The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society

Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy

Much has been written about theory and practice in the law, and the tension between practitioners and theorists. Judges do not cite theoretical articles often; they rarely "apply" theories to particular cases. These arguments are not revisited. Instead the Essay explores the working and interaction of theory and practice, practitioners and theorists. The Essay starts with a story about solving a legal issue using our intellectual tools - theory, practice, and their progenies: experience and "gut." Next the Essay elaborates on the nature of theory, practice, experience and "gut." The third part of the Essay discusses theories that are helpful to practitioners and those that are less helpful. The Essay concludes that practitioners theorize, and theorists practice. They use these intellectual tools differently because the goals and orientations of theorists and practitioners, and the constraints under which they act, differ. Theory, practice, experience and "gut" help us think, remember, decide and create. They complement each other like the two sides of the same coin: distinct but inseparable.

Of Theory and Practice

Governing the Commons

Inclusion and democracy.

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 (design-process). 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.

A Systematic Review of Online Deliberation Research

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.

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

Previous research suggests that distinct characteristics of news articles, such as their news factors, account for the different participation rates in comment sections as well as the degree of int

Linking News Value Theory With Online Deliberation: How News Factors and Illustration Factors in News Articles Affect the Deliberative Quality of User Discussions in SNS’ Comment Sections:

High degrees of incivility and hostility in comment sections potentially threaten a deliberative and inclusive discussion atmosphere. News outlets are struggling with effectively moderating such di...

Collective Civic Moderation for Deliberation? Exploring the Links between Citizens’ Organized Engagement in Comment Sections and the Deliberative Quality of Online Discussions

This article focuses on the potential of online participation to enable the cooperative development of norms by affected stakeholders, investigating whether such processes can produce norms of both high quality and legitimacy. To answer this question, we designed, implemented, and evaluated an online norm setting process that goes beyond the scope of those usually described in the literature. Taking as a case study a process to redraft the examination regulations for doctoral degrees at a science faculty of a German university, we show that such instances of online deliberation can integrate the diversity of opinions of all affected stakeholders. The result was a norm that implemented previously controversial external recommendations for doctoral dissertation procedures and that was met with high satisfaction from both those who participated as well as those who remained passive. While we believe that the university context in which this process was conducted is particularly promising for such efforts because of its organization, its members, and the issue that was at stake, we argue that similar conducive conditions exist, for example, for political parties. As such, the findings can be instructive for understanding the potential and limits of successful online participation in other contexts.

/pdf/online-deliberation-in-academia-evaluating-the-quality-and-523nlb534q.pdf

Dennis Friess

Papers

A Systematic Review of Online Deliberation Research

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

Linking News Value Theory With Online Deliberation: How News Factors and Illustration Factors in News Articles Affect the Deliberative Quality of User Discussions in SNS’ Comment Sections:

Collective Civic Moderation for Deliberation? Exploring the Links between Citizens’ Organized Engagement in Comment Sections and the Deliberative Quality of Online Discussions

Online Deliberation in Academia: Evaluating the Quality and Legitimacy of Cooperatively Developed University Regulations