The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Deliberative Democracy
Abstract
It is sometimes assumed that voting is the central mechanism for political decision-making. The contributors to this volume focus on an alternative mechanism, that is decision by discussion or deliberation. The original contributions include case studies based on historical and current instances of deliberative democracy, normative discussion of the merits of deliberation compared to other models of collective decision-making, and studies of the conditions under which it tends to improve the quality of decisions. This volume is characterized by a realistic approach to the issue of deliberative democracy. Rather than assuming that deliberative democracy is always ideal, the authors critically probe its limits and weaknesses as well as its strengths.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Social Protection and the Formation of Skills: A Reinterpretation of the Welfare State
Estevez‐Abe, M., Iversen, T., & Soskice, D. (2001) · Varieties of Capitalism · doi:10.1093/0199247757.003.0004 · Cited by 1,568
Four Phases of Mediatization: An Analysis of the Mediatization of Politics
Strömbäck, J. (2008) · The International Journal of Press/Politics · doi:10.1177/1940161208319097 · Cited by 1,373
Closing the Books: Transitional Justice in Historical Perspective
Elster, J. (2004) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511607011 · Cited by 531
Self-citationA problem-based approach to democratic theory
WARREN, M. E. (2017) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055416000605 · Cited by 478
(2004) · Cited by 478
(2004) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511491207 · Cited by 461
Does discourse matter? Discourse analysis in environmental policy making
Feindt, P. H., & Oels, A. (2005) · Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning · doi:10.1080/15239080500339638 · Cited by 394
de Fine Licht, K., & de Fine Licht, J. (2020) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-020-00960-w · Cited by 334
“…of the public eye, thereby making them aware of their responsibility to work toward the public good rather than in their own self-interests (e.g., Elster 1998; Chambers 2004, 2005; Naurin 2007).10 This is true for both the decision-makers when establishing the goals as well as the programmers…”
BackgroundDirect Public Engagement in Local Government
Nabatchi, T., & Amsler, L. B. (2014) · The American Review of Public Administration · doi:10.1177/0275074013519702 · Cited by 274
“Do the right thing:” The effects of moral suasion on cooperation
Dal Bó, E., & Dal Bó, P. (2014) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.05.002 · Cited by 157
Connecting deliberative mini‐publics to representative decision making
Setälä, M. (2017) · European Journal of Political Research · doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12207 · Cited by 160
Public deliberation on government-managed social media: A study on Weibo users in China
Medaglia, R., & Zhu, D. (2017) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2017.05.003 · Cited by 114
(2019) · doi:10.1080/13510347.2019.1613980 · Cited by 66
The effects of information and social conformity on opinion change
Mallinson, D. J., & Hatemi, P. K. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0196600 · Cited by 62
Carlsson, H., Hanell, F., & Engström, L. (2023) · Journal of Documentation · doi:10.1108/jd-03-2023-0061 · Cited by 34
Empowerment and disempowerment in climate assemblies: The French citizens' convention on climate
Galván Labrador, A., & Zografos, C. (2024) · Environmental Policy and Governance · doi:10.1002/eet.2093 · Cited by 30
Hanell, F. (2026) · Journal of Documentation · doi:10.1108/jd-07-2025-0187 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1998-03-28
- OpenAlex
- W764290220
- Cited by
- 2,183
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 84.27
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
