How does state capacity shape bureaucratic responsiveness to different types of citizen claims? Claim-making is a crucial form of citizen-state engagement, with potential to improve service delivery and social accountability, but faces many challenges including limitations of state capacity and bureaucratic biases. Researchers also highlight different approaches including both collaborative and confrontational social accountability. We study these using a conjoint experiment embedded in a survey of roughly 700 local bureaucrats in Bihar, India, charged with managing block- and district-level service delivery in education, health, early childhood care, and public works. We present respondents with pairs of hypothetical claimants with randomly varying features including group size, gender, status, brokerage, and collaborative or confrontational approaches. We not only assess the direct effects of these features on officials’ choice of which claim to prioritize, but also how such effects differ across varying levels of real-world state capacity as it varies across offices. We thus are able to test whether or not state capacity enhances impartiality in responding to citizen claims; as well as whether citizen confrontation or collaboration each complement or substitute for state capacity. The survey is currently in the field with block- and district-level officials being surveyed in-person by trained enumerators. Fieldwork should conclude in February 2025 and preliminary results will be available soon after that.