A large literature on the determinants of public service performance and how citizens perceive it has yielded valuable insights. There remain concerns about omitted variables and selection bias, however. The papers in this panel all provide a remedy for one of these problems. Three of the four papers use an experiment. There is one real-effort experiment, one field experiment, and one survey experiment. The fourth paper includes a theoretically important variable in an observational study that had been omitted in existing research. Substantively, the first paper, containing real-effort experiment, uses performance feedback for workers as the treatment and assesses whether the treatment varies depending on the worker's degree of public service motivation. The second and third paper assess aspects of citizens' perceptions of the performance of a public service. The second paper, containing the field experiment, uses variations in the degree of direct responsibility for a service as the treatment, to assess whether politicians can shift blame for poor performance by using delegation. The third paper, containing the survey experiment, induces respondents to either think abstractly or concretely about what they expect from public services in order to test whether the different types of expectations affect these respondents' satisfaction with public services they use. The fourth paper assesses whether the job satisfaction of public workers predicts the satisfaction of citizens using these workers' services. While job satisfaction had been identified as theoretically important, prior research on citizen satisfaction had not been able to test it for a lack of appropriate data. All together, the innovative research design elements in the four papers on this panel enhance the validity of insights about public service performance and how citizens perceive it.