IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v104y2010i03p566-583_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who Wants To Deliberate—And Why?

Author

Listed:
  • NEBLO, MICHAEL A.
  • ESTERLING, KEVIN M.
  • KENNEDY, RYAN P.
  • LAZER, DAVID M.J.
  • SOKHEY, ANAND E.

Abstract

Interest in deliberative theories of democracy has grown tremendously among political theorists, political scientists, activists, and even government officials. Many scholars, however, are skeptical that it is a practically viable theory, even on its own terms. They argue (inter alia) that most people dislike politics and that deliberative initiatives would amount to a paternalistic imposition. Using two large national samples investigating people's hypothetical willingness to deliberate and their actual participation in response to a real invitation to deliberate with their member of Congress, we find that (1) willingness to deliberate in the United States is much more widespread than expected, and (2) it is precisely those people less likely to participate in traditional partisan politics who are most interested in deliberative participation. They are attracted to such participation as a partial alternative to “politics as usual.â€

Suggested Citation

  • Neblo, Michael A. & Esterling, Kevin M. & Kennedy, Ryan P. & Lazer, David M.J. & Sokhey, Anand E., 2010. "Who Wants To Deliberate—And Why?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(3), pages 566-583, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:104:y:2010:i:03:p:566-583_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055410000298/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Fawcett & Jack Corbett, 2018. "Politicians, professionalization and anti-politics: why we want leaders who act like professionals but are paid like amateurs," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(4), pages 411-432, December.
    2. Yunyi Qin, 2023. "Grassroots governance and social development: theoretical and comparative legal aspects," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    3. Zhijun Pei & Yingchun Pan & Martin Skitmore, 2018. "Political Efficacy, Social Network and Involvement in Public Deliberation in Rural China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 453-471, September.
    4. Grillos, Tara & Zarychta, Alan & Nelson Nuñez, Jami, 2021. "Water scarcity & procedural justice in Honduras: Community-based management meets market-based policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    5. Eva Sørensen & Jacob Torfing, 2021. "Accountable Government through Collaborative Governance?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-20, November.
    6. Reinhard Heinisch & Carsten Wegscheider, 2020. "Disentangling How Populism and Radical Host Ideologies Shape Citizens’ Conceptions of Democratic Decision-Making," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 32-44.
    7. Louis-Gaëtan Giraudet & Bénédicte Apouey & Hazem Arab & Simon Baeckelandt & Philippe Bégout & Nicolas Berghmans & Nathalie Blanc & Jean-Yves Boulin & Eric Buge & Dimitri Courant & Amy Dahan & Adrien F, 2022. "“Co-construction” in deliberative democracy: lessons from the French Citizens’ Convention for Climate," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Hoti, Ferdiana & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter & Renn, Ortwin, 2021. "Who is willing to participate? Examining public participation intention concerning decommissioning of nuclear power plants in Belgium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    9. Maija Karjalainen & Lauri Rapeli, 2015. "Who will not deliberate? Attrition in a multi-stage citizen deliberation experiment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 407-422, January.
    10. Yueping Zheng & Hindy Lauer Schachter, 2017. "Explaining Citizens’ E-Participation Use: the Role of Perceived Advantages," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 409-428, September.
    11. Anatol Itten & Niek Mouter, 2022. "When Digital Mass Participation Meets Citizen Deliberation: Combining Mini- and Maxi-Publics in Climate Policy-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-25, April.
    12. Robert Weymouth & Janette Hartz-Karp & Dora Marinova, 2020. "Repairing Political Trust for Practical Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, August.
    13. Zürn, Michael, 2022. "How Non-Majoritarian Institutions Make Silent Majorities Vocal: A Political Explanation of Authoritarian Populism," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 20(3), pages 788-807.
    14. Michal Šoltés, 2023. "Consequences of inconvenient information: Evidence from sentencing disparities," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(360), pages 1307-1334, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:104:y:2010:i:03:p:566-583_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.