Deutsch
 
Benutzerhandbuch Datenschutzhinweis Impressum Kontakt
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT

Freigegeben

Zeitschriftenartikel

Small Differences that Matter: The Impact of Discussion Modalities on Deliberative Outcomes

MPG-Autoren
Es sind keine MPG-Autoren in der Publikation vorhanden
Externe Ressourcen
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Volltexte verfügbar
Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Baccaro, L., Bächtiger, A., & Deville, M. (2016). Small Differences that Matter: The Impact of Discussion Modalities on Deliberative Outcomes. British Journal of Political Science, 46(3), 551-566. doi:10.1017/S0007123414000167.


Zitierlink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-002D-D024-D
Zusammenfassung
An experiment on the extension of the political rights of foreigners in the Swiss city of Geneva used three different procedural ways to structure deliberation: participants take positions at the outset, do not take positions, and reflect first. Most opinion change occurred when participants did not have to take a position at the outset. However, no learning effects were recorded, the deliberative quality was poor and group influence had the greatest impact. When participants had to take a position at the outset, opinion change and group influence were least, but there was significant learning, and the deliberative quality was better. These results indicate a potential trade-off between opinion change – which many scholars equate with deliberative success – and good procedural deliberative quality.