Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-564cf476b6-pp5r9 Total loading time: 0.226 Render date: 2021-06-18T15:26:13.087Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Deliberative Abilities and Influence in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Abstract

This article investigates the deliberative abilities of ordinary citizens in the context of ‘EuroPolis’, a transnational deliberative poll. Drawing upon a philosophically grounded instrument, an updated version of the Discourse Quality Index (DQI), it explores how capable European citizens are of meeting deliberative ideals; whether socio-economic, cultural and psychological biases affect the ability to deliberate; and whether opinion change results from the exchange of arguments. On the positive side, EuroPolis shows that the ideal deliberator scoring high on all deliberative standards does actually exist, and that participants change their opinions more often when rational justification is used in the discussions. On the negative side, deliberative abilities are unequally distributed: in particular, working-class members are less likely to contribute to a high standard of deliberation.

Type
Articles
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

*

Institute of Political Science, University of Bern; Institute of Social Sciences, University of Stuttgart; Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz; Institute of Political Science, University of Bern; The Graduate Institute, University of Geneva (emails: marlene.gerber@ipw.unibe.ch; andre.baechtiger@sowi.uni-stuttgart.de; susumu.shikano@uni-konstanz.de; sim.reber@gmail.com; samuel.rohr@graduateinstitute.ch). The authors would like to thank participants in the panel ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’ at the MPSA Conference 2011, participants at the workshop ‘Frontiers of Deliberation’ at the ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops in St. Gallen 2011 and the panel ‘Committees and Rational Decision-Making’ at the ECPR General Conference in Reykjavik 2011, participants at seminars at the University of Frankfurt and Oldenburg (2012), three anonymous reviewers, and the editors Bob Goodin and Hugh Ward for excellent comments and suggestions on previous versions of this article. The authors are particularly grateful to John Dryzek and Jane Mansbridge for their extremely valuable feedback, their encouragement and their support, and also wish to thank David Sanders for helping us replicate his findings on opinion change in EuroPolis. Finally, they would also like to thank Karolina Kojder for her careful work in transcribing and translating the Polish group discussions. This project was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (‘Potential for Deliberation among EU Citizens’, no. 100012_126483). André Bächtiger and Susumu Shikano also thank the Hanse Wissenschaftskolleg (Delmenhorst, Germany) for its support during this project. Data replication sets are available at https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/BJPolS. Online appendices are available at http://dx.doi.org/doi: 10.1017/S0007123416000144.

