Although online social media have achieved spectacular success in some instances, the design of such systems remains an art. In some specialized areas, such as online deliberation systems for participatory democracy, experiences from many projects have been reported in the research literature. Designers can benefit from knowledge accumulated from these experiences. However, the knowledge is dispersed and not organized for ready access by practicing professionals. This thesis proposes a framework for structuring and codifying design knowledge from published studies to help designers make design choices that will attain design objectives.

Although online social media have achieved spectacular success in some instances, the design of such systems remains an art. In some specialized areas, such as online deliberation systems for participatory democracy, experiences from many projects have been reported in the research literature. Designers can benefit from knowledge accumulated from these experiences. However, the knowledge is dispersed and not organized for ready access by practicing professionals. This thesis proposes a framework for structuring and codifying design knowledge from published studies to help designers make design choices that will attain design objectives.

This thesis examines the quality and effectiveness of online political deliberation, within the framework of Jurgen Habermas’ public sphere and discourse theories. The thesis analyzes a deliberative process that took place online, in June 2011, as part of the Liberal Party of Canada’s Extraordinary Convention, specifically through content and discourse analysis of data from online discussion platforms. The analysis sought to ascertain whether the objectives of the convention were met, measured the quality of discourse and identified insights to support the creation of more effective spaces for political deliberation online. Analysis of the results revealed a difference in the discourse quality for each platform, attributed to the synchronicity or asynchronicity of the platform. The thesis concludes with suggestions for a design that makes use of both the synchronous and asynchronous features of the online discussion platforms in order to more specifically target the objectives of the political process.

This thesis examines the quality and effectiveness of online political deliberation, within the framework of Jurgen Habermas’ public sphere and discourse theories. The thesis analyzes a deliberative process that took place online, in June 2011, as part of the Liberal Party of Canada’s Extraordinary Convention, specifically through content and discourse analysis of data from online discussion platforms. The analysis sought to ascertain whether the objectives of the convention were met, measured the quality of discourse and identified insights to support the creation of more effective spaces for political deliberation online. Analysis of the results revealed a difference in the discourse quality for each platform, attributed to the synchronicity or asynchronicity of the platform. The thesis concludes with suggestions for a design that makes use of both the synchronous and asynchronous features of the online discussion platforms in order to more specifically target the objectives of the political process.

Submitted by Daniele Ferreira Seridorio null (seridorio@gmail.com) on 2016-10-11T01:24:36Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação Daniele F. Seridório.pdf: 3302884 bytes, checksum: 1ec30a8e49911054e366480acd984b34 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Juliano Benedito Ferreira (julianoferreira@reitoria.unesp.br) on 2016-10-17T18:49:50Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 seridorio_df_me_bauru.pdf: 3302884 bytes, checksum: 1ec30a8e49911054e366480acd984b34 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-10-17T18:49:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 seridorio_df_me_bauru.pdf: 3302884 bytes, checksum: 1ec30a8e49911054e366480acd984b34 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-08-22 / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) / A expansão do ambiente on-line possibilitou às assembleias de praça pública alcançar fóruns, sites e outras plataformas digitais de interação. Para o processo deliberativo foi cunhado um novo termo, a deliberação on-line. Esta pesquisa reflete sobre a deliberação on-line e os processos comunicativos e interativos que a envolvem, aplicados à análise do debate poder definir a qualidade de um ambiente deliberativo on-line. O objeto de estudo é o website Vote na Web - criado em 2009 pela empresa Webcitizen - que tem como objetivo aproximar os cidadãos do ambiente deliberativo da Câmara dos Deputados. A análise se constitui da descrição das ferramentas de arquitetura do website, da qualidade do resumo apresentado e do debate em torno do projeto de lei 7633/2014 no vote na Web. As categorias que utilizamos foram: inclusividade, respeito mútuo, tópico, provimento de razão, reciprocidade e reflexividade. O estudo indicou que o Vote na Web, como experiência de uso político da internet, é arena participativa, mas não deliberativa. O potencial de deliberação - que não se efetiva - está justamente em permitir que as pessoas participem em torno de determinado tópico, mas essa participação não leva à deliberação, esses usuários conversam, em sua maioria, sozinhos, ou somente leem os outros comentários e se posicionam, mas sem aprofundar-se na reciprocidade e na reflexividade. O Vote na Web é uma complementação para os temas que estão em discussão na esfera pública. / The expansion of the online connection had come to the public spaces meeting and took them to online forums, sites and other digital interactive platforms. From deliberation process it was shaped a new concept, online deliberation. This research aims to reflect about online deliberation and the communicative and interactive process that it involves, applying to the analyses of the messages to be able to determinate the quality of an online deliberation space. The object of the study is the website “Vote na Web”, which principal propose is to approximate Brazilian citizens to the deliberation area that is the National Legislative Assembly. The investigation was based in the description of the website's architecture tools, the quality of the abstract and the debate around the law project 7633/2014 presented in the website. The categories that we used were: inclusivity, mutual respect, rational provision, topic, reciprocity and reflexivity. This study indicated that the website “Vote na Web” it is a participative arena, but not deliberative. The deliberative potential it is in allowing that people participate around as specific topic, but this participation doesn’t achieve deliberation level, most of the users talk alone, without going deep into reciprocity and reflexivity. “Vote na Web” offers a complementation to the topics that are in discussion in the public sphere. / FAPESP: 2014/12307-6 / FAPESP: 2015/18826-8

Some of the most pressing challenges facing humanity today, such as how to respond to climate change or govern the internet, are too complex for any individual or small group to completely understand by themselves, but a lot of people each know a piece of the problem or solution. This is somewhat like a billion-piece jigsaw puzzle where somebody threw away the box and mailed each piece to a different person. Attempts are now being made to build platforms where people can bring their pieces and assemble them into solutions. This thesis examines such platforms, how people use and perceive them and their content, and how certain design decisions such as the exposure of discussion behind collaboratively produced content can affect those perceptions. Through a set of studies ranging from qualitative interviews to controlled experiments with hundreds or thousands of participants, this thesis adds to our understanding of how humans use and perceive content on such platforms, including when primary content is presented alongside related content or discussion, so that we can better understand how to design these systems to better achieve their users’ intended goals. The research integrates insights from computer science and social psychology with latent variable modeling techniques in order to increase our understanding of what people are trying to accomplish on an example platform designed to support large-scale collaboration around a complex issue, and experimentally explores how people perceive the content they find on such sites. Data and projects used in this thesis come from a diversity of sources including Wikipedia, the President’s SAVE award ideation contest (facilitated through the IdeaScale ideation platform), and the MIT Climate CoLab.

O presente trabalho analisa o conteúdo desenvolvido dentro dos espaços virtuais dos fóruns de discussão disponibilizados por meio do portal e-Democracia da Câmara Federal de Deputados. O referido portal oferece aos cidadãos a possibilidade de participação na elaboração do texto de leis, realizada por meio do oferecimento de ferramentas participativas, como bate-papos, enquetes, editores colaborativos de textos, além dos fóruns de discussão, espaço no qual a pesquisa se concentra. A partir dessa possibilidade de interação entre sociedade civil e poder público e, do desenvolvimento teórico acerca da participação política empreendida por meio da internet, a dissertação propõe, primeiramente, avaliar o grau de deliberatividade das discussões realizadas online, utilizando os indicadores justificação, reciprocidade, reflexividade, informação e pluralidade, extraídos da literatura sobre teoria deliberativa. Propõe ainda, identificar as demandas dos participantes originadas das discussões nos fóruns e mensurar seu aproveitamento no texto das leis sancionadas. Por último, o trabalho busca estabelecer uma relação entre essas duas etapas: a discussão deliberativa e o aproveitamento das demandas apresentadas. / This paper analyzes the content developed within the discussion forums in virtual spaces available through the Federal House of Representatives e-Democracy website. That website offers citizens the opportunity to participate in drafting the text of laws, held by offering participatory tools such as chats, polls, collaborative text editors, in addition to discussion forums, space in which the research is concentrated. From this possibility of interaction between civil society and the government, and theoretical developments on the political participation undertaken through the Internet, the dissertation proposes, first, evaluate the degree of deliberativeness of online discussions held, using the justification, reciprocity, reflexivity, information and plurality indicators, taken from the deliberative theory literature. It also proposes to identify the demands of the participants originated from discussions in the forums and measure its use in the text of the enacted laws. Finally, the study seeks to establish a relationship between these two steps: a deliberative discussion and the use of the demands presented.

This paper deals with online political discussion on social networking sites. Drawing from Habermas’ concept of the public sphere and former adaptations of public sphere theory to Internet research, the study examines to what extent political discussion on social networking sites displays public issue focus as well as deliberative, liberal and communitarian characteristics. The empirical analysis is a case study that scrutinizes two opposing Facebook pages created in the context of the topic ‘Stuttgart 21’ – a construction project that evoked a local civic protest movement in the city of Stuttgart in the south of Germany. Using an ethnographic approach, the study takes into account the architecture, culture and discussion style on the two pages and aims at describing the pages in terms of their degree of reciprocity, contestation, ideological homogeneity, rationality and contextualisation with the offline protest movement. The results show two polarized pages that lack deliberation and dialogue, but feature ideological homophily and identification. The results back the fragmentation theory of Internet audiences, while not maintaining the fear of losing the common ground in society. On the contrary, the study suggests that civic political engagement on social networking sites should be discussed in the context of radical democratic processes. It concludes that the utilization of social networks in order to politically inform, stimulate and mobilise scalable publics is desirable.

Deliberative democracy has been promoted as a way improving legitimacy and political equality in policy debates. This dissertation seeks to understand how deliberation takes place within the intersection of two unique spaces: dialogue among members of regional civil society groups and communication in online fora. The motivation for this research is based on the notion that existing forms of decision-making have contributed to political inequality, a major issue in areas such as the Caribbean. Accordingly I examine the online discussions of three different civil society groups in the Caribbean. I looked at how certain variables in these fora were related to three of the main dimensions of deliberation, the use of reasoned arguments, reciprocity and reflection. With regard to reasoned arguments I examined how diversity among members, the participation of the moderator and the topic and scope of the conversation were pertinent to a discussion in a regional and multi-national setting. For reciprocity I looked at how variables related to time and the posting structure of a conversation were relevant in an online forum. Finally I looked at the strategies that were employed by participants as part of the communication process in an online forum and how these were related to processes of reflection. To address these questions I used a combination of content analysis and conversation analysis of email conversations and interviews with participants. One set of contributions from this dissertation is methodological through the development of a codebook and the novel application of conversation analysis to online deliberation. Also, the results are significant and can contribute to our understanding of deliberation in a context for which there has been little previous research. For example, I showed that national and occupational diversity can contribute to an increase in the proportion of reasoned arguments used in a conversation as does the presence of the moderator. However, these factors along with the scope and topic of a thread vary in their degree of influence on the use of reasoned arguments by the civil society group in question. I also showed that there are specific communication strategies that participants employ such as preference organization or speaker selection that are related to different forms of reflection evident in a conversation. Finally I observed that the posting structure of a conversation specifically the distribution of emails that participants send becomes less equal as reciprocity increases. This does not augur well for a deliberative ideal that envisions both reciprocity and equal participation. Furthermore, when considering deliberation as a whole, the results indicate that its different parts are not always correlated with each other. None of the lists has more than one significant correlation between the three dimensions of deliberation. In fact, reciprocity and the use of reasoned arguments were never significantly correlated in any of the lists. Together these results point to another main finding of this dissertation which is deliberation as a whole is difficult to observe in practice. Nevertheless I suggest that separately the results for each dimension can be useful from both a design perspective and for policy-makers in general. For example, encouraging the sharing of information and a more active moderator, having the opportunity to discuss regional issues could all help to promote a greater use of reasoned arguments overall. Experimenting with different ways in which group members can get to know each other might help to reduce the disparity between participation and reciprocity. Also encouraging participants to reply inline where possible, creating easier access to the message archives and having a system for collating threads and discussions online could all promote better reflection in the lists. Finally the list might benefit from having members go through an exercise of determining whether or not and in what way decision-making should be part of their discussions. With regard to policy-makers I note that several members reported benefits for policy-makers who themselves were members of the lists. This could stem from listening and learning from the discussions of other members or actually contributing to discussions. The groups also showed the potential to collate many different policy positions around a specific problem, thus assisting policy makers in understanding issues at a regional level.

