Discourse Quality in Deliberative Citizen Forums – A Comparison of Four Deliberative Mini-publics

Staffan Himmelroos
{"title":"Discourse Quality in Deliberative Citizen Forums – A Comparison of Four Deliberative Mini-publics","authors":"Staffan Himmelroos","doi":"10.16997/JDD.269","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, there has been a rapid growth in studies reporting findings from a variety of deliberative citizen forums. Such studies help to develop our understanding of deliberative democracy by exploring changes in opinion and knowledge as well as - more recently - the quality of the deliberative process itself. However, most deliberative forums are organized on an ad hoc basis, making it hard to judge how generalizable the findings from such forums actually are. This article attempts to address this problem by comparing the findings on the quality of deliberation from four different citizen forums. Based on the findings citizen deliberation is generally very respectful, while argumentation is less refined than among elected representatives. The cases included in this study also suggest that women and those with lower education have less influence in the deliberative process.","PeriodicalId":23601,"journal":{"name":"VOLUME-8 ISSUE-10, AUGUST 2019, REGULAR ISSUE","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"39","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"VOLUME-8 ISSUE-10, AUGUST 2019, REGULAR ISSUE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16997/JDD.269","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 39

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a rapid growth in studies reporting findings from a variety of deliberative citizen forums. Such studies help to develop our understanding of deliberative democracy by exploring changes in opinion and knowledge as well as - more recently - the quality of the deliberative process itself. However, most deliberative forums are organized on an ad hoc basis, making it hard to judge how generalizable the findings from such forums actually are. This article attempts to address this problem by comparing the findings on the quality of deliberation from four different citizen forums. Based on the findings citizen deliberation is generally very respectful, while argumentation is less refined than among elected representatives. The cases included in this study also suggest that women and those with lower education have less influence in the deliberative process.
协商公民论坛的话语质量——四种协商小公众的比较
近年来,报告各种公民审议论坛结果的研究迅速增加。这些研究通过探索意见和知识的变化,以及最近的审议过程本身的质量,有助于加深我们对协商民主的理解。然而,大多数审议论坛都是在特别的基础上组织起来的,因此很难判断这些论坛的结论实际上有多大的普遍性。本文试图通过比较四个不同的公民论坛对审议质量的调查结果来解决这个问题。根据调查结果,公民审议通常是非常尊重的,而辩论则不如民选代表那么精致。本研究中包括的案例还表明,妇女和受教育程度较低的人在审议过程中的影响力较小。
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