References

Ackerman, Bruce, and Fishkin, James S.. 2002. Deliberation Day. Journal of Political Philosophy 10:129152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, Vibeke N., and Hansen, Kasper M.. 2007. How Deliberation Makes Better Citizens: The Danish Deliberative Poll on the Euro. European Journal of Political Research 46:531556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bächtiger, André, Niemeyer, Simon, Neblo, Michael, Steenbergen, Marco R., and Steiner, Jürg. 2010. Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities. Journal of Political Philosophy 18:3263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Basil. 1971. Class, Codes and Control: Theoretical Studies towards a Sociology of Language. London: Routledge & Kegan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkhalter, Stephanie, Gastil, John, and Kelshaw, Todd. 2002. A Conceptual Definition and Theoretical Model of Public Deliberation in Small Face-to-Face Groups. Communication Theory 12:398422.Google Scholar
Caluwaerts, Didier. 2012. Confrontation and Communication: Experiments on Deliberative Democracy in Linguistically Divided Belgium. Brussels: Vrije Universiteit Brussel.Google Scholar
Cappella, Joseph N., Price, Vincent, and Nir, Lilach. 2002. Argument Repertoire as a Reliable and Valid Measure of Opinion Quality: Electronic Dialogue during Campaign 2000. Political Communication 19:7393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, Simone. 1996. Reasonable Democracy: Jürgen Habermas and the Politics of Discourse. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, Simone. 2004. Behind Closed Doors: Publicity, Secrecy, and the Quality of Deliberation. Journal of Political Philosophy 12:389410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinton, Joshua, Jackman, Simon, and Rivers, David. 2004. The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data. American Political Science Review 90:355370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Joshua. 1989. ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’. Pp. 1734 in The Good Polity, edited by Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Curato, Nicole, and Böker, Marit. 2015. Linking Mini-Publics to the Deliberative System: A Research Agenda. Policy Sciences, Online First.Google Scholar
Doerr, Nicole. 2009. Activists beyond Language Borders? Multilingual Deliberative Democracy Experiments at the European Social Forums. 5th ECPR General Conference, Potsdam.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2007. Theory, Evidence, and the Task of Deliberation. Pp. 237250 in Can the People Govern? Deliberation, Participation and Democracy, edited by Shawn Rosenberg. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2010. Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duchesne, Sophie, and Haegel, Florence. 2007. Avoiding or Accepting Conflict in Public Talk. British Journal of Political Science 37:122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutwin, David. 2003. The Character of Deliberation: Equality, Argument, and the Formation of Public Opinion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 15:239264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elff, Martin, and Shikano, Susumu. 2014. Bias in ML Estimation of Multilevel Models: Check the Algebra before You Gamble in Monte Carlo. Paper presented at the 4th Annual General Conference of the European Political Science Association, Edinburgh, 19=21 June 2014.Google Scholar
Estlund, David. 2000. Political Quality. Social Philosophy and Policy 17:127160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishkin, James S. 1995. The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fishkin, James S. 2009. When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fishkin, James S., He, Baogang, Luskin, Robert C., and Siu, Alice. 2010. Deliberative Democracy in an Unlikely Place: Deliberative Polling in China. British Journal of Political Science 40:435448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishkin, James S., Luskin, Robert C., and Siu, Alice. 2014. EuroPolis and the European Public Sphere: Empirical Explorations of a Counterfactual Ideal. European Union Politics 15:328351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, Dieter, and Klingemann, Hans-Dieter. 2002. Eastward Enlargement of the European Union and the Identity of Europe. West European Politics 25:1954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2003. Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences. Journal of Political Philosophy 11:338367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gambetta, Diego. 1998. Claro! An Essay on Discursive Machismo. Pp. 1943 in Deliberative Democracy, edited by John Elster. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and Hill, Jennifer. 2007. Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gerber, Marlène. 2015. Equal Partners in Dialogue? Participation Equality in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis). Political Studies 63:110130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Marlène, Bächtiger, André, Fiket, Irena, Steenbergen, Marco, and Steiner, Jürg. 2014. Deliberative and Non-Deliberative Persuasion: Mechanisms of Opinion Formation in EuroPolis. European Union Politics 15:410429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, Robert E. 2000. Democratic Deliberation Within. Philosophy & Public Affairs 29:81109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, Robert E. 2005. Sequencing Deliberative Moments. Acta Politica 40:182196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grönlund, Kimmo, Setälä, Maija, and Herne, Kaisa. 2010. Deliberation and Civic Virtue: Lessons from a Citizen Deliberation Experiment. European Political Science Review 2:95117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, and Thompson, Dennis F.. 1996. Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2005. Concluding Comments on Empirical Approaches to Deliberative Politics. Acta Politica 40:384392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Kasper M. 2004. Deliberative Democracy and Opinion Formation. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark.Google Scholar
Hastie, Reid, Penrod, Steven, and Pennington, Nancy. 1983. Inside the Jury. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himmelroos, Staffan, and Christensen, Henrik Serup. 2014. Deliberation and Opinion Change: Evidence from a Deliberative Mini-Public in Finland. Scandinavian Political Studies 37:141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooghe, Marc. 1999. The Rebuke of Thersites. Deliberative Democracy under Conditions of Inequality. Acta Politica 34:287301.Google Scholar
Isernia, Pierangelo, and Fishkin, James. 2014. The EuroPolis Deliberative Poll. European Union Politics 15:311327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, Simon. 2001. Multidimensional Analysis of Roll Call Data via Bayesian Simulation: Identification, Estimation, Inference, and Model Checking. Political Analysis 9:227241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennstal, Julia. 2012. Traits and Talks: Lessons about Personality and Deliberation from the Negotiations between Nelson Mandela and F. W. De Klerk. doctoral dissertation, University of Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Jennstal, Julia, and Niemeyer, Simon. 2014. The Deliberative Citizen: Exploring Who is Willing to Deliberate, When and How through the Lens of Personality, Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance Working Paper Series, Working Paper No. 1, University of Canberra, Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance.Google Scholar
Karp, Jeffrey A., and Banducci, Susan A.. 2007. Party Mobilization and Political Participation in New and Old Democracies. Party Politics 13:217234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karpowitz, Christopher F., and Raphael, Chad. 2014. Deliberation, Democracy, and Civic Forums: Improving Equality and Publicity. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karpowitz, Christopher F., Mendelberg, Tali, and Shaker, Lee. 2012. Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participation. American Political Science Review 106:533547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Nuri, Siu, Alice, and Sood, Gaurav. 2010. Minority Report: Impact of Opinion Minorities on Deliberation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association, Singapore, 21-26 June 2010.Google Scholar
