Search results

Following Hovland’s persuasion theory, this paper aims to develop a conceptual model and analyzes characteristics of online political deliberation behavior from three aspects (i.e. information, situation and manager). Based on the whole interactive process of online political deliberation, this paper aims to reveal the key points that affect the response effect of the government from the persuasive perspective of online political consultation.

Based on more than 40,000 netizens’ posts and government responses from 2011 to the first half of 2019 of the Chinese political platform, this paper used the text analysis and machine learning methods to extract measurement variables of online political deliberation characteristics and the econometrics analysis method to conduct empirical research.

The results showed that the textual information, political environment and identity of the political objects affect the effectiveness of government response. Furthermore, for different position categories of political officials, the length of political texts, topic categories and emotional tendencies have different effects on the response effectiveness. Additionally, the effect of political time on the effectiveness of response differs.

The findings will help ascertain the characteristics of online political deliberation behavior that affect how effective government response is and provide a theoretical basis for why the public should express their political concerns.

This article makes two points: first, that greater public deliberation is needed to enhance the democratic steering of technological change and, second, that universities are particularly well situated to provide an institutional foundation for such deliberations. Existing problems with policy making about issues with significant scientific and/or technological components are considered, along with the prospect that structured public deliberation might help close an evident democratic deficit in scientific and technological policy making. Several kinds of public deliberations are described, with special emphasis on the Danish Consensus Conference model. The basic requirements for effective public deliberations are discussed, along with several issues that need fundamental research. Finally, a scenario of multiple public deliberative exercises scaled at the national level is discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how teachers engaged in curriculum deliberation through lesson study (LS) and how different types of teacher knowledge were elicited, co-constructed and transformed in integrated ways across LS stages. It also clarifies how different school-level orientations influence the nature, depth and scope of the deliberation.

The study adopted an interpretive qualitative case study approach involving two schools, employing participant observations of LS cycles and post-LS teacher interviews. Thematic analysis and analytical coding were conducted.

The two cases revealed core features of curriculum deliberation trajectories enabled by LS: problem identification, planning to unlock the educative potential of content and reflection on enactment for improvement. The types of teacher knowledge that informed deliberation on English language learning were uncovered to reveal LS teams' initial comprehension, collective reasoning and actions, and new knowledge derived. Pedagogical content knowledge was prominently drawn on in unlocking curriculum potential and transformed with the knowledge of student learning gained from the live lesson observations. The school-level orientations were found to influence the extent to which teachers can interrogate existing practices and co-construct knowledge.

The study offers a nuanced understanding of curriculum thinking in LS teams, which is enabled by processes that construct the dialogic space for coordinating curriculum commonplaces to transform content into pedagogical representations to cultivate students' future capacities. It highlights the importance of viewing sustainable LS from an interconnected perspective that calls attention to the social contexts of deliberation.

To illuminate the importance of the communal deliberative process, as a form of collective thinking, in overcoming the growing complexities of schoolwork in uncertain and turbulent environments.

Introduces the notion of deliberation as evolved from Dewey's moral theory, the essential phases and elements of deliberative activities and the principal's role in facilitating this communal process.

Provides information on the stepping‐stones towards communal deliberation, while recognizing its major impediments.

In light of structural restructuring efforts that have not yielded significant effects in issues of teaching and learning, this paper offers the rhetorical process of communal deliberation as a means for developing schools that learn.

Healthcare innovation, exemplified by genomic medicine, requires increasingly sophisticated understanding of the interdisciplinary-organizational context in which new innovations are implemented. Deliberative stakeholder consultations are public engagement tools that are gaining increasing traction in health care, as a means of maximizing the diversity of roles and interests vested in a particular policy or practice issue. They engage participants from different knowledge systems (“cultures”) in mutually respectful debate to enable group consensus on implementation strategies. Current deliberation analytic methods tend to overlook the cultural contexts of the deliberative process. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This conceptual paper proposes adding ethnographic participant observation to provide a more comprehensive account of the process that gives rise to deliberative outputs. To underpin this conceptual paper, the authors draw on the authors’ experience engaging healthcare professionals during implementation of genomics in the care for pediatric oncology patients with treatment-resistant glioblastoma at two tertiary care hospitals.

Ethnography enabled a deeper understanding of deliberative outcomes by combining rhetorical and non-rhetorical analysis to identify the implementation and coordination of care barriers across professional cultures.

This paper highlights the value of ethnographic methods in enabling a more comprehensive assessment of the quality of engagement across professional cultures in implementation studies.

The purpose of this study is to investigate how mock jurors’ experiences of deliberations are impacted by the defendant having a personality disorder.

This study used a qualitative approach to explore mock jurors’ experiences during the deliberations of a fictional defendant, Sarah Priest. Ten participants formed two mock juries, and each mock jury were given two case studies to deliberate. Case study one described Priest as having “Severe Personality Disorder, Borderline Pattern” whereas case study two described Priest as having “Complex Mental Health Problems”. There were no changes to the content of the case studies aside from the change in language used to describe the defendant.

An inductive thematic analysis identified two main themes relating to juror experience: “Interaction with Other Mock Jurors” and “Language as a Barrier to a Verdict”. Participants constructed that prosocial interactions with other mock jurors in the deliberations helped them make a verdict decision, but some of these interactions led to disagreements between participants due to a wide variation of opinion. Second, the different description of the defendant in each case study were constructed to have made the deliberations and decision-making difficult, but for different reasons. In case study one, a lack of knowledge surrounding BPD was the reason for this difficulty, and in case study two, participants thought that the applicability of diminished responsibility criteria were unclear, making it hard to reach a verdict.

The findings have key implications for the judicial system; common experiences can be identified and recorded to implement procedures to protect jurors from adverse experiences.

