Advertisement

Quality & Quantity

, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 407–422 | Cite as

Who will not deliberate? Attrition in a multi-stage citizen deliberation experiment

  • Maija Karjalainen
  • Lauri RapeliEmail author
Article

Abstract

This article examines the determinants of attrition in deliberative mini-publics. We approach attrition from a social psychological and a socioeconomic perspective and draw several hypotheses. We find that age and life situation are the primary predictors of attrition, but also having a negative opinion about immigration and reluctance to expose oneself to conflicting opinions play an important role. We use data from a citizen deliberation experiment organized in Finland in 2012. The data allows us to analyze attrition in several stages of recruitment, resulting in 207 people from an initial population of 12,000 participating in a deliberation experiment. The topic of the discussions was immigration, and the experiment was designed to test the theoretical assumptions of enclave deliberation. Our results feed the ongoing discussion about equality and representation in deliberative mini-publics and highlight the importance of social psychological variables in explaining attrition.

Keywords

Deliberative democracy Enclaves Experimental research  Survey methodology Attrition Nonresponse 

References

  1. Allison, P.D.: Missing data. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA (2001)Google Scholar
  2. Carpini, M.X.D., Cook, F.L., Jacobs, L.R.: Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: a review of the empirical literature. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 7, 315–344 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clifford, S.: Making disability public in deliberative democracy. Contemp. Polit. Theor. 11(2), 211–228 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Conover, P.J., Searing, D.D., Crewe, I.M.: The deliberative potential of political discussion. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 32(1), 21–62 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Druckman, J.N., Green, D.P., Kuklinski, J.H., Lupia, A.: The growth and development of experimental research in political science. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 100(4), 627–635 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dryzek, J.: Deliberative democracy and beyond. Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar
  7. Dryzek, J.S., Niemeyer, S.: Discursive representation. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 102(4), 481–493 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farrar, C., Fishkin, J.S., Green, D.P., List, C., Luskin, R.C., Levy Paluck, E.: Disaggregating deliberation’s effects: an experiment within a deliberative poll. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 40(2), 333–347 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Finnish National Election Study [FSD2653]. Borg, Sami, Grönlund, Kimmo, Election Study Consortium. Helsinki: Taloustutkimus, 2011. Available through The Finnish Social Science Data Archive (2011)Google Scholar
  10. Fitzgerald, J., Gottschalk, P., Moffitt, R.: An Analysis of Sample Attrition in Panel Data: The Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics. Working Paper No. 220. National Bureau of Economic Research (1998)Google Scholar
  11. Gerber, A.S., Green, D.P.: Field experiments: design, analysis, and interpretation. Norton W. W. & Company, New York, NY (2012)Google Scholar
  12. Goodin, R.E.: Representing diversity. Br. J. Politi. Sci. 34, 453–468 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. Goodin, R.: Innovating democracy: democratic theory and practice after the deliberative turn. Oxford University Press, New York, NY (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graham, J.W.: Missing data analysis: making it work in the real world. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 60, 549–576 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grönlund, K., Herne, K., Setälä, M.: Deliberation within and across enclaves: knowledge and opinion changes in an experiment. Paper presented at the 71st MPSA Conference, Chicago, 11–14 April 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  16. Grönlund, K., Bächtiger, A., Setälä, M.: Deliberative mini-publics: involving citizens in the democratic process. ECPR Press, Colchester (2014)Google Scholar
  17. Grönlund, K., Setälä, M., Herne, K.: Deliberation and civic virtue: lessons learned from a citizen deliberation experiment. Eur. Polit. Sci. Rev. 2(1), 95–118 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Groves, R.M.: Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opin. Q. 70(5), 646–675 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Groves, R.M., Singer, E., Corning, A.: Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation. Public Opin. Q. 64(3), 299–308 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gutmann, A., Thompson, D.: Why deliberative democracy?. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (2004)Google Scholar
  21. Habermas, J.: Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  22. Hausman, J.A., Wise, D.A.: Attrition bias in experimental and panel data: the Gary income maintenance experiment. Econometrica 47(2), 455–473 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hooghe, M., Stolle, D., Mahéo, V.-A., Vissers, S.: Why can’t a student be more like an average person? Sampling and attrition effects in social science field and laboratory experiments. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 628, 85–96 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. James, M.R.: Descriptive representation in the British Columbia citizens’ assembly. In: Warren, M., Pearse, H. (eds.) Designing deliberative democracy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)Google Scholar
  25. Luskin, R., Fishkin, J., Jowell, R.: Considered opinions: deliberative polling in Britain. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 32(3), 455–487 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Estlund, D., Føllesdal, A., Fung, A., Lafont, C., Manin, B., Martí, J.: The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. J. Polit. Philos. 18(1), 64–100 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mutz, D.: Cross-cutting social networks: testing democratic theory in practice. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 96(1), 111–126 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mutz, D.: Hearing the other side: deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Neblo, M.A., Esterling, K.M., Kennedy, R.P., Lazer, D.M.J., Sokhey, A.E.: Who wants to deliberate—and why? Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 104(3), 566–583 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Noelle-Neumann, E.: The spiral of silence: public opinion: our social skin. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL (1993)Google Scholar
  31. Norris, P.: Radical right. Voters and parties in the electoral market. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. OECD Immigration Statistics (2010). www.oecd.org. Accessed Dec 2012.
  33. Parkinson, J.: Legitimacy problems in deliberative democracy. Polit. Stud. 51(1), 180–196 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Scheufele, D., Eveland, W.: Perceptions of “public opinion” and “public” opinion expression. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 13(1), 25–44 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sides, J., Citrin, J.: European opinion about immigration: the role of identities, interests and information. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 37(3), 477–504 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Smith, G.: Deliberative democracy and mini-publics. In: Newton, K., Geissel, B. (eds.) Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise?. Routledge, New York, NY (2012)Google Scholar
  37. Smith, G., Wales, C.: Citizens’ juries and deliberative democracy. Polit. Stud. 48(1), 51–65 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sunstein, C.: The law of group polarization. J. Polit. Philos. 10(2), 175–195 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Uhrig, S.C.N.: The nature and causes of attrition in the British household panel survey. ISER Working paper series. Institute for Social and Economic Research (2008)Google Scholar
  40. Ulbig, S.G., Funk, C.L.: Conflict avoidance and political participation. Polit. Behav. 21(3), 265–282 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Voogt, R.J.J., Kempen, H.V.: Nonresponse bias and stimulus effects in the Dutch national election study. Qual. Quant. 36(4), 325–345 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Warren, M., Pearse, H. (eds.): Designing deliberative democracy: the British Columbia citizens’ assembly. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)Google Scholar
  43. Wilson, P.A.: Deliberative planning for disaster recovery: re-membering New Orleans. J. Public Delib. 5, 1 (2008)Google Scholar
  44. Wojcieszak, M., Baek, Y.M., Delli Carpini, M.X.: Deliberative and participatory democracy? Ideological strength and the processes leading from deliberation to political engagement. Int. J. Public Opin. 22(2), 154–180 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Young, I.M.: Inclusion and democracy. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Social Science Research InstituteÅbo Akademi University TurkuFinland
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Turku TurkuFinland
  3. 3.Aronia Research and Development InstituteEkenäsFinland

Personalised recommendations