What happened on deliberation day?

被引:65
作者
Schkade, David [1 ]
Sunstein, Cass R.
Hastie, Reid
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Diego, Rady Sch Management, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
[2] Univ Chicago, Sch Law, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[3] Univ Chicago, Dept Polit Sci, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[4] Univ Chicago, Sch Law, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[5] Univ Chicago, Dept Polit Sci, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
关键词
D O I
10.2307/20439113
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
What are the effects of deliberation about legal and political issues by like-minded people? This Essay reports the results of an experimental investigation involving sixty-three citizens in Colorado. Groups from Boulder, a predominantly liberal city, met to discuss global warming, affirmative action, and civil unions for same-sex couples. Groups from Colorado Springs, a predominately conservative city, discussed the same issues. The major effect of deliberation was to make group members more extreme in their views than they were before they started to talk. Liberals became more liberal on all three issues; conservatives became more conservative. As a result of intragroup deliberation, the division between the citizens of Boulder and the citizens of Colorado Springs significantly increased. Deliberation also increased consensus and significantly reduced diversity within the groups. Even anonymous statements Of personal opinion became more extreme and less diverse after deliberation. Because political views are often distributed along geographical lines, these findings are highly likely to be replicated in actual deliberative processes unless safeguards and careful procedures are introduced.
引用
收藏
页码:915 / 940
页数:26
相关论文
共 56 条
[41]   GROUP-INDUCED POLARIZATION IN SIMULATED JURIES [J].
MYERS, DG ;
KAPLAN, MF .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN, 1976, 2 (01) :63-66
[42]   DISCUSSION-INDUCED ATTITUDE POLARIZATION [J].
MYERS, DG .
HUMAN RELATIONS, 1975, 28 (08) :699-714
[43]  
Nickerson R. S., 1998, Review of General Psychology, V2, P175, DOI [10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175, DOI 10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175, 10.1037/10892680.2.2.175, DOI 10.1037/10892680.2.2.175]
[44]  
PYSZCZYNSKI T, 2003, PSYCHOL TERROR
[45]  
ROSS L, 1991, PERSON SITUATION, P28
[46]   Deliberating about dollars: The severity shift [J].
Schkade, D ;
Sunstein, CR ;
Kahneman, D .
COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW, 2000, 100 (04) :1139-1175
[47]   AN EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH TO THE STUDY OF ATTITUDES [J].
Sherif, Muzafer .
SOCIOMETRY, 1937, 1 (1-2) :90-98
[48]  
STASSER G, BLACKWELL HDB GROUP, V73, P31
[49]  
STONER JAF, 1961, THESIS MASSACHUSETTS
[50]   The law of group polarization [J].
Sunstein, CR .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, 2002, 10 (02) :175-195