Deliberative Theory Research Articles

Political interest, political ideology, and attitudes toward immigration

Although much research has been devoted to how political interest is related to different political outcomes, little is known about its influence on attitudes toward immigration. In line with deliberative theory, political interest should facilitate greater exposure to various perspectives via political discussions and other forms of political engagement that, in turn, should contribute to more positive attitude toward those with differing views or backgrounds. Using data from the European Social Survey, including 39 countries across 10 survey rounds 2002–2021, this study shows that political interest is positively related to immigrant acceptance. However, there is moderation effect of conservative values. Being politically interested is associated with a higher probability of holding pro-immigrant attitudes among weak conservatives, while there is no significant association among strong conservatives. This finding can be explained by the motivated cognition theory, which states that individuals tend to seek out and pay more attention to information that supports their strong pre-existing ideologies. For individuals with ideologies that predispose them to adopt very negative attitudes toward immigration (strong conservatives), being politically interested might entail a greater exposure and attention to ideology-congruent perspectives and, as a result, confirmation of initial predispositions.

Conversational Agents to Facilitate Deliberation on Harmful Content in WhatsApp Groups

WhatsApp groups have become a hotbed for the propagation of harmful content including misinformation, hate speech, polarizing content, and rumors, especially in Global South countries. Given the platform's end-to-end encryption, moderation responsibilities lie on group admins and members, who rarely contest such content. Another approach is fact-checking, which is unscalable, and can only contest factual content (e.g., misinformation) but not subjective content (e.g., hate speech). Drawing on recent literature, we explore deliberation---open and inclusive discussion---as an alternative. We investigate the role of a conversational agent in facilitating deliberation on harmful content in WhatsApp groups. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 Indian WhatsApp users, employing a design probe to showcase an example agent. Participants expressed the need for anonymity and recommended AI assistance to reduce the effort required in deliberation. They appreciated the agent's neutrality but pointed out the futility of deliberation in echo chamber groups. Our findings highlight design tensions for such an agent, including privacy versus group dynamics and freedom of speech in private spaces. We discuss the efficacy of deliberation using deliberative theory as a lens, compare deliberation with moderation and fact-checking, and provide design recommendations for future such systems. Ultimately, this work advances CSCW by offering insights into designing deliberative systems for combating harmful content in private group chats on social media.

Real Democracy: A Critical Realist Approach to Democracy and Democratic Theory

This article presents an alternative general model of democracy to traditional minimalist (electoral and liberal) and deliberative theories by drawing from critical realist philosophical thought. Realist or real democracy is proposed as a societal system where preconditions exist to fully empower all citizens to realize their individual capabilities. This includes empowerment opportunities at the ballot box - but also other preconditions such as health, educational and living standards. Real democracy also separates democratic preconditions from democratic outcomes. Democratic outcomes require the absence of inequalities in power as result from the contingent interaction preconditions and human agency. The new approach is argued to provide a more holistic and dynamic concept of democracy which is also more grounded in the everyday experience of the citizen compared to traditional approaches. It reconnects democracy with theories of human development and enables a new classification of political regimes and conception of democratic politics. An initial empirical mapping of patterns of global real democracy shows evidence of rising preconditions since 1990 – but stagnation since 2010 and some signs of decline. Democratic outcomes by socio-economic position saw the most notable decline.

Whose forest? A two-level collective action perspective on struggles to reach polycentric governance

