082103.104840
- The paper
- Miller, G. J. (2005). THE POLITICAL EVOLUTION OF PRINCIPAL-AGENT MODELS. Annual Review of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.8.082103.104840
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.