How does the media report about immigration and legal rules? Which public attitudes are dominant, and do they vary regionally? And how do these factors influence frontline bureaucratic decision-making?

In my dissertation, I developed the media-driven discrimination cycle to explain how immigration discourses in regional news outlets activate stereotypes and make them cognitively accessible to street-level bureaucrats, subconsciously feeding into decisions of street-level bureaucrats. I also posit that the normalization of deeply rooted illiberal norms in regional social contexts, especially anti-immigrant sentiments, influence how strongly negative media reporting affects bureaucratic-decision-making due to selective information processing. The results show that media coverage fuels discrimination in public administration, depending on the dominant media narratives, regional context, and who the beneficiaries are. I continue to explore how media and regional contexts shape bureaucratic decision-making.

Relevant publications:

• Rueß, Stefanie. 2026. "Regional News, Regional Bias? Evidence From Media Discourses and Welfare Decisions in Germany." Policy Studies Journal (Online first). 

• Rueß, Stefanie, Gerald Schneider, and Jan P. Vogler. 2025. "Illiberal Norms, Media Reporting, and Bureaucratic Discrimination: Evidence from State-Citizen Interactions in Germany". Comparative Political Studies (Online first).

Ongoing research:

• Leue, Miriam, Stefanie Rueß, and Gerald Schneider. "Administrative Welfare Chauvinism? Regional Inequities in Sanction Decisions against Different Welfare Recipients". (Working paper). 

How are laws and administrative guidance written? How do street-level bureaucrats perceive vague and indeterminate terms in such documents?And how do these texts structure discretion and shape implementation?

In my second research area, I examine how vague formulations in laws and administrative guidance shape the exercise of bureaucratic discretion. Specifically, I want to explain how vagueness is transmitted, reduced, or reproduced as statutory rules are translated into administrative guidance and implemented by street-level bureaucrats. For example, when deciding whether to impose a benefit reduction on a welfare recipient who misses a mandatory meeting, caseworkers in German job centers must assess whether an “important reason” justified the absence. While administrative guidance aims to clarify such terms, it can itself remain vague (“all reasons that carry particular weight for the person (...) are important, taking into account all the circumstances of the individual case (...)”), leaving caseworkers with considerable discretion. This flexibility can be useful in dealing with individual circumstances, but it can also create room for unequal treatment. I continue to explore when vagueness in legal design and administrative guidance is beneficial and when it contributes to inequality in public service delivery.

Relevant publications:

• Hurka, Steffen, Stefanie Rueß, Mike Cowburn, and Constantin Kaplaner. 2025. "Laws as Blades: A Conceptual Framework of Legislative Design". Policy Sciences (Online first).

Ongoing research:

• Rueß, Stefanie, Steffen Hurka, Mike Cowburn, Constantin Kaplaner. "Seeds of Inequality: How Legal Design and Administrative Guidance Shape Public Service Delivery". (Working paper).

Which interventions are effective in reducing bias and limiting the influence of negative media narratives? How can bureaucrats be supported in (better) processing information from law and administrative guidance? And which formats are most successful?

In my third research area, I examine how public organizations can support fairer and more consistent decision-making. In my dissertation, I show that media and social contexts reinforce each other in shaping bureaucratic biases. I therefore examined whether media literacy interventions can help break this cycle by strengthening frontline officials' ability to critically evaluate media information. My findings suggest that media literacy training can help reduce bias in bureaucratic decision-making. I continue to explore how different interventions and formats (e.g., interactive formats) can help bureaucrats process information more effectively and make fairer decisions.

Ongoing research:

• Rueß, Stefanie. "The Pursuit of Fairness: Can Media Literacy Interventions Mitigate Discrimination in Welfare Offices?" (Revise & Resubmit).