Natural resources management often entails accommodating competing cross-scale interests. Polycentricity literature offers a potential solution: value heterogeneity can reflect in an institutional architecture that allows the coexistence of multiple management priorities, appeasing conflicts. However, this literature has largely endorsed a static perspective focusing less on the function conflicts can play ex ante for reaching such a more participated governance. This paper addresses this gap by focusing on the micro-processes of conflict that precede the potential instalment of polycentric governance. We present a two-level collective action framework that emphasizes key moments of such processes and use it to read forest-related conflicts. In a comparative analysis of four illustrative case studies from Finland, Canada, Brazil and Indonesia, we focus on common dynamics of conflict reification and its eventual transformation into an agreement on common procedural rules, which can sustain polycentric governance. We work iteratively to enrich our two-level collective action framework with insights from other corollary theories, notably the Social Movements, Bargaining, and Deliberative theories. We find that conflict serves the purpose of marginalized parties to reshuffle power imbalances and force stronger parties to the negotiation table, corroborating other literature. Yet, conflict must be followed by negotiations and integrative bargaining on procedural rules for institutional innovation, that can lead to the accommodation of value heterogeneity. Our study can help practitioners in contextualizing current conflict scenarios within a longer-term perspective, and evaluating ongoing conflict episodes and the costs associated to certain strategies versus the prospect of longer-term consequences of these struggles.

Reflecting on the boundaries of the demos: A virtual deliberative experiment with German citizens

AbstractThis article combines the fields of deliberative theory and citizenship studies. Drawing from a deliberative experiment on foreigner political rights with almost 300 German citizens, we find that a short virtual deliberative treatment produced a clarification effect, whereby especially those with already negative views increased their scepticism. Participants in our deliberative treatment displayed higher levels of argument repertoire and integrative complexity, underlining that the treatment led to well‐considered opinions. A qualitative analysis of participants’ substantive rationales unravels traces of what De Schutter and Ypi dub ‘mandatory citizenship’, implying that political rights must be attached to obligations. These results have wide ranging implications: They indicate that the practice of deliberation is not quasi‐automatically programmed to progressive outcomes (as some have argued) but can have a communitarian dimension (where preferences are determined on the basis of existing communal values and self‐understandings); this suggests that participatory practices may not always advance progressive reforms.

Textual Indicators of Deliberative Dialogue: A Systematic Review of Methods for Studying the Quality of Online Dialogues

High-quality online dialogues help sustain democracy. Deliberative theory, which predates the internet, provides the primary model for assessing the quality of online dialogues. It conceptualizes high-quality online dialogue as civil, rational, constructive, equal, interactive, and for the common good. More recently, advances in computation have driven an upsurge of empirical studies using automated methods for operationalizing online dialogue and measuring its quality. While related in their aims, deliberative theory and the wider empirical literature generally operate independently. To bridge the gap between the two literatures, we introduce Textual Indicators of Deliberative Dialogue (TIDDs). TIDDs are defined as text-based measures of online dialogue quality under a deliberative model (e.g., disagreement, incivility, and justifications). In this study, we identified 123 TIDDs by systematically reviewing 67 empirical studies of online dialogue. We found them to have mid-low reliability, low criterion validity, and high construct validity for measuring two deliberative dimensions (civility and rationality). Our results highlight the limitations of deliberative theory for conceptualizing the variety of ways online dialogues can be operationalized. We report the most promising TIDDs for measuring the quality of online dialogue and suggest deliberative theory would benefit from altering its models in line with the broader empirical literature.

Deliberative Democracy and Systemic Racism

AbstractExamining recent developments in deliberative democracy alongside growing attention to system-wide racism, I look at the ways deliberative systems theory and practice deals with the tension between the theory's normative claims and the structural injustice against which deliberative systems unfold. I focus on work aimed at deepening inclusion in deliberative systems, noting that this focus on inclusion into unjust systems stops the deliberative literature from taking full responsibility for structural and systemic racism. Taking a critical approach to the deliberative literature's capacity to confront systemic racism and live up to its normative principles of treating all people as equals, I argue that we need to reframe power to centre the relationship between race and democracy. As I do so, I propose ways to begin dismantling foundational injustice in deliberative systems, centring foundational inequalities in deliberative theory and design, and setting out differential responsibilities for listening as deliberative theorists confront the problem of white supremacy in deliberative systems.

Democracy Making melalui Musyawarah Desa di Desa Bendungan Kecamatan Kaliwiro Wonosobo

Democracy making through village deliberation is a deliberative theory of democracy to control and aggregation. Explorative Qualitative Research is used to explore phenomena and explore concepts related to making democracy in Bendungan Village. The data is analyzed by phenomena that occur in people's lives. Data collection was done by observation, documentation and interviews. The results of the study show that democracy making in Bendungan Village is carried out through village deliberations which are held twice a year which is the result of democracy making hamlet deliberations and non-formal deliberations such as Friday night tahlilan events, recitation and patrols. In these non-formal deliberations, political spaces are opened to discuss various kinds of community interests in order to become a means of control and aggregation. With strong deliberation at Friday night such as tahlilan events, women's recitations, night patrols, community service, and posyandu (Integrated Healthcare Center) which are carried out routinely, in addition to controlling power and aggregation, genuine people's aspirations can emerge that are autonomous and not based on mobilization based on community modalities

Rationality (Online Discussions/Discussion Quality)

Rationality (Online Discussions/Discussion Quality)

Algorithmic News Diversity and Democratic Theory: Adding Agonism to the Mix

The role news recommenders can play in stimulating news diversity is receiving increasing amounts of attention. Democratic theory plays an important role in this debate because it helps explain why news diversity is important and which kinds of news diversity should be pursued. In this article, I observe that the current literature on news recommenders and news diversity largely draws on a narrow set of theories of liberal and deliberative democracy. Another strand of democratic theory often referred to as ‘agonism’ is often ignored. This, I argue, is a mistake. Liberal and deliberative theories of democracy focus on the question of how political disagreements and conflicts can be resolved in a rational and legitimate manner. Agonism, to the contrary, stresses the ineradicability of conflict and the need to make conflict productive. This difference in thinking about the purpose of democratic politics can also lead to new ways of thinking about the value of news diversity and role algorithmic news recommenders should play in promoting it. The overall aim of the article is (re)introduce agonistic theory to the news recommender context and to argue that agonism deserves more serious attention.

What Creates Listening Online? Exploring Reciprocity in Online Political Discussions with Relational Content Analysis

Democratic governments frequently use online tools to include large numbers of citizens in participation processes. Against the backdrop of deliberative theories, such initiatives are subject to normative needs. This article examines the equality of participation. Previous research has mainly focused on equality in terms of access to, and voice within, deliberation processes. However, much less is known about the factors that influence the distribution of reciprocity in online political discussions. Proposing a theoretical distinction between simple replying and deliberative reciprocity, this study addresses the question: What obstructs or promotes deliberative reciprocity online? Drawing on previous online communication research, we assume that communication style, gender and users’ activity are important predictors of simple replying and deliberative reciprocity. Results of a relational quantitative content analysis indicate that in order to receive deliberative reciprocity users should ask questions, propose arguments, be humorous, have a critical attitude and use a male user name. Storytelling and expressions of emotions show no significant associations with deliberative reciprocity.

Listening to the Public: An Inductive Analysis of the Good Citizen in a Deliberative System

Significant research has demonstrated that deliberative participation has a number of benefits for participants, leaving them more informed, efficacious, and engaged. Unfortunately, this model of the good citizen may be at odds with both what citizens want out of engagement and what might be most beneficial for self-empowerment. Activism, rather than deliberation, might be a more effective means of influencing public decisions, but traits associated with activism are often considered antithetical to deliberative participation. This paper utilizes a case study to ask what participants want out of engagement and whether their conception of the good citizen aligns with theoretical deliberative norms. Findings suggest that participants in a hybrid model of engagement that blends deliberative discussion with interest group politics want opportunities for public input that center interest formation and recognition, equity, and empowerment. These results suggest a need to better integrate the voices of citizens in normative deliberative theory and research.

