The Resilience of Pandemic Digital Deliberation: An Analysis of Online Synchronous Forums

S. Elstub, R. Thompson, O. Escobar, J. Hollinghurst, Duncan Grimes, M. Aitken, A. McKeon, K. Jones, Alexa Waud, N. Sethi
{"title":"The Resilience of Pandemic Digital Deliberation: An Analysis of Online Synchronous Forums","authors":"S. Elstub, R. Thompson, O. Escobar, J. Hollinghurst, Duncan Grimes, M. Aitken, A. McKeon, K. Jones, Alexa Waud, N. Sethi","doi":"10.1080/13183222.2021.1969616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Quality deliberation is essential for societies to address the challenges presented by the coronavirus pandemic effectively and legitimately. Critics of deliberative and participatory democracy are highly skeptical that most citizens can engage with such complex issues in good circumstances and these are far from ideal circumstances. The need for rapid action and decision-making is a challenge for inclusivity and quality of deliberation. Additionally, policy responses to the virus need to be even more co-ordinated than usual, which intensifies their complexity. The digitalisation of the public sphere may be seen as a further challenge to deliberating. Furthermore, these are stressful and emotional times, making a considered judgement on these issues potentially challenging. We employ a modified version of the Discourse Quality Index to assess the deliberative quality in two facilitated synchronous digital platforms to consider aspects of data use in light of COVID 19. Our study is the first to perform a comprehensive, systematic and in-depth analysis of the deliberative capacity of citizens in a pandemic. Our evidence indicates that deliberation can be resilient in a crisis. The findings will have relevance to those interested in pandemic democracy, deliberative democracy in a crisis, data use and digital public spheres.","PeriodicalId":93304,"journal":{"name":"Javnost (Ljubljana, Slovenia)","volume":"28 1","pages":"237 - 255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Javnost (Ljubljana, Slovenia)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2021.1969616","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Quality deliberation is essential for societies to address the challenges presented by the coronavirus pandemic effectively and legitimately. Critics of deliberative and participatory democracy are highly skeptical that most citizens can engage with such complex issues in good circumstances and these are far from ideal circumstances. The need for rapid action and decision-making is a challenge for inclusivity and quality of deliberation. Additionally, policy responses to the virus need to be even more co-ordinated than usual, which intensifies their complexity. The digitalisation of the public sphere may be seen as a further challenge to deliberating. Furthermore, these are stressful and emotional times, making a considered judgement on these issues potentially challenging. We employ a modified version of the Discourse Quality Index to assess the deliberative quality in two facilitated synchronous digital platforms to consider aspects of data use in light of COVID 19. Our study is the first to perform a comprehensive, systematic and in-depth analysis of the deliberative capacity of citizens in a pandemic. Our evidence indicates that deliberation can be resilient in a crisis. The findings will have relevance to those interested in pandemic democracy, deliberative democracy in a crisis, data use and digital public spheres.
流行病数字审议的弹性——对在线同步论坛的分析
高质量的审议对于社会有效合法地应对冠状病毒大流行带来的挑战至关重要。审议和参与式民主的批评者对大多数公民能否在良好的情况下处理如此复杂的问题持高度怀疑态度,而这些情况远非理想。快速行动和决策的必要性是对包容性和审议质量的挑战。此外,应对病毒的政策需要比平时更加协调,这加剧了其复杂性。公共领域的数字化可能被视为对审议的进一步挑战。此外,这是一个充满压力和情绪的时期,对这些问题做出深思熟虑的判断可能具有挑战性。我们使用修改版的话语质量指数来评估两个促进同步数字平台中的审议质量,以考虑新冠肺炎19的数据使用方面。我们的研究首次对疫情中公民的审议能力进行了全面、系统和深入的分析。我们的证据表明,在危机中深思熟虑是有弹性的。这些发现将与那些对疫情民主、危机中的协商民主、数据使用和数字公共领域感兴趣的人有关。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信