There is a lack of studies that have investigated juror experience in the UK, and the few studies available have used a quantitative methodology. The approach taken in the current study is, therefore, unique in a UK context. The findings have key implications for the judicial system; common experiences can be identified and recorded to implement procedures to protect jurors from adverse experiences.

Democracy is learned through doing, not telling. The purpose of this paper is to report the findings from an action research project where a group of fourth-grade students participated in a simulation that explored the possibilities and the constraints of acting democratically, while faced with the dilemmas of environmental disaster and establishing a new society.

The authors studied how participating students engaged in deliberations and self-directed inquiry. The authors focused the data collection on the responses of students to the challenges presented in the simulation.

Based on the analysis of student work during the simulation and reflection on the simulation after the project, the authors documented the ways in which students critiqued authority or expressed their distrust in it, engaged in difficult deliberations around controversial issues, and developed expanded agency through inquiry-based learning.

This paper presented a model of inquiry learning that can be critical, i.e. examining issues of power and justice, while engaging in deliberation via a simulation that integrated social studies and English language arts. Creating space for young students to deliberate issues, steeped in values, and ethics, allows them to recognize the inherent tension and dissension necessary to a healthy democracy.

The purpose of this paper is to portray an example of how organizations can harness their employees’ insight. The procedure described here can complement traditional methods such as interviews, open forums, round tables and employee surveys, and can assist HR managers to acquire a unique look inside the company.

The described procedure was facilitated at Intel Corporation and was about The Future of Work. 145 Intel employees took part in an online crowd-deliberation with a methodology called Real-Time Imen-Delphi (RTID). The methodology guided them to initiate 689 questions that were then organized into 258 mission statements, which were rated by importance, priority and feasibility.

A main theme was identified to represent the collective notion with regards to The Future of Work. The participants leaned toward the fractal model for a preferred work environment. This model includes employees who will no longer have a single job description, but rather repeatedly sign up for tasks and projects based on their interests, capabilities, availability, aspirations and future beliefs regarding the path their organization needs to take in manufacturing, research and development.

The result provides an example of how organizations can harness their employees’ wisdom to bring to the table cutting-edge ideas, debate their relevancy to the organization, agree collectively on their vision and generate applicable ideas toward realizing their preferred future.

As social media tools evolve and become a central part in organizations, they will seek to involve employees in effective conversations and in decision-making processes. RTID is a solid way with which they can do this.

The purpose of this paper is to expose how organizational cybernetics (OC)-related concepts could be used in combination with information and communication technologies (ICT) to facilitate group discussions on complex issues, and to show its impact in a real case.

A software inspired by OC and team syntegrity concepts has been developed with the aim of helping groups of people to deliberate around complex issues through the internet. Two groups of persons with similar backgrounds were chosen to pursue a deliberation process around the same issue. One had the support of ICT while the other did not. The authors used the same questionnaires with both groups, aimed at getting qualitative and quantitative information about the results obtained in each case.

The results obtained show that the group working with ICT support did produce a better output (quality and quantity) than the group not supported with ICT as well as a higher degree of satisfaction in practically all indicators than the second group.

The authors are dealing with only one experiment and therefore cannot make a generalization. It would be desirable to repeat the experiment with various groups and in different contexts.

An internet-based software inspired by OC concepts was created to facilitate the first phases (generation and aggregation of ideas) of a deliberation process and the authors measured, in an experiment with two groups of people with similar backgrounds, the impact of using it on the quality and quantity of information produced through the process.

There are substantive disagreements about whether encouraging deliberative thinking increases consumer preference in low-involvement product categories. The authors draw on dual-process theory to add rare experimental evidence to this debate. They also investigate whether the effect of deliberative thinking increases with familiarity of the stimuli, as different theories of memory yield different predictions on this point. Finally, they provide evidence on whether the effectiveness of the Fairtrade logo arises more from mere exposure or attention to the ethical claim.

The context for the research is the use of ethical logos in packaged coffee, as this provides a realistic setting for the desired experimental manipulations. The fieldwork consists of two sets of trade-off experiments – rankings based conjoint analysis (n = 360) and best-worst scaling with a balanced incomplete block design (n = 1,628). Deliberative thinking is manipulated in three ways: by varying logos between visual (Type 1 processing) and lexical (Type 2 processing) treatments, by post hoc classification of time taken, and by imposing either time constraints (Type 1) or cognitive load (Type 2) on the completion of the task. Familiarity is manipulated by varying logos between the Fairtrade and a fictional Exchange Ethics logo.

Consumers do have higher preferences in the deliberative treatment conditions; thinking more results in an 18 per cent increase (Cohen’s d = 0.25) in the preference for choices that display an ethical cobranded logo. Surprisingly, the impact of deliberation is not greater for the more familiar Fairtrade logo than the fictional Exchange Ethics logo. This result is inconsistent with strength-based theories of memory, as these predict that deliberation will have a greater effect for more familiar stimuli. However, it is consistent with newer theories of memory that acknowledge familiarity can lead to activation confusion, reducing retrieval of pre-existing knowledge into working memory. The research also shows that the Fairtrade logo has substantial utility to consumers, and that this is approximately 59 per cent due to the ethical claim and 41 per cent due to the familiarity of the logo.

In field conditions, attempts to manipulate deliberation may not be effective or may simply result in reduced attention. Also, the costs of increasing deliberation may outweigh the benefits obtained.

The research confirms the heuristic value of the Fairtrade logo and shows that the effectiveness of ethical logos may increase with additional deliberation by shoppers.

There is relatively little work in marketing that applies dual-process theories to investigate consumer behaviour. The present study extends the use of dual-process theories in marketing, demonstrates a new method to investigate the effect of deliberation on brand choice and shows how deliberation magnifies the effect of endorsing logos, including unfamiliar logos.