Deliberative Quality Research Articles

Parliamentary Debate Dynamics: Understanding the Paradigm of Young Parliamentarians in the 12th Malaysia Plan Mid-Term Review Discourse

Young parliamentarians play a dynamic role in shaping Malaysia’s economic trajectory, especially during parliamentary sittings such as the mid-term review of the 12th Malaysia Plan. This study explores the dynamics of parliamentary debates qualitatively, scrutinising the contributions of young parliamentarians through discourse analysis, utilising the Deliberative Quality Index (DQI) to analyse speeches during the 12th Malaysia Plan Mid-term Review Special Parliamentary Seating. Findings showcased a consistent range of the DQI’s scores. Still, interestingly, no clear correlation between educational background and political exposure was evident, suggesting a complex array of factors influencing deliberative quality. The thematic analysis highlighted a priority towards food security and future-ready talent, contrasted against a noticeable unfamiliarity with the MADANI concept. For a more nuanced understanding of intergenerational collaboration in legislative discussions, this study advocates a holistic approach in future research. This exploration into contrasting perspectives and debating styles between young and seasoned parliamentarians could pave the way for a more inclusive, progressive, and forward-thinking parliamentary discourse in Malaysia, fostering a blend of youthful innovation and seasoned wisdom.

Chasing Deliberation in the Social Science Classroom. A Study of Deliberative Quality in Whole-Class, Small Group, and Pair Discussions

While classroom discussion is often cherished as a cornerstone of effective social science teaching, knowledge on when and where discussions tend to turn deliberative is lacking. To make up for this lack of knowledge, the present study examined classroom discussion in three conditions: a whole-class condition, a small group condition, and a pair condition. The study made use of video observations from a classroom intervention to evaluate how each condition affected the deliberative quality of the discussion process. To this end, 585 student utterances were coded for aspects of deliberation using the Stromer-Galley observation manual. The results showed that both the small group and pair conditions promoted key aspects of deliberation compared to the whole-class condition. The small group condition generated the highest levels of contestation and engagement, whereas the pair condition generated the highest level of equality. While these results suggest that the deliberative quality of classroom discussion might sometimes benefit from the teacher’s absence, more research is needed to determine the circumstances in which this is likely to be the case.

Citizens’ preferences and the future of Europe: a case for the ‘five scenarios’ as deliberative entry-points in mini-publics

ABSTRACT Mini publics have become cornerstones of the European Union’s Future of Europe (FoE) initiative. However, weaknesses in their designs bring their political influence into question. Often-unsystematic in design, they fail to strengthen participants' understandings of the issues under evaluation and induce silo-thinking and the formation of pseudo-preferences. These come at a cost to informed and deliberatively deduced recommendations which speak to underlying functional/operational technicalities which fundamentally determine the form and delivery of policy interests. Guided by the adage that form follows function, this paper argues that mini publics pertaining to the FoE must primarily encourage participants to think about the ways policies are made in the EU before they formulate policy recommendations. To do this, they must consider the EU’s overall form (or prospective forms). Utilising data from focus group analysis, the paper demonstrates that scenario (vignette) models are conducive to strengthening participants’ understandings of both existing and alternative EU forms, and their functional consequences for EU policies, thus enabling them to formulate concrete and potentially deliverable policy recommendations. Subsequently, the paper encourages organisers of relevant mini-publics to employ the European Commission’s ‘Five Scenarios for the FoE’ as entry-points to strengthen the deliberative quality and democratic outputs of such exercises.

Quality User-Generated Content? A Case Study of the Quality of Online News Comments on the Site of Finnish Public Service Broadcaster Yle

ABSTRACT Over the years, studies have assessed the quality of discourse in comment sections and results have been mixed. Some argue that newspapers have created forums for hate speech against minorities, that the quality of discourse undermines the democratic potential of comment sections, or that comments are troubled by incivility. Others have found that commenters produce content resembling public deliberation and that comment sections can contain fruitful discussions on divisive topics. This article contributes to the literature on the deliberative quality of news comments by assessing the deliberative quality of news comments in Finland. What is the deliberative quality of comments on Svenska Yle’s news articles? We conduct a quantitative content analysis of 565 news comments to 30 articles on Svenska Yle. Using a novel measurement strategy derived and developed from earlier research on assessments of deliberative quality, we analyze the deliberativeness, emotiveness, and confrontativeness of comments. Our findings are relatively positive since the overall quality level exceeds that of several previous studies. However, several indicators of quality still need improvement.

Social media posts as source for political news coverage inside and outside election campaigns: Examining effects on deliberative news media quality

Journalists increasingly cite and/or embed social media posts in news articles. While social media posts have been found to be of little deliberative quality, we do not know whether this also affects the deliberative quality of the news. Against the background of a hybrid media system and deliberative news media standards, we answer this research question with a content analysis of news articles including or not including posts from X (formerly Twitter) in the twelve widest-reaching German news websites prior and after the German general election 2021. We were particularly interested in the differences inside and outside election campaigns as the interdependence of the mass media and the political sphere is particularly pronounced during campaign periods. Results show that posts are more often cited and/or embedded in news articles inside than outside election campaigns. Articles including posts feature a greater number of actors but are not more diverse as mainly actors from the political center are referenced. Moreover, articles with posts are associated with a higher position responsiveness but on the other hand a decreased civility of the represented political discourse. This pattern only emerged inside but not outside campaign periods. These findings add to our understanding of contemporary hybrid media systems and the nature of political journalism during contentious political periods.

The Influence of Leaders on the Quality of Citizen Deliberation: An Exploratory Assessment of Online Deliberation in New Zealand

Leaders can be essential in setting the tone of deliberation in the public sphere, but can their discursive style influence the wider public sphere? Mass communication usually mediates leader-citizen interactions, and the proliferation of social media has presented new, large-scale opportunities to support deliberation. Further, leaders using these platforms have widespread reach. Using deliberative discourse analysis, this exploratory research studies whether leaders influence the quality of citizen deliberation and whether this is dependent on the online arena. Two leaders with contrasting communication styles were chosen: New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern and opposition leader Judith Collins. Two online arenas were included: a national news media Facebook page and the leaders’ respective Facebook pages. The results found that deliberative quality was variable within the news mass media arena; however, citizens displayed higher deliberative quality when the leader did so in the leaders-led online media arena. This study suggests that a leader’s use of deliberative dialogue to foster more deliberative discussion among citizens when they engage as both participants and facilitators in arenas with greater access to directly support deliberation. It presents theoretical arguments for leaders to participate in legitimation processes as part of the response ot the problem of scale and introduces a communication model for leaders to support deliberation in the public sphere. The model suggests that the leader's ability to affect the deliberative quality of citizens' discussions is mediated by their level of influence within that space. 

What Happens When Mini-Publics Are Held in a Deeply Divided Place? Evidence from Northern Ireland

A pessimistic view of the potential of deliberative mini-publics to effectively contribute to democratic decision making on highly contested issues in deeply divided places asserts that (1) deliberative quality would be low due to the bitterness prompted by discussion of divisive issues, and (2) levels of opinion change would be low given the stubbornly enduring nature of political attitudes in divided places. We empirically examined this pessimistic view using a quasi-experiment involving mini-publics on two separate issues in Northern Ireland: (1) the contentious ethno-national question of Northern Ireland’s constitutional status, and (2) the much less contested and non-ethno-national issue of social care. Contrary to the pessimistic view, we find evidence that from the perspective of the participants themselves, deliberative quality was higher in the mini-public on an ethno-national issue. However, in line with the pessimistic view, levels of self-reported opinion change were significantly lower in the ethno-national mini-public. Overall, the findings highlight the potential for carefully designed deliberative mini-publics to address divisive ethno-national issues: they provide a space for participants to engage with such issues in open and respectful discussion—even if the prospects for attitudinal change are more limited.

Discourse integration in positional online news reader comments: Patterns of responsiveness across types of democracy, digital platforms, and perspective camps

Online discourse integration, or the degree to which online user comments are responsive, that is, address or refer to other debate participants, is a normatively valued yet neglected quality dimension of online discussions. This preregistered study features the first cross-country/cross-platform investigation of online discourse integration, using manual and computational content analysis ( N = 9835 and N = 30,753 positional news reader comments). Unexpectedly, about one quarter of the comments was responsive in both majoritarian and consensus-oriented democracies (Australia/United States vs Germany/Switzerland) and on platforms that separate or mix public and private contexts (websites vs Facebook pages of mainstream media), even though other deliberative quality criteria were previously shown to vary by country and platform. Comments that are responsive to fellow commenters in the opposing perspective camp were more likely to contain negative evaluations of those addressed, whereas comments responsive within the same perspective camp were more likely to contain positive evaluations.

The influence of the deliberative quality of user comments on the number and quality of their reply comments

Comment sections below news posts on social media pages of news outlets provide spaces for user engagement and public discussions. However, from the normative perspective of deliberative discussions, user comments often lack quality. We analyze how deliberative characteristics of Facebook user comments, namely, reciprocity, respect, rationality, and constructiveness, can influence the number and deliberative quality of the reply comments they receive. The manual content analysis shows that rationality in top comments increases the number of replies; additionally, respect, rationality, and constructiveness in top comments increase the occurrence of these characteristics in replies. The findings support assumptions about the involvement mechanisms in commenting behavior and the applicability of social norm theory in online discussions. They contribute to understanding spirals of deliberation as well as those of incivility.

For Deliberation Sake, Show Some Constructive Emotion! How Different Types of Emotions Affect the Deliberative Quality of Interactive User Comments

Deliberation is classically understood as a communication process where equal participants justify their positions in a respectful, reciprocal, argumentative manner. However, critical scholars have argued for a concept of deliberation that incorporates other forms of communication beyond argumentation, for example, expressions of emotions. While previous research focused on differences between positive and negative emotions, we introduce a distinction between constructive and non-constructive expressions of emotions. Whilst constructive emotions focus on the discussed issue, non-constructive emotions refer to other participants. We draw on a quantitative relational content analysis of user comments written in an online-participation platform. The results show a positive effect of constructive expressions of emotions on the deliberative quality of interactive user comments and a negative effect of non-constructive expressions of emotions. Overall, we conclude that emotions can promote the deliberative quality of interactive user comments if they are not focused on other participants but on the discussed issue.

Everyday Political Talk with Strangers: Evidence on a Neglected Arena of the Deliberative System

According to normative theorists, informal conversations between strangers are the most basic manifestation of the political public sphere and truest to the deliberative democratic ideal. Yet systematic empirical evidence on citizens’ everyday political talk outside their social networks is largely missing. Using a unique survey, we examine citizens’ access to the public discursive sphere of political talk with strangers, as well as the frequency and disagreeableness of the conversations held in this arena of the deliberative system. Although widespread and frequent engagement is desirable from a normative point of view, we find this discursive sphere to be considerably smaller in scope and less vibrant than the private and semi-public discursive spheres of political talk within strong and weak network ties. Contrary to theorists’ equation of strangeness with difference, political conversations between strangers also appear rather harmonious. Furthermore, our findings show that psychological dispositions, most notably social trust and conflict orientations, are important drivers of individuals’ involvement in political conversations with strangers. Their impact exceeds the influence of political dispositions, opportunities, and skills. Some aspects of our results raise doubts about the deliberative quality of these conversations.

Authorship and individualization in the digital public sphere

Authorship and individualization in the digital public sphere

Being a master of metaphors

Being a master of metaphors

“Ideology and simultaneously more than mere ideology”: On Habermas’ reflections and hypotheses on a further structural transformation of the political public sphere

“Ideology and simultaneously more than mere ideology”: On Habermas’ reflections and hypotheses on a further structural transformation of the political public sphere

Can Deliberative Participatory Fora Cure Representation Gaps in France and Germany?

