Skip to main content

Designing for democracy?: an experimental study comparing the outcomes of citizen discussions in online forums with those of online discussions in a forum designed according to deliberative principles

  • Kim Strandberg (a1)

Democratic theorists often envision public deliberation as being essential to the working of democracy. Several scholars have also highlighted a potential for realising such deliberations on the internet. Consequentially, an emerging array of experiments in online deliberation has now been developed to achieve online discussions, which would be beneficial for democracy. However, few studies have yet attempted to compare the outcomes of online mini-publics to online citizens’ discussions in general. This article, thus, concerns an online experiment carried out in 2013 with the purpose of examining whether, and under which conditions, forums designed according to deliberative principles produce better ‘democratic outcomes’ – such as coherence of opinions, increased efficacy, trust, and propensity for civic participation – than online citizens’ discussions, which are ‘left to their own devices’. The study applies a post-test only, 2×2 factorial design, with a control group. In total, N=70 participants taking part in the experiment. The findings indicate that the effects of designing for deliberation were generally positive, albeit not for all of the democratic outcomes. In addition, methodological issues of relevance for the internal and external validity of the current experiment, which could be of relevance for future studies, are also brought forth.

Corresponding author
Hide All
Bächtiger, A. (2011), Deliberation in Swiss Direct Democracy: A Field Experiment on the Expulsion Initiative Report, Switzerland: National Center of Competence in Research.
Baek, Y.M., Wojcieszak, M. and Delli Carpini, M.X. (2011), ‘Online versus face-to-face deliberation: Who? Why? What? With what effects?’, New Media & Society 14(3): 121.
Barber, B.R. (1984), Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age, Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Budge, I. (1996), The New Challenge of Direct Democracy, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Camerer, C.F. and Hogarth, R.M. (1999), ‘The effects of financial incentives in experiments: a review and capital-labor-production framework’, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 19(2–3): 742.
Campbell, D.T. and Stanley, J.C. (1963), Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research, Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Coleman, S. and Goetze, J. (2001), Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation, London: Hansard Society.
Coleman, S. and Moss, G. (2012), ‘Under construction: the field of online deliberation research’, Journal of Information Technology & Politics 9: 115.
Dahl, R.A. (1989), Demokratin och dess Antagonister [Democracy and its Critics], New Haven: Yale University Press.
Dahlberg, L. (2001), ‘The internet and democratic discourse – exploring the prospects of online deliberative forums extending the public sphere’, Information, Communication & Society 4(4): 615633.
Davies, T., O’Connor, B., Cochran, A., Effrat, J., Parker, A., Newman, B. and Tam, A. (2009), ‘An online environment for democratic deliberation: motivations, principles, and design’, in T. Davies and S.P. Gangadharan (eds), Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 275292.
Davies, T. and Chandler, R. (2011), ‘Online deliberation design: choices, criteria, and evidence’, in T. Nabatchi, M. Weiksner, J. Gastil and M. Leighninger (eds), Democracy in Motion: Evaluating the Practice and Impact of Deliberative Civic Engagement, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 103134.
Druckman, J.N. and Kam, C.D. (2011), ‘Students as experimental participants: a defense of the ‘narrow data base’’, in J.N. Druckman, D.P. Green, J.H. Kuklinski and A. Lupia (eds), Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 4157.
Dryzek, J.S. and List, C. (2003), ‘Social choice theory and deliberative democracy: a reconciliation’, British Journal of Political Science 33: 128.
Esterling, K., Neblo, M. and Lazer, D. (2011), ‘Means, motive, an opportunity in becoming informed about politics: a deliberative field experiment with members of congress and their constituents’, Public Opinion Quarterly 75(3): 483503.
Fishkin, J.S. (1995), The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy, New Haven: Yale University Press.
Fishkin, J.S. (2009), ‘Virtual public consultation: prospect for internet deliberative democracy’, in T. Davies and S.P Gangadharan (eds), Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 2335.
Fishkin, J.S., Luskin, R.C. and Jowell, R. (2000), ‘Deliberative polling and public consultation’, Parliamentary Affairs 53: 657666.
Fung, A. (2003), ‘Recipes for public spheres: eight institutional design choices and their consequences’, Journal of Political Philosophy 11: 338367.
Gastil, J. (2000), ‘Is face-to-face deliberation a luxury or a necessity’, Political Communication 17: 357361.
Gribbons, B. and Herman, J. (1997), ‘True and quasi-experimental designs’, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 5(14).
Grönlund, K., Strandberg, K. and Himmelroos, S. (2009), ‘The challenge of deliberative democracy online – a comparison of face-to-face and virtual experiments in citizen deliberation’, Information Polity 14(3): 187201.
Grönlund, K., Setälä, M. and Herne, K. (2010), ‘Deliberation and civic virtue lessons from a citizen deliberation experiment’, European Political Science Review 2: 95117.
Habermas, J. (1996), Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hamlett, P.W. and Cobb, M.D. (2006), ‘Potential solutions to public deliberation problems: structured deliberations and polarization cascades’, The Policy Studies Journal 34: 629648.
