Empirische Deliberationsforschung – eine systematische Übersicht

Bächtiger, André; Wyss, Dominik

doi:10.1007/s12286-013-0153-x

Cited by 30 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recognizing the persistent growth of research activity in the field, several scholars have introduced frameworks for more systematic overviews of and investigations into online deliberation (B€ achtiger & Wyss, 2013;Friess & Eilders, 2015;Wessler, 2008). Most recently, Friess and Eilders (2015) distinguish between three dimensions of online deliberation (Figure 1).…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design Matters! An Empirical Analysis of Online Deliberation on Different News Platforms

Esau¹,

Frieß²,

Eilders³

2017

Policy & Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ever since the Internet has provided easy access to online discussion, advocates of deliberative democracy have hoped for an improved public sphere. This article investigates which particular platform features promote deliberative debate online. We assume that moderation, asynchronous discussion, a well‐defined topic, and the availability of information enhance the level of deliberative quality of user comments. A comparison between different types of news platforms that differ in terms of design (a news forum, news websites, and Facebook news pages) shows that deliberation (measured as rationality, reciprocity, respect, and constructiveness) differs significantly between platforms. We find that the news forum yields the most rational and respectful debate. While user comments on news websites are only slightly less deliberative, Facebook comments perform poorly in terms of deliberative quality. However, comments left on news websites and on Facebook show particularly high levels of reciprocity among users.

show abstract

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design Matters! An Empirical Analysis of Online Deliberation on Different News Platforms

Esau¹,

Frieß²,

Eilders³

2017

Policy & Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They discuss normative criteria of public sphere concepts from different theoretical traditions by asking who should speak, in what sort of process, how ideas should be presented, and what the relationship is between discourse and decision‐making outcomes (Ferree et al , p. 316). In their review of empirical deliberation research, Bächtiger and Wyss () introduced a similar differentiation, focusing on the conditions for deliberation, the process of deliberation, and the normatively desirable outcomes. As they also outlined empirical indicators for each level, this model promises to be particularly useful for empirical research.…”

Section: Basic Framework For Analyzing Online Deliberationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Online Deliberation Research

Frieß¹,

Eilders²

2015

Policy &Amp; Internet

178

181

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article takes stock of the growing field of online deliberation research. Our review of the theoretical and empirical findings is guided by a framework encompassing the three relevant components of deliberation: the institutional design that enables and fosters deliberation (institutional input: "design"), the quality of the communication process (communicative throughput: "process"), and the expected results of deliberation (productive outcome: "results"). Our findings show that scholarly attention is unevenly distributed across the different components of the framework. Most research has focused on the quality of the online discussion (process). A fair amount of research has focused on the institutional conditions fostering deliberation (design), while the outcomes of online deliberation processes (results) have mostly been neglected. This picture is repeated in terms of the causal relations between design, process, and results of deliberation: Most studies have dealt with the effects of the platform design on the degree of deliberation (designprocess). Much less is known about how the process of deliberation shapes the outcomes of deliberation (process-results). Studies investigating all three aspects of deliberation and their causal links (design-process-results) are particularly rare.

show abstract

“…This matches the current status quo of deliberation research which refers to practices of bargaining, promising, story-telling, even of threatening (cf. Schaal and Ritzi: 2009;Bächtiger and Wyss 2013). Similarly, Mansbridge (2015: 14) highlights citizens' moralizations as 'compatible' with public deliberation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moralizing and Deliberating in Financial Blogging. Moral Debates in Blog Communication During the Financial Crisis 2008

Venema

Averbeck-Lietz

2017

Transforming Communications – Studies in Cross-Media Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The public engagement with the financial crisis sparked in 2008 is a process of (re)discussing, (re)negotiating and communicatively (re)constructing norms, values and ethics. Several studies show that debates on causes and solutions are often related to explicit and implicit references to norms and values. However, the concrete way in which norms and values are communicatively constructed is mostly neglected in research. Integrating approaches of deliberation and moralization research, the chapter provides a detailed discussion of moral debates, communicative practices and mechanisms of constructions of norms and values in financial blog communication. The findings reveal two central aspects: First, the actors’ engagement with the crisis is not limited to the financial crisis itself but also deals with norms of public communication. Second, they show the interplay of commingled practices of moralizing and deliberating. The chapter underlines that research on (moral) public debates requires the consideration of both moralization and deliberation as crucial concepts for a comprehensive analysis of public social negotiations and their dynamics of interaction.

show abstract

Empirische Deliberationsforschung – eine systematische Übersicht

Cited by 30 publications

References 55 publications

Design Matters! An Empirical Analysis of Online Deliberation on Different News Platforms

Design Matters! An Empirical Analysis of Online Deliberation on Different News Platforms

A Systematic Review of Online Deliberation Research

Moralizing and Deliberating in Financial Blogging. Moral Debates in Blog Communication During the Financial Crisis 2008

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About