Multiple Ways to Democracy in Contemporary China

ABSTRACT Chinese democracy is discussed here from the perspective of intercultural dialog and the need for a global conversation and cultural understandings to build a new democratic global political order. Democracy in China is a controversial issue. But democracy is today problematic and full of paradoxes and contradictions everywhere. We indeed face a paradoxical situation: Western liberal democracy can no longer be considered the unique and universal model of democracy, yet we cannot surrender to a relativistic perspective on democracy. In this article, I first deal with some presuppositions and questions that constitute the “common sense” about Chinese politics: Is Chinese political culture compatible with democracy? Does democracy exist in China? Is talking about democracy in China a Western imposition? Even more: Is democracy necessary? All these questions are intertwined and drive us to ask which democracy we are talking about. Second, we focus on some of the main debates on Chinese democracy: transition to democracy, gradualism, the New Left, deliberative theories and present visions of democracy linked to the new era, the Chinese Dream and the Chinese concept of “Tianxia” (all under heaven) for a new model of international relations.

Lobbying: Its Role in and Impact on the US Government System

Introduction. The article provides an overview of lobbying regulations in the United States. The US lobbying legislation is an integral part of the whole country legislation system, with its regulations helping, in particular, to make the influence exerted by lobbyists on the decision-making process transparent. The statusquo of lobbying anywhere except the US, Canada and the European Union is nonidentical as there still have not been enacted any direct laws and statutory instruments regulating this field elsewhere [8].Lobbying is thus apt to be misinterpreted due to its misperceiving and insufficient awareness. Consequently, the myth that “bribing” is an equitable sobriquet for “lobbying” is still going strong and has yet to be dissected. The author delves into the origins and history of lobbying in the US, tracing its enhancement and indicating legal loopholes still remaining despite seemingly exhaustive disclosure required. The author equally inquiries into theoretical justifications for regulating lobbying from deliberative democratic theory. “Grassroots lobbying” and “shadow lobbying” constitute likewise matters of concern to the article.Materials and methods. The author employs both general and specialized scientific methods in the study. The issue of US lobbying development is addressed by means of historical method. In detecting legal loopholes and propounding other approaches used in relation to them either on federal level or in certain states, a comparative legal analysis and a logical method are combined.Study results. The research has revealed that lobbying activities in general and lobbying practices in particular unfold at every level of government. The acts adopted throughout the US lobbying history provide a range of definitions for the terms “lobbyist” and “lobby groups”, clarify the status of lobbyists and circumscribe the cases of obligatory disclosure of lobbying activities. Lobbying appears to be a thriving field due to it exerting immense influence on legislative process, as well as the outcome of the elections. Last but not least, the study has ascertained the US lobbying system as the one attempting not to leave any of lobbying activities opaque from public perspective by means of eliminating legal loopholes. Thus, lobbying regulations significantly contribute to fostering transparency and democracy overall.Discussion and conclusion. From our perspective, lobbying exists even when unregulated, hence not only its regulations do not constitute corruption, but they can also serve as a means of outlawing the latter by bringing policy makers under close scrutiny, i.e. establishing certain limitations pertaining their interactions with lobbyists and lobby groups hence the decision-making process. With the aforesaid aim, as well as with the aim of keeping the decision-making process transparent in general, lobbying legislation in the US has been gradually developing in scale and sophistication to eventually encompass the vast number of lobbying interactions.

Rights and Deliberative Systems

This article maps a significant area of contribution to (and control of) deliberative democratic systems: human rights enacted in law. Thus it takes up John Dryzek’s call for ‘close study of actual deliberative systems in the terms that theorists specify’. The article shows how the theory and practice of legal rights often provide a good fit with, and sometimes help to elaborate and advance, aspects of systemic deliberative democratic theory. One rationale for presenting a more detailed legal map of deliberative systems is descriptive: to look more comprehensively at the set of participants and activities within such systems. Yet the project may also be framed as normative. To try to ensure that legal rights do not displace, but rather align with, systemic deliberative democracy, courts and other legal actors may engage in what the article terms (pace John Hart Ely) ‘deliberative system reinforcement’.

Pragmatics between Formal Transformations and Technological Applications

The Pragamatics represents a critical theory that deals with the analysis of discourse and is related in different fields such as philosophy, law, economics and the arts. It appears in multiple analyzes that study the special phenomena in these fields in the linguistic analyzes, which require studying all the rationales and problems according to the surrounding of many questions. Functional purpose, contextual and communicative aspects, and are therefore subject to evidential and developmental processes leading to interpretation. On this basis, it has evolved into several paths resulting from the different specialties of researchers in the interests of deliberative theory. The deliberative process is also concerned with the study of the technical work according to the objective communication between the artist, the message, the artistic work, and research on how to deal with the technical elements in the visual achievement, And the mechanisms of the process of evidence in the processing of the outputs of the plastic analysis of the discourse in the work, which necessitates a Pragmatics reading aware of the significance and Beyond the above to discuss the intent of the message and the context, resulting from the interactive installations between the sender and the work and the future, which are implicit in conjunction with the appropriate context. Based on this, the study is entitled “Pragmatics between formal transformations and technological applications”. This paper contains the problem of what are the formal and technical transformations in the contemporary plastic pattern? The study discusses the concept of Pragmatics and approach in reading the transformations of the contemporary art, including the new media art and its technical and formal representations. Under the last title “results and discussion”, the findings of the study are Summarized.

Overcoming Factionalism in Serious Mental Illness Policy Making: A Counter-Perspective

Overcoming Factionalism in Serious Mental Illness Policy Making: A Counter-Perspective

Bolsonaro riu disso e eu também: o sarcasmo como retórica de vínculo em conversações on-line sobre os cortes na educação

Abstract In light of deliberative theory and based on the concepts of bonding rhetoric and bridging rhetoric (Dryzek, 2010), this article aims to investigate how sarcasm was employed in online conversations on Facebook and YouTube regarding budgetary cutbacks in education made in 2019 by the Ministry of Education (MEC). Sarcasm was the most used argumentative device and was often associated with insults, contributing to a polarized discussion. Sarcastic comments also had low rates of justification, were predominantly declaratory, and largely had a generic or specific target, generating reaction and conflict while strengthening a bond with those who understood the sarcastic meaning behind the message and agreed with the subject who employed it.

Digital campaigning as a policy of democracy promotion: Applying deliberative theories of democracy to political parties

Today’s election campaigns are heavily data-driven. Despite the numerous skeptical voices questioning the compatibility of specific campaigning practices with fundamental principles of liberal democracies, there has to date been little comprehensive work in this area from the perspective of normative democratic theory. Our article addresses this gap by drawing on recent research on the normative theory of political parties in the field of deliberative democratic theory. The deliberative theories of democracy proposed by Habermas and Rawls contain structural elements of a normative theory of the political party: the special status of political parties as mediators between background culture and the political forum, between the political system and the public sphere, and between the individual and the state, confers on them a central position as actors in in the public use of reason and deliberation.We argue in this article for a view of digital campaigning as a policy of democracy promotion and for the proposition that, alongside other actors, political parties have a special responsibility in this regard. We point to the implications for the evaluation and design of digital political microtargeting that arise from the application of deliberative principles to political parties and consider the need they reveal for the ongoing development of detailed, nuanced normative theories of democracy.

Mediated Deliberation in Deep Conflicts: How Might Deliberative Media Content Contribute to Social Integration Across Deep Divides?

Conflicts perceived by the media, either within or across national borders, are a staple of modern societies. These conflicts become especially challenging for societies that are divided along religious, ethnic, cultural or political lines. In the light of such deep conflicts, the contribution of mediated deliberation to social integration moves center stage. In this paper we discuss normative standards for mediated public communication deemed conducive to social integration in divided societies by deliberative theorists. We identify inclusiveness, responsiveness, mutual respect, and the display of group-bridging identities as the essential criteria. These criteria can be applied as yardsticks to assess the production, the content as well as the reception of media material in both mass media and social media. They therefore serve as an ideal point of departure for empirical work on the media’s role in social integration.