Demokrati som politiskt system är aldrig stabilare än det stöd det har hos befolkningen.Samtidigt visar studier att Sverige upplever en anmärkningsvärd minskning i stödet för demokrati bland de yngre medborgarna. Mot bakgrund av detta utforskas i denna studie vilken betydelse den demokratimodell som ett politiskt beslut fattas enligt har för ungas stöd gentemotden politiska beslutsprocessen. Därigenom dras slutsatser om möjliga alternativ för att reformera den representativa modellen genom att antingen förstärka eller försvaga demokratin.Detta undersöks genom ett surveyexperiment (N=134) med respondenter i åldern 18-29 år.Respondenterna fick svara på en enkät om deras attityd gentemot en politisk beslutsprocess där politikerna hade fattat beslutet antingen utifrån resultatet av en nationell folkomröstning,digitala deliberativa möten eller en expertgruppsutrednings slutsatser. En blygsam effekt av demokratimodell på stöd för beslutsprocessen uppmättes, men där expertdemokrati uppvisade en signifikant starkare effekt på stödet för beslutsmetoden jämfört med direkt demokrati. / Democracy as a political system is never more stable than the support it enjoys among the mass public. At the same time, studies show that Sweden currently experiences a remarkable decrease in democratic support among its´ younger citizens. This study examines if the model of democracy that a political decision is made according to, affect young people’s support for the political decision-making process and thus explores possible avenues for reforming the representative model by either strengthening or weakening democracy. This is investigated through a survey experiment (N = 134) among respondents aged 18 to 29 years old. The respondents were asked to answer a survey about their attitudestowards a political decision, where the politicians had grounded their decision in either the result of a national referendum, digital deliberative meetings, or the conclusion by a group of experts. Modest effects of democracy models on support for the decision-making process were found. However, expert democracy had a significantly stronger effect on support for the decision method compared to direct democracy.

The purpose of the study is to explore how social media can be used as a forum to discuss politics and also how young people use critical reflection to evaluate the information available on social media. To achieve the purpose, a qualitative research is used. The empirical data is collected through semi-structured interviews with six high school students who voted in the Swedish parliamentary elections in/of 2014. The empirical data were then analyzed based on previous research on social media, and the school's mission to foster individuals who think critically. The analysis is also based on the theory of deliberative democracy model. The study shows that social media can be used as a platform for political discussions but it is in a large extent characterized by mudslinging between the sides for and against the various political elements. The survey also shows that the interviewed students do not understand the implications of source criticism. Instead they use critical thinking to determine what is a good or a bad source. The study shows that the deliberative democracy model cannot be applied to social media in its present form, but should be seen as an ideal image of how a deliberative democracy should work.