MITOZO, Isabele Batista. Participação e deliberação em ambiente online: um estudo do portal e-democracia. 2013. 174f. . – Dissertação (Mestrado) – Universidade Federal do Ceará, Programa de Pós-graduação em Comunicação Social, Fortaleza (CE), 2013. / Submitted by Márcia Araújo (marcia_m_bezerra@yahoo.com.br) on 2014-04-03T13:37:13Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2013-DIS-IBMITOZO.pdf: 4214318 bytes, checksum: 6e461ed855cf909228b8de91750c8ad5 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Márcia Araújo(marcia_m_bezerra@yahoo.com.br) on 2014-04-03T15:46:31Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2013-DIS-IBMITOZO.pdf: 4214318 bytes, checksum: 6e461ed855cf909228b8de91750c8ad5 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2014-04-03T15:46:31Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2013-DIS-IBMITOZO.pdf: 4214318 bytes, checksum: 6e461ed855cf909228b8de91750c8ad5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013 / This work aims to understand the vision of participation and the valorization the Brazilian Legislative Power, specifically the Chamber of Deputies, makes about political participation mechanisms by the case study of the Portal e-Democracia, sponsored by that institution. The tools of e-Democracia, by allowing citizens to participate in the discussion of topics arising from legislative agenda, bring up the use of the internet as, possibly, an effective link between representatives and the represented. In other words, the proposal of e-Democracia is to generate discussion, both among citizens and between them and their representatives in order to contribute to the formulation of public policies. The research observed the development of Legislative Communities housed in the experience in question, able to engage any interested user, and it could identify an attempt to play the optimal model based on the binomial deliberation-voting, designed to guide the operation of the process of political decision production within the committees. It appears, however, a lack of systematization, at the portal, required by this ideal model, since there is an effective link between the stages of debate and decision. From this perspective, we have delimited as empirical corpus two communities whose discussions are of fundamental importance for the country - those aiming to participate in the construction of laws related to Brazilian budget 2013 (Budget Guidelines Law and the Annual Budget Law). The parameters the analysis is based on were divided in to levels: 1) Participative (Information, Motivation, Channels layout) and 2) Deliberative, which was sectioned into: 2.1) Structure of the forums (Identification; Openness; Agenda; Moderation; Public Space Strong x Weak) and 2.2) Content of posts (Reason-Giving; Reciprocity; Mutual respect; Common-good orientation). By that analysis, it is concluded that the initiative gives good results in relation to the participatory criteria adopted as a parameter of this research and suitable for an experiment that aims to enhance the participatory potential preferences of their users. Regarding the deliberation moment, however, the portal has not yet be successful, just to concentrate on being a device of multiple tools, which favored the expansion of participation instead of forwarding the citizens to a more qualified contribution through the discussions developed in the forums. / O presente trabalho objetiva compreender a visão de participação e a valorização que o Poder Legislativo brasileiro, na figura da Câmara dos Deputados, faz acerca de mecanismos de participação, a partir de um estudo de caso do Portal e-Democracia, patrocinado pela referida instituição. As ferramentas do e-Democracia, por permitirem aos cidadãos participação na discussão de tópicos advindos de pauta legislativa, trazem à tona a utilização da internet como elemento possivelmente eficaz de ligação entre representantes e representados. Em outras palavras, a proposta do e-Democracia consiste na geração de debates, tanto entre os cidadãos quanto entre estes e seus representantes, a fim de contribuir para a formulação de políticas públicas. A pesquisa se concentrou em observar o desenvolvimento das Comunidades Legislativas abrigadas na experiência em questão, aptas a envolverem qualquer usuário interessado, sendo possível identificar no processo que nelas se desenvolve uma tentativa de reprodução do modelo ideal baseado no binômio deliberação-votação, desenhado para guiar o funcionamento do processo de produção da decisão política no âmbito das Comissões. Constata-se, contudo, a falta, no portal, da sistematização requerida por esse modelo ideal, uma vez que não se efetiva a ligação entre as etapas de debate e decisão. Nessa perspectiva, delimitaram-se como corpus empírico duas Comunidades cujas discussões são de fundamental importância para o país – aquelas que visam à participação na construção das leis ligadas ao orçamento brasileiro de 2013 (Lei de Diretrizes Orçamentárias e Lei Orçamentária Anual). Os parâmetros sob os quais foi realizada a análise subdividiram-se em dois níveis: 1) Participativo (Provimento de informação, Motivação aos cidadãos; Perfil dos Canais) e 2) Deliberativo, sendo este, ainda, posto em duas instâncias: 2.1) Estrutura dos fóruns (Identificação; Abertura/Liberdade; Agenda; Moderação; Espaço Público Forte x Fraco) e 2.2) Conteúdo das postagens (Provimento de razões; Reciprocidade; Respeito mútuo; Orientação para o Bem-Comum). Por meio da análise empírica, conclui-se que, a iniciativa apresenta bons resultados quanto aos critérios participativos adotados como parâmetro na pesquisa. Em relação à deliberação, contudo, o portal ainda não apresenta ser bem sucedido, justamente por concentrar-se em atuar na condição de dispositivo dotado de múltiplas ferramentas, o que privilegiou a ampliação da participação em vez de encaminhar os cidadãos a contribuírem de forma mais qualificada, através das discussões desenvolvidas nos fóruns.