A Preface to Studying Deliberation Empirically

André Bächtiger
{"title":"A Preface to Studying Deliberation Empirically","authors":"André Bächtiger","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198747369.013.57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This preface to the methodological part discusses how normative theories of deliberation can be studied empirically. Despite major advances in deliberative methodology, the preface identifies two challenges: on the one hand, quantitative work on deliberative processes still struggles with the challenge of causality, requiring the development and application of more sophisticated quantitative designs; on the other hand, there is an urgent need for better understanding the variegated meaning of deliberative acts, requiring more qualitative approaches. The chapter calls for a “problem-based” approach to studying deliberation empirically, combining advanced quantitative and qualitative designs, and suggests that new methodological tools may need to be developed or borrowed from other disciplines.","PeriodicalId":185217,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198747369.013.57","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

This preface to the methodological part discusses how normative theories of deliberation can be studied empirically. Despite major advances in deliberative methodology, the preface identifies two challenges: on the one hand, quantitative work on deliberative processes still struggles with the challenge of causality, requiring the development and application of more sophisticated quantitative designs; on the other hand, there is an urgent need for better understanding the variegated meaning of deliberative acts, requiring more qualitative approaches. The chapter calls for a “problem-based” approach to studying deliberation empirically, combining advanced quantitative and qualitative designs, and suggests that new methodological tools may need to be developed or borrowed from other disciplines.
《实证研究思考》序言
这是方法论部分的序言,讨论了如何从经验上研究审议的规范理论。尽管审议方法取得了重大进展,但序言指出了两个挑战:一方面,审议过程的定量工作仍然与因果关系的挑战作斗争,需要开发和应用更复杂的定量设计;另一方面,迫切需要更好地理解审议行为的各种含义,需要更多的定性方法。本章呼吁采用一种“基于问题”的方法,结合先进的定量和定性设计,从经验上研究审议,并建议可能需要开发或借鉴其他学科的新方法工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信