Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
Prospects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of Public Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis Policy and ManagementInstitute for the Study of Information Technology and Society (InSITeS)Carnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburgh. PennsylvaniaPlease send correspondence to:peterm@andrew.cmu.edu2EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThis report provides an overview of key findings from a 1200-person mail Sliney, funded Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysisby the Markle Foundation, and designed and conducted by Carnegie Mellon University's Community Connections Project. Mail survey participants were seleProspects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
cted to be representative of the Pittsburgh city community. The Sliney was designed to provide data useful to Community Connections' objective of promProspects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of Public Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis against which Community Connections can judge the success of its efforts, such as the current quantity and quality of everyday political discussion.The survey also provides answers to many vital questions pertinent to how Community Connections directs its efforts: How receptive is the public to imp Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysisroving the quantity and quality of political discussion? What factors influence the quantity and quality of political discussion either generally or wProspects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
ith regard to particular forms? The nature of these factors will help Community Connections identify the types of persuasive appeals and other interveProspects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of Public Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysishe factors are strongly determined by demographic characteristics, they may be based on strong social divisions that could be difficult to eradicate. Moreover, if demographics play a substantial role, then the views of those who discuss politics may not be representative of the community as a whole. Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis Special efforts would then need to be undertaken to insure that public deliberations organized by Community Connections adequately represent the publProspects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
ic as a whole.Key findings discussed in this report include:3Discussion QuantityOnly 12% of respondents discuss politics one hour or more a week. An hProspects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of Public Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysisreflecting their values and interests.Only 3% of respondents disc USS politics three or more hours per week. Three hours per week may be necessary for a person to be an active participant in determining what counts as the "common good”—a community function many political theorists consider essential Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis to democracy.The quantity of political discussion is distributed very unequally. The bottom 50% of the population account for 6% of all discussion anProspects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
d the top 20% account for 75% of all discussion. Five people talk about politics 40 or more hours a month.Discussion QualityLarge percentages of thoseProspects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of Public Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis as listening to other speakers or speaking oneself) and by die presence of certain deliberative nouns, such as willingness to find common ground with others. By one standard, using a summary measure of the behaviors and norms Ĩ call "deliberaliveness," 72% of those who discuss politics have sub-sta Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysisndard discussion quality.4Those who discuss politics less also tend to have lower discussion quality, though the relationship is not deterministic (coProspects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
rrelation of .42).Prospects for ImprovementRespondents recognize the nonnative desirability of more discussion and higher discussion quality—the averaProspects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of Public Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysisare quite modest.The level of quality improvements desired by people who have below standard levels of quality are substantially larger, though not enough to achieve "acceptable" levels.Similarly, people who engage in low amounts of discussion say they want amount improvements that are substantially Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis greater than people who engage in average amounts of discussion.Nevertheless, the amount of discussion respondents in the bottom 80% of the populatioProspects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
n want to engage in falls well below a subjective minimum standard of one hour a week.All the findings above concern people's desire for more of the eProspects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of Public Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis do what they say? The survey finds that 39% of respondents are willing to be contacted5about a six-hour deliberative meeting or deliberative web site in which they could participate.•Offering $50-5100 to participate in the six-hour meeting increases interest in being contacted from 32% (for the no Prospects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysispay condition) only to 33%.•Persons who score high on the deliberativeness of their discussions are appreciably more likely to want to be contacted abProspects for Electronic Democracy A Survey Analysis
out the deliberative meetings or web site—irrespective of their actual and ideal amount of discussion.Prospects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of Public Prospects for Electronic Democracy: A Survey Analysis, Version 1Peter Muhlberger and Peter ShaneCommunity ConnectionsH. J. Heinz III School of PublicGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook