Picturing deliberation: How dissatisfied citizens make sense of it
By: Does, Ramon van Der and Petit, Guillaume
.
Material type: 
BookPublisher: International Political Science Review Description: 45(3), Jun, 2024: p.301-315.Subject(s): Deliberation, Politically Dissatisfied Citizens, Sense-Making, Informal Discussion, Non-Partisan Activists, Politically Disadvantaged, Focus Groups, Belgium, Deliberative Institutions, Structured Discussion, Citizen Perceptions, Communication Outcomes, Institutional Design
In:
International Political Science ReviewSummary: What makes politically dissatisfied citizens enthusiastic about deliberation? And what makes them hate it instead? Based on a picture task embedded in a series of focus groups conducted in Belgium, we argue that differences in sense-making help to explain why dissatisfied citizens (do not) support deliberation. We focus on two groups of dissatisfied citizens: non-partisan activists and politically disadvantaged citizens. For both groups, we find that when they thought of deliberation as low-key, informal discussion, they linked it to respectful communication and beneficial outcomes; when they thought of it as formalized, structured discussion, their appraisals became much more negative. For researchers of deliberation, our results make clear that we should be careful in asking citizens what they think about ‘deliberation’ without inquiring into the way they interpret it. For deliberation practitioners, our findings underline the relevance of integrating informal interactions into the design of deliberative institutions.- Reproduced
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/01925121221139056
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | 45(3), Jun, 2024: p.301-315 | Available | AR132757 |
What makes politically dissatisfied citizens enthusiastic about deliberation? And what makes them hate it instead? Based on a picture task embedded in a series of focus groups conducted in Belgium, we argue that differences in sense-making help to explain why dissatisfied citizens (do not) support deliberation. We focus on two groups of dissatisfied citizens: non-partisan activists and politically disadvantaged citizens. For both groups, we find that when they thought of deliberation as low-key, informal discussion, they linked it to respectful communication and beneficial outcomes; when they thought of it as formalized, structured discussion, their appraisals became much more negative. For researchers of deliberation, our results make clear that we should be careful in asking citizens what they think about ‘deliberation’ without inquiring into the way they interpret it. For deliberation practitioners, our findings underline the relevance of integrating informal interactions into the design of deliberative institutions.- Reproduced
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/01925121221139056
There are no comments for this item.