Landemore, Hélène, and Mercier, Hugo. 2012. Talking It Out with Others vs. Deliberation Within and the Law of Group Polarization: Some Implications of the Argumentative Theory of Reasoning. Análise Social 205:910934.Google Scholar
Luskin, Robert C., Sood, Gaurav, Fishkin, James S., and Hahn, Kyu S.. 2015. Paper presented at the Congress of the French Political Science Association, Aix-en-Provence.Google Scholar
Luskin, Robert C., O’Flynn, Ian, Fishkin, James S., and Russel, David. 2014. Deliberating across Deep Divides. Political Studies 62:116135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luskin, Robert C., Fishkin, James S., and Jowell, Roger. 2002. Considered Opinions: Deliberative Polling in Britain. British Journal of Political Science 32:455487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, Michael K., and Warren, Mark E.. 2012. Two Trust-Based Uses of Minipublics in Democratic Systems. Pp. 95124 in Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale, edited by John Parkinson and Jane Mansbridge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2010. Deliberative Polling as the Gold Standard. The Good Society 19:5562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane, Bohman, with James et al. 2010. The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy 18:64100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane et al. 2012. A Systemic Approach to Deliberative Democracy. Pp. 126 in Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale, edited by John Parkinson and Jane Mansbridge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCrae, Robert R., and Costa, Paul T.. 1987. Validation of the Five-Factor Model of Personality across Instruments and Observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52:8190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mendelberg, Tali. 2002. The Deliberative Citizen: Theory and Evidence. Pp. 151193 in Political Decision Making, Deliberation and Participation: Research in Micropolitics, Vol. 6, edited by Michael X. Delli Carpini, Leonie Huddy and Robert Y. Shapiro. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Min, Seong‐Jae. 2009. Deliberation, East Meets West: Exploring the Cultural Dimension of Citizen Deliberation. Acta Politica 44:439458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mondak, Jeffery J., Hibbing, Matthew V., Canache, Damarys, Seligson, Mitchell A., and Anderson, Mary R.. 2010. Personality and Civic Engagement: An Integrative Framework for the Study of Trait Effects on Political Behavior. American Political Science Review 104:85110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutz, Diana C. 2008. Is Deliberative Democracy a Falsifiable Theory? Annual Review of Political Science 11:521538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naurin, Daniel. 2010. Most Common When Least Important: Deliberation in the European Union Council of Ministers. British Journal of Political Science 40:3150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neblo, Michael A. 2007. Change for the Better? Linking the Mechanisms of Deliberative Opinion Change to Normative Theory. Available from polisci.osu.edu/faculty/mneblo/papers/ChangeC4.pdf, accessed 12 May 2015.Google Scholar
Nie, Norman H., Junn, Jane, and Stehlik-Barry, Kenneth. 1996. Education and Democratic Citizenship in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 1996. Women Politicians: Transforming Westminster? Parliamentary Affairs 49:89102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedrini, Seraina. 2014. Deliberative Capacity in the Political and Civic Sphere. Swiss Political Science Review 20:263286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petty, Richard E., Cacioppo, John T., and Schumann, David. 1983. Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research 10:135146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polletta, Francesca, and Lee, John. 2006. Is Telling Stories Good for Democracy? Rhetoric in Public Deliberation after 9/11. American Sociological Review 71:699723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasch, Georg. 1980. Probabilistic Models for Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ratner, Steven R. 2008. Communicative Rationality in the Citizens’ Assembly and Referendum Processes. Pp. 145165 in Designing Deliberative Democracy: The British Columbia Citizens’ Assembly, edited by Mark E. Warren and Hilary Pearse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Shawn W. 2005. The Empirical Study of Deliberative Democracy: Setting a Research Agenda. Acta Politica 40:212224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Shawn W. 2007. Types of Discourse and Democracy of Deliberation. Pp. 130158 in Can the People Govern? Deliberation, Participation and Democracy, edited by Shawn W. Rosenberg. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Shawn W. 2014. Citizen Competence and the Psychology of Deliberation. Pp. 98117 in Deliberative Democracy: Issues and Cases, edited by Stephen Elstub and Peter McLaverty. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Ryfe, David M. 2005. Does Deliberative Democracy Work? Annual Review of Political Science 8:4971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, David. 2012. The Effects of Deliberative Polling in an EU-Wide Experiment: Five Mechanisms in Search of an Explanation. British Journal of Political Science 42:617640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Lynn M. 1997. Against Deliberation. Political Theory 25:347376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneiderhan, Erik, and Khan, Shamus. 2008. Reasons and Inclusion: The Foundation of Deliberation. Sociological Theory 26:124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shikano, Susumu. 2008. The Dimensionality of German Federal States: Policy Preferences in the Bundesrat. German Politics 17:340352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siu, Alice. 2009. Look Who’s Talking: Examining Social Influence, Opinion Change and Argument Quality in Deliberation. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Department of Communication.Google Scholar
Steiner, Jürg. 2012. The Foundations of Deliberative Democracy: Empirical Research and Normative Implications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steiner, Jürg, Bächtiger, André, Spörndli, Markus, and Steenbergen, Marco R.. 2004. Deliberative Politics in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stromer-Galley, Jennifer. 2007. Measuring Deliberation Content: A Coding Scheme. Journal of Public Deliberation 3:135.Google Scholar
Thompson, Dennis F. 2008. Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science 11:497520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
University of Texas. 2003. An Expertise in Democracy. Available from http://www.utexas.edu/features/archive/2003/polling.html, accessed 27 February 2013.Google Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Brady, Henry E.. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris M. 2002. Inclusion and Democracy (paperback edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Gerber supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Gerber supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 591 KB
Supplementary material: Link

Gerber et al. Dataset

Link
18
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Deliberative Abilities and Influence in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis)
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Deliberative Abilities and Influence in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis)
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Deliberative Abilities and Influence in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis)
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *