The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Is Deliberative Democracy a Falsifiable Theory?
Open accessAbstract
To further dialogue between theory and research on deliberative democracy, I advocate abandoning tests of deliberative theory per se and instead developing “middle-range” theories that are each important, specifiable, and falsifiable parts of deliberative democratic theory. By replacing vaguely defined entities with more concrete, circumscribed concepts, and by requiring empirically and theoretically grounded hypotheses about specific relationships between those concepts, researchers may come to understand which elements of the deliberative experience are crucial to particular valued outcomes.
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
Cites
(1954) · Cited by 15,935
The Practice of Social Research
Neustadtl, A., & Babbie, E. (1989) · Teaching Sociology · doi:10.2307/1318433 · Cited by 14,398
Pettigrew, T. F. (1998) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65 · Cited by 6,001
Eulau, H. (1960) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s000305540012235x · Cited by 4,722
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098 · Cited by 4,583
Social Theory and Social Structure.
Stone, G. P., & Merton, R. K. (1958) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2390803 · Cited by 4,499
Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.
Hutchison, T. W., & Popper, K. R. (1964) · Economica · doi:10.2307/2551371 · Cited by 4,197
Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.
Hesse, M., & Popper, K. R. (1965) · The Philosophical Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2218271 · Cited by 4,189
Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,368
(1998) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139175005 · Cited by 2,183
Cited by
Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science
Thompson, D. F. (2008) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.081306.070555 · Cited by 987
Frenemies: How Social Media Polarizes America
Settle, J. E. (2018) · doi:10.1017/9781108560573 · Cited by 377
Political Fact-Checking on Twitter: When Do Corrections Have an Effect?
Margolin, D. B., Hannak, A., & Weber, I. (2018) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2017.1334018 · Cited by 285
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
What Motivates Reasoning? A Theory of Goal‐Dependent Political Evaluation
Groenendyk, E., & Krupnikov, Y. (2021) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12562 · Cited by 85
Metadata
- Authors
- Mutz, D. C.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Political Science
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2008-06-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 521-538
- ISSN
- 1094-2939 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-1577
- OpenAlex
- W2117851540
- Cited by
- 447
- References
- 45
- FWCI
- 30.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is Deliberative Democracy a Falsifiable Theory? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.081306.070308
- The paper
- Mutz, D. C. (2008). Is Deliberative Democracy a Falsifiable Theory? Annual Review of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.081306.070308
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.
