Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Discussion Group Composition and Deliberation Experience

  • Nathanael Gratias Sumaktoyo (a1), David W. Nickerson (a2) and Michael J. Keane (a3)
Abstract

In order to encouragee broad participation in deliberative forums, it is important to understand how people from politically less powerful groups perceive the deliberative experience and how discussion group composition affects their experiences. Using data from 27 deliberative polls from 2004, we examine how four individual characteristics (sex, age, race, and education) and randomly assigned small group composition predict participants’ attitudes about the deliberative experience. We find evidence that women, young people, non-whites, and those without college degree generally evaluate the experience positively, but find no evidence for the argument that including more people from these groups would lead to more positive deliberation experience for participants from the groups. That is, there is no interaction between minority status and group composition in predicting participants’ evaluation of the deliberation process.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Bryan, Frank M. 2004. Real Democracy: The New England Town Meeting and How it Works. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Farrar, Cynthia, Green, Donald P., Green, Jennifer, Nickerson, David, and Shewfelt, Steven. 2009. “Does Discussion Group Composition Affect Policy Preferences? Results from Three Randomized Experiments.” Political Psychology 30 (1): 615–47.
Fishkin, James S. and Luskin, Robert C.. 2005. “Experimenting with a Democratic Ideal: Deliberative Polling and Public Opinion.” Acta Politica 40: 284–98.
Hannagan, Rebecca and Larimer, Christopher. 2010. “Does Gender Composition Affect Group Decision Outcomes? Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment.” Political Behavior 32 (1): 5167.
Karpowitz, Christopher F., Mendelberg, Tali, and Shaker, Lee. 2012. “Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participation.” American Political Science Review 106 (3): 533–47.
Smith-Lovin, Lynn and Brody, Charles. 1989. “Interruptions in Group Discussions: The Effecs of Gender and Group Composition.” American Sociological Review 54 (3): 424–35.
Mendelberg, Tali, Karpowitz, Christopher F., and Oliphant, Baxter J.. 2014a. “Gender Inequality in Deliberation: Unpacking the Black Box of Interaction.” Perspectives on Politics 12 (1): 1844.
Mendelberg, Tali, Karpowitz, Christopher F., and Goedert, Nicholas. 2014b. “Does Descriptive Representation Facilitate Women's Distinctive Voice? How Gender Composition and Decision Rules Affect Deliberation.” American Journal of Political Science 58 (2): 291306.
Myers, C. Daniel and Mendelberg, Tali. 2013. “Political Deliberation.” In Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology 2nd edition, eds. Huddy, Leonie, Sears, David, and Levy, Jack. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Price, Vincent and Cappella, Joseph. 2002. “Online Deliberation and its Influence: The Electronic Dialogue Project in Campaign 2000.” IT & Society. 1 (1): 303–29.
Sanders, Lynn M. 1997. “Against Deliberation,” Political Theory 25 (3) (June 1997): 370.
Simon, Bernd and Sturmer, Stefan. 2003. “Respect for Group Members: Intragroup Determinants of Collective Identification and Group-Serving Behavior.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29 (2): 183–93.
Stromer-Galley, Jennifer, and Peter, Muhlberger. 2009. “Agreement and Disagreement in Group Deliberation: Effects on Deliberation Satisfaction, Future Engagement, and Decision Legitimacy.” Political Communication 26 (2):173–92.
Walsh, Katherine C. 2007. Talking about Race: Community Dialogues and the Politics of Difference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Williams, M. 2000. “The Uneasy Alliance of Group Representation in Deliberative Democracy”. In Citizenship in Diverse Societies, eds., Kymlicka, Will and Norman, Wayne. London, UK: Oxford University Press, 124–54.
Wojcieszak, Magdalena, Baek, Young M., and Delli Carpini, Michael X.. 2009. “What is Really Going On? Structure Underlying Face-to-Face and Online Deliberation.” Information, Communication, and Society 12 (7): 1080–102.
Young, Iris. 2001. “Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy.” Political Theory 29 (5): 670–90.
Recommend this journal

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

Journal of Experimental Political Science
  • ISSN: 2052-2630
  • EISSN: 2052-2649
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-experimental-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Sumaktoyo supplementary material
Sumaktoyo supplementary material

 Word (197 KB)
197 KB

Metrics

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