Revisiting “The voice of the people”: an evaluation of the claims and consequences of deliberative polling
LS Gleason - Critical Review, 2011 - Taylor & Francis
LS Gleason
Critical Review, 2011•Taylor & FrancisABSTRACT Political scientist James Fishkin has devised “deliberative polling” as a means
to better informed, more autonomous, and more reflective participant opinion. After a
deliberative poll, this improved form of public opinion can be disseminated to the general
public and to policy makers so as to influence public opinion (as it is normally construed)
and public policy. Close examination of the results of deliberative polling, however, suggests
no evidence of a normatively desirable gain in informed, autonomous, or considered opinion …
to better informed, more autonomous, and more reflective participant opinion. After a
deliberative poll, this improved form of public opinion can be disseminated to the general
public and to policy makers so as to influence public opinion (as it is normally construed)
and public policy. Close examination of the results of deliberative polling, however, suggests
no evidence of a normatively desirable gain in informed, autonomous, or considered opinion …
Abstract
Political scientist James Fishkin has devised “deliberative polling” as a means to better informed, more autonomous, and more reflective participant opinion. After a deliberative poll, this improved form of public opinion can be disseminated to the general public and to policy makers so as to influence public opinion (as it is normally construed) and public policy. Close examination of the results of deliberative polling, however, suggests no evidence of a normatively desirable gain in informed, autonomous, or considered opinion—as opposed to minor gains in participants' general political knowledge and in ideological constraint, which is likely attributable to the pre-packaged “expert” views set forth in the briefing materials provided to the participants.