IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v37y2007i04p587-618_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Discussion in the Deliberative System: Does It Make Better Citizens?

Author

Listed:
  • SEARING, DONALD D.
  • SOLT, FREDERICK
  • CONOVER, PAMELA JOHNSTON
  • CREWE, IVOR

Abstract

In democratic theory, the practice of discussing public affairs has been associated with desirable consequences for citizenship and democracy. We use Anglo-American survey data to examine twelve hypotheses about psychological foundations for four general conditions that such discussions might promote: autonomous citizens, political legitimacy, good representation and democratic communities. Our data combine detailed measures of public discussion with measures of more of its hypothesized civic consequences than have heretofore been available. They also enable us to probe, using specialized samples, causal inferences suggested by our analyses of random samples in our British and American communities. Six of the hypotheses are supported, including at least one regarding each of the four general liberal democratic conditions we investigate.

Suggested Citation

  • Searing, Donald D. & Solt, Frederick & Conover, Pamela Johnston & Crewe, Ivor, 2007. "Public Discussion in the Deliberative System: Does It Make Better Citizens?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(4), pages 587-618, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:37:y:2007:i:04:p:587-618_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123407000336/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. Tania Burchardt, 2012. "Deliberative research as a tool to make value judgements," CASE Papers case159, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    2. Burchardt, Tania, 2012. "Deliberative research as a tool to make value judgements," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 43904, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Rui Wang & James S. Fishkin & Robert C. Luskin, 2020. "Does Deliberation Increase Public‐Spiritedness?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2163-2182, October.
    4. repec:cep:sticas:/159 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:bjposi:v:37:y:2007:i:04:p:587-618_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/jps .

    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.