Hibbing, J.R. and Theiss-Morse, E. (2002), Stealth Democracy Americans’ Beliefs About How Government Should Work, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jankowski, N. and Van Os, R. (2004), ‘Internet-based political discourse: a case study of electronic democracy in Hoogeveen’, in P.M. Shane (ed.), Democracy Online: The Prospects for Political Renewal Through the Internet, New York: Routledge, pp. 181195.
Janssen, D. and Kies, R. (2005), ‘Online forums and deliberative democracy’, Acta Politica 40(3): 317335.
Jensen, J. (2003), ‘Public spheres on the Internet: anarchic or government-sponsored: a comparison’, Scandinavian Political Studies 26(4): 349--374.
Kies, R. (2010), Promises and Limits of Web-Deliberation, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kraemer, H.C. and Thiemann, S. (1987), How Many Subjects? Statistical Power Analysis in Research, London: Sage.
Luskin, R.C., Fishkin, J.E. and Iyengar, S. (2006), Considered Opinions on U.S. Foreign Policy: Evidence from Online and Face-to-Face Deliberative Polling, California: The Center for Deliberative Democracy.
Manosevitch, E. (2010), ‘Mapping the practice of online deliberation’, in F. De Cincio, A. Machintosh and C. Peraboni (eds), Online Deliberation, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference , Leeds, UK: Leeds University, pp. 172188
Min, S.-J. (2007), ‘Online vs. face-to-face deliberation: effects on civic engagement’, Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 12: 13691387.
Monnoyer-Smith, L. and Wojcik, S. (2012), ‘Technology and the quality of public deliberation: a comparison between on and offline participation’, International Journal of Electronic Governance 5(1): 2449.
Morton, R.B. and Williams, K.C. (2010), Experimental Political Science and the Study of Causality: From Nature to the Lab, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Muhlberger, P. (2005), ‘The Virtual Agora project: a research design for studying democratic deliberation’, Journal of Public Deliberation 1(1).
Mutz, D.C. (2006), Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative Versus Participatory Democracy, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Noveck, B.S. (2004), ‘Unchat: democratic solution for a wired world’, in P. Shane (ed.), Democracy Online: The Prospects for Political Renewal through the Internet, New York: Routledge, pp. 2134.
Papacharissi, Z. (2004), ‘Democracy online: civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups’, New Media & Society 6(2): 259283.
Price, V. (2009), ‘Citizens deliberating online: theory and some evidence’, in T. Davies and S.P. Gangadharan (eds), Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 3758.
Price, V. and Capella, J.N. (2002), ‘Online deliberation and its influence: the electronic dialogue project in campaign 2000’, IT & Society 1(1): 303329.
Research Methods Knowledge Base (2006), ‘Factorial design variations’. Retrieved 29 November 2013 from <>.
Rhee, W.J. and Kim, E.-M. (2009), ‘Deliberation on the net: lessons from a field experiment’, in T. Davies and S.P Gangadharan (eds), Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 223232.
Ryfe, D.M. (2005), ‘Does deliberative democracy work?’, Annual Review of Political Science 8: 4971.
Smith, G., John, P. and Sturgis, P. (2013), ‘Taking political engagement online: an experimental analysis of asynchronous discussion forums’, Political Studies 61: 709730.
Smith, G., John, P., Sturgis, P. and Nomura, H. (2009), ‘Deliberation and internet engagement: initial findings from a randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of facilitated internet forums’. Paper presented at the ECPR General Conference, 10–12th September, 2009, Potsdam, Germany.
Strandberg, K. (2008), ‘Public deliberation goes on-line? An analysis of citizens’ political discussions on the internet prior to the Finnish parliamentary elections in 2007’, Javnost – The Public 15(1): 7190.
Strandberg, K. and Grönlund, K. (2012), ‘Online deliberation and its outcome: evidence from the Virtual Polity deliberative experiment’, Journal of Information Technology and Politics 9(2): 167184.
Strandberg, K. and Grönlund, K. (2014), ‘Online deliberation: theory and practice in virtual mini-publics’, in K. Grönlund, A. Bächtiger and M. Setälä (eds), Deliberative Mini-Publics: Involving Citizens in the Democratic Process Colchester: ECPR Press, pp. 93114.
Stromer-Galley, J. (2002), ‘New voices in the public sphere: a comparative analysis of interpersonal and online political talk’, Javnost – The Public 9(2): 2342.
Sunstein, C.R. (2009), Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide, New York: Oxford University Press.
VanVoorhis, C.R. and Morgan, B.L. (2007), ‘Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes’, Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology 3(2): 4350.
Wilhelm, A. (1999), ‘Virtual sounding boards: how deliberative is online political discussion?’, in B.N. Haugue and B. Loader (eds), Digital Democracy: Discourse and Decision Making in the Information Age, London: Routledge, pp. 153178.
Witschge, T. (2004), ‘Online deliberation: possibilities of the internet for deliberative democracy’, in P. Shane (ed.), Democracy Online: The Prospects for Political Renewal through the Internet, New York: Routledge, pp. 109122.
Wright, S. and Street, J. (2007), ‘Democracy, deliberation and design: the case of online discussion forums’, New Media & Society 9: 849869.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

European Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 1755-7739
  • EISSN: 1755-7747
  • URL: /core/journals/european-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed