Abstract
Despite increased scholarly attention, there is still limited knowledge on how empathy works in democratic deliberation. This article examines the role of empathy in citizen deliberation with the help of a deliberative experiment on immigration. First, a random sample of citizens was surveyed regarding their opinions on immigration. Based on their opinions, they were then divided into a permissive or a non‐permissive enclave, and randomly assigned into like‐minded or mixed‐opinion groups for deliberation. After deliberation, they were surveyed anew. The study analyzes: (a) empathy differences between permissive and non‐permissive participants; (b) changes in outgroup empathy toward immigrants as a result of deliberation; and (c) differences in prosocial behavior (i.e., donating to charity). The results show that the permissive respondents had more empathy, especially toward immigrants, than the non‐permissive respondents. Among participants, outgroup empathy increased during deliberation. Regarding prosocial behavior, the permissive participants donated more often to charity at the end of the experiment.
Highlights
Democratic deliberation appears to be the key to informed and fair collective decision making
We examine the role of empathy in a citizen deliberation experiment
In addition to the role of empathy in the deliberative process, we study the connection between empathy and prosocial behavior in the context of democratic deliberation
Summary
Democratic deliberation appears to be the key to informed and fair collective decision making. Batson (2011), for example, argues that empathetic concern involves a variety of feelings, including sympathy and compassion Understood in this way, emotional empathy seems relevant for democratic deliberation because it is likely to be linked to pro-social attitudes. The role of affective aspects of empathy is not straightforward, Morrell (2010) claims that open-mindedness and sensitivity to others’ emotions are likely to be empirically related to the sense of reciprocity and commitment to deliberation In other words, it is the affective element of empathy that motivates considerations of other people’s positions. The diversity of viewpoints, put forward in a deliberative process, is expected to help participants to see things from other people’s perspectives, including outgroups such as immigrants This kind of development is expected to take place especially among those participants who have negative attitudes toward immigration and who deliberate in mixed groups. H3: Participants in the pro enclave donate more often to the Red Cross than participants in the con enclave, especially to the International Catastrophe Fund
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
