Quality of Crowdsourced Deliberation: Respect, Reciprocity and Lack of Common-Good Orientation

In this paper, published at CHI ’17, we examine deliberative quality of crowdsourced deliberation. Analyzing data from two crowdsourced policy-making processes, we found a good quality deliberation with respect, reciprocity, and storytelling according to the standards in the theory of deliberative democracy. We identified a group of super-deliberators, whose deliberation was above the average, and low-quality deliberators, whose deliberation was below the average. The findings show that even when crowdsourced policymaking was not designed for deliberation, it can facilitate a fairly high-quality democratic deliberation.

Download (PDF, 674KB)