Do discussions in like-minded groups necessarily lead to more extreme opinions? Deliberative democracy and group polarization
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7324633 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kim Strandberg (0000-0001-6357-5643, Åbo Akademi University, corresponding author), Staffan Himmelroo (0000-0002-9527-3137, Åbo Akademi University), Kimmo Grönlund (0000-0001-9386-5043, Åbo Akademi University) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 41-57 |
| Publication date | 2017-06-26 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Political Science Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0192-5121 • E-ISSN: 1460-373X |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0192512117692136 |
| OpenAlex | W2681955606 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 74 |
| References cited | 41 |
In today’s society, we can easily connect with people who share our ideas and interests. A problem with this development is that political reasoning in like-minded groups easily becomes lop-sided since there is little reason to critically examine information that everyone seems to agree with. Hence, there is a tendency for groups to become more extreme than the initial inclination of its members. We designed an experiment to test whether introducing deliberative norms in like-minded discussions can alleviate such group polarization. Based on their attitudes toward a linguistic minority, participants were divided into a positive and a negative opinion enclave. Within the two enclaves, the participants were randomly assigned to group discussions either with or without deliberative norms. Both face-to-face and online discussions were arranged. We found that free discussion without rules led to group polarization in like-minded groups, whereas polarization could be avoided in groups with deliberative norms
Deliberation · Deliberative democracy · Democracy · Polarization (electrochemistry · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Law · Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence · Psychology · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Media and Politics · Social Psychology
Consensus, cooperation and collective intelligence in foraging societies
Experimental Methods
Researching Deliberative Democracy
Deliberative Democracy
Citizenship and Contemporary Direct Democracy
Kollektive Informationsverarbeitung von Medieninhalten
The Epistemic Value of Democratic Deliberation
The model of collective information processing (MCIP)
The Corrective Effect of Fact-Checking and Hostile Media Perceptions
Investigating the potential of civil disagreement to decrease issue polarization in China
Are we what parties we support? Personality traits and party support in a multi‐party system
Education for deliberative democracy through the long-term view
Democratic education in the fourth generation of deliberative democracy
Democratic citizenship and polarization
Polarisation and Silencing Others During the Covid-19 Pandemic in Germany
Do discussions in human-computer communities trigger group polarization? Insights from the media evocation paradigm
Learning from disagreement on social media
Supportive and uncivil expressions in discussions on out-groups by in-group members in anonymous computer-mediated communication
Ideological motives, digital divides, and political polarization
What makes people more polarized? The effects of anonymity, being with like-minded others, and the moderating role of need for approval
We Don’t Trust YOU
Explaining contentious political issues promotes open-minded thinking
The Instrumental Value of Deliberative Democracy – Or, do we have Good Reasons to be Deliberative Democrats
Rhetorical Alignment between Political Campaign Discourse and Democratic Deliberation
Can Organized Deliberation Reduce Confirmation Bias
Diversity in Facilitation
Psychological Phenomena in Democratic Deliberation
The Influence of Leaders on the Quality of Citizen Deliberation
On Deliberators’ Awareness of Attitude Transformation
Why Do You Feel That Way? Elaboration Questions and Feeling Heard in Political Talk
Over Time, Right-Wing Twitter Users in France Exhibit Growing Homophily Compared to Left and Center Users
Deliberation and polarization
The relationship between information hoarding and selective exposure
On the Interplay of Gullibility, Plausibility, and Criticism
The Social Dynamics Approach to mediated communication
Awareness of opinion change
Affective polarization in crosscutting communication networks
The influence of political knowledge on opinion polarization in citizen deliberation
The Good, the Bad, and the Evil Media
Understanding Fake News
Overview and Context
Depolarizing Through Deliberation in Civics Education
Meat & Greet
The Deliberative Type? How Different Personalities Prefer and Experience Public Deliberation
The potential of deliberative reasoning
The law of group polarization revisited
Research Methods in Deliberative Democracy
Public Deliberation in Russia
Teaching Teachers with, for, and through Dialogue
Introducing ReChat
Human Life Is Group Life
Deliberation, Polarization, and Emotion
Deliberative Distortions? Homogenization, Polarization, and Domination in Small Group Discussions
Media Diet and Polarisation
Empathy in a Citizen Deliberation Experiment
Can politicians and citizens deliberate together? Evidence from a local deliberative mini‐public
When Mini-Publics and Maxi-Publics Coincide
Using Data from Reddit, Public Deliberation, and Surveys to Measure Public Opinion about Autonomous Vehicles
Does Party Identification Matter for Deliberation? Evidence from the Poland Speaks Experiment
The promise and peril of interpersonal political communication
Depolarizing within the Comfort of Your Party
A Little More Conversation A Little Less Prejudice
Disagreement and Deliberation
Narrative strategies in a nondemocratic setting
Fit to govern? Comparing citizen and policymaker perceptions of deliberative democratic innovations
Deliberative democracy in the age of serial crisis
When reality strikes
Reducing political polarization in Hong Kong
Deliberative democracy in an algorithmic society
Right-Wing Twitter Users in France Exhibit Growing Homophily Compared With Left and Center Users
Science Factionalism
Emancipation cannot be programmed
Enmeshing the mundane and the political
The Polarizing Effect of Partisan Echo Chambers
Why Deliberative Democracy?
Democratic Innovations
Experimental Political Science and the Study of Causality
Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy
Debates in Contemporary Political Philosophy
Deliberation of Controversial Public School Curriculum
Types of Deliberation
Norms of Deliberation
Deliberation and Attitude Polarization
Inclusion and Democracy
Reasonable Democracy
Going to Extremes
Group polarization
Following from the front
Online Deliberation and Its Outcome—Evidence from the Virtual Polity Experiment
Online versus face-to-face deliberation
Democracy, deliberation and design
Survey Article
The Law of Group Polarization
Deliberative Democracy and the Deliberative Poll on the Euro
The effects of repeated expressions on attitude polarization during group discussions
Democracy online
Does Discussion Group Composition Affect Policy Preferences? Results from Three Randomized Experiments
Designing for democracy
Deliberation and Opinion Change
Citizen Deliberation on Nuclear Power
Equal Partners in Dialogue? Participation Equality in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (Europolis)
Reasoning Is for Arguing
Is Face-to-Face Citizen Deliberation a Luxury or a Necessity
When Corrections Fail
Does Enclave Deliberation Polarize Opinions
The role of deliberation in attitude change
Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs
The Effects of Deliberative Polling in an EU-wide Experiment
Considered Opinions
Depolarization of attitudes in groups
The challenge of deliberative democracy online – A comparison of face-to-face and virtual experiments in citizen deliberation
Between Facts and Norms
| Unique citing works | 74 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 8,22 |
| Citation span | 2017 - 2026 (10) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 73 |