The Challenges for Online Deliberation Research: A Literature Review

Magnus E. Jonsson, Joachim Åström
{"title":"The Challenges for Online Deliberation Research: A Literature Review","authors":"Magnus E. Jonsson, Joachim Åström","doi":"10.4018/ijep.2014010101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While pure deliberation has still not been found online, the field of online deliberation research is blossoming. Born out of the \"frustrations and possibilities\" of the 1990s, a current theme in the field is to re-link deliberative theory with empirical political science. The aim of this systematic literature review is to sort out and examine important features of this development; to identify and categorise important research themes and issues as well as to pinpoint some research gaps. Using citation analysis as a method for article selection, 788 abstracts were retrieved and out of these, 130 items were chosen for further analysis. First the review shows that researchers from several different disciplines are involved in the field and that these researchers are studying online deliberation in a variety of arenas aided by a wide range of methods. Second the review reveals that the field struggles with a highly diversified concept of deliberation; that newer theoretical developments are underutilised in the operationalisation of theoretical concepts for empirical analyses, and that it there is a rather low degree of cumulativity in the field. Finally, more attention is paid on deliberation per se, rather than the political and democratic consequences of deliberation.","PeriodicalId":13695,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. E Politics","volume":"56 1","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Int. J. E Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijep.2014010101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

While pure deliberation has still not been found online, the field of online deliberation research is blossoming. Born out of the "frustrations and possibilities" of the 1990s, a current theme in the field is to re-link deliberative theory with empirical political science. The aim of this systematic literature review is to sort out and examine important features of this development; to identify and categorise important research themes and issues as well as to pinpoint some research gaps. Using citation analysis as a method for article selection, 788 abstracts were retrieved and out of these, 130 items were chosen for further analysis. First the review shows that researchers from several different disciplines are involved in the field and that these researchers are studying online deliberation in a variety of arenas aided by a wide range of methods. Second the review reveals that the field struggles with a highly diversified concept of deliberation; that newer theoretical developments are underutilised in the operationalisation of theoretical concepts for empirical analyses, and that it there is a rather low degree of cumulativity in the field. Finally, more attention is paid on deliberation per se, rather than the political and democratic consequences of deliberation.
网络审议研究的挑战:文献综述
虽然网上还没有发现纯粹的讨论,但在线讨论研究领域正在蓬勃发展。诞生于20世纪90年代的“挫折和可能性”,该领域当前的一个主题是将审议理论与经验政治科学重新联系起来。本系统文献综述的目的是整理和研究这一发展的重要特征;识别和分类重要的研究主题和问题,并指出一些研究差距。使用引文分析作为文章选择的方法,检索了788篇摘要,从中选择了130篇进行进一步分析。首先,这篇综述表明,来自不同学科的研究人员参与了这一领域,这些研究人员在各种各样的方法的帮助下,正在研究各种领域的在线审议。其次,回顾表明,该领域与高度多样化的审议概念作斗争;较新的理论发展在理论概念的操作中未得到充分利用,用于实证分析,并且该领域的累积程度相当低。最后,人们更多地关注审议本身,而不是审议的政治和民主后果。
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