The French and the German national parliaments are dominated by highly educated, older, and mostly male politicians. There are growing calls for a more balanced political representation of different social groups. This paper seeks to inform this debate by conceptualizing and measuring representation gaps for women, people of immigrant origin, the working class, and younger age groups in France and Germany and by assessing the potential of deliberative participatory fora to ameliorate underrepresentation. Based on theories of deliberative and participatory democracy, it suggests three criteria these fora must fulfill to potentially balance underrepresentation (descriptive representation in composition, deliberative quality, and coupling to politics) and explores them empirically in four recent cases of deliberative participatory fora: the Grand Débat National and the Convention Citoyenne pour le Climat in France and the Bürgerrat Deutschlands Rolle in der Welt and the Bürgerrat Klima in Germany. We show that significant representation gaps exist for all groups studied. They have been narrowing for women and people of immigrant origin and remain most pronounced for class. Regarding institutional features, our cases fare relatively well in terms of balanced composition and deliberative quality, but the potential to balance representation gaps is seriously limited by a lack of coupling to the political system.

Political entrepreneurs in social media: Self-monitoring, authenticity and connective democracy. The case of Íñigo Errejón

Political entrepreneurs seek to mobilise public opinion and access large audiences who are not directly interested in politics, but are exposed to the digital environment. The aim of this research was to analyse how these figures promote experimental communication uses on channels far removed from political activity. We focused on Twitch, a successful platform for promoting entertainment and learning in the video games field. To do so, we conducted a significant case study, that of Íñigo Errejón, a Spanish male Member of Parliament, in 2021 through 18 live streamings that lasted 1223 min. We specifically described the conception and use of Twitch, measured the audience's impact, analysed the accountability exercise through this platform and evaluated the deliberative quality of conversation with users. To conclude, we identified three novel contributions of Twitch to digital political communication: self-monitoring, insofar as the elected politician himself proactively exercises accountability to the public without a third party intervening; the activation of mediated authenticity as a key value in the political actor's public construction; promoting connective democracy, which would help those sectors not used to employing political information to take an interest in it by detecting attention being paid to their needs and questions.

Learning through online participation: A longitudinal analysis of participatory budgeting using Big Data indicators

Local authorities increasingly employ digital platforms to facilitate public engagement in participatory budgeting processes. This creates opportunities for and challenges in synthesizing citizens’ voices online in an iterated cycle, requiring a systematic tool to monitor democratic quality and produce formative feedback. In this paper, we demonstrate how cases of online deliberation can be compared longitudinally by using six Big Data-based, automated indicators of deliberative quality. Longitudinal comparison is a way of setting a reference point that helps practitioners, designers, and researchers of participatory processes to interpret analytics and evaluative findings in a meaningful way. By comparing the two rounds of OmaStadi, we found that the levels of participation remain low but that the continuity and responsiveness of online deliberation developed positively.

Everyday Talk on Twitter: Informal Deliberation About (Ir-)responsible Business Conduct in Social Media Arenas

Recent research has damped initial promises for democratic deliberation in social media arenas. Empirical studies find only low degrees of direct reciprocal interaction among participants, a lack of consensus orientation, and accelerated forms of communication that fail to meet traditional ideals of deliberation. In line with recent literature, we argue that traditional deliberative ideals are too narrow to embrace the potential contribution of social media for deliberation about (ir-)responsible business conduct. Instead, we propose to conceptualize social media as arenas for everyday talk, that is, everyday communication practices through which participants informally discuss and express opinions about current issues, thereby contributing to a broader deliberative system. In adopting this lens, we ask: How can everyday talk in social media contribute to deliberation about (ir-)responsible business conduct? Drawing on the latest insights from online deliberation studies, we develop a framework for evaluating everyday talk and propose that its deliberative quality depends on social media appropriate forms of justification, interactivity, equality, and civility. We apply this framework with an analysis of 260,224 tweets about the role of business in climate change. Based on our findings, we critically discuss how everyday talk in social media can contribute to deliberation at the intersection of business and society.

Storytelling (Online Discussions/Discussion Quality)

Storytelling (Online Discussions/Discussion Quality)

Interactivity/Reciprocity (Online Discussions/Discussion Quality)

Interactivity/Reciprocity (Online Discussions/Discussion Quality)