Abstract
ABSTRACT Many citizens support the involvement of experts in political decision-making, yet we know little about how citizens react to expert opinions. Bridging recent evidence on technocratic attitudes and deliberative democracy, we study citizen responses to experts during influential deliberative mini-publics. Combining automated speech transcription of over 380,000 spoken words and quantitative text analysis, we estimate the topic prevalence in all expert testimonials, Q&A sessions, and other agenda items in the Irish Citizens’ Assembly (2016–2018), one of the prime examples of impactful deliberative forums. We find that inputs of experts structure subsequent discussions but do not dominate them. This correlation persists with various measures of topic prevalence and is robust to several modelling approaches. We also find that participants tended to react less strongly to testimonials by female experts. These conditional effects should encourage organisers to invite experts with diverse backgrounds in order to enhance inclusive decision-making.
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
