Author's Keywords: Citizens' juries, deliberative democracy, participation bias, framing effects, waste incineration	Convention All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p40078_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

French, Damien. and Laver, Michael. "Participation bias and framing effects in citizens’ juries" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2011-03-14 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p40078_index.html>

French, D. and Laver, M. J. , 2005-09-01 "Participation bias and framing effects in citizens’ juries" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2011-03-14 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p40078_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: Estimating the impact of deliberation on attitude change in real political settings is complicated by a problem that those who participate in deliberation may be more predisposed to particular attitudes, and/or to shifts in attitudes, than those who do not. We investigate this problem in the first large-scale citizens’ jury to take place Ireland. The jury was a random sample from the 2002 Irish Election Study (IES), itself a random sample of Irish electors. Before jury selection the issue for deliberation, the incineration of domestic waste, was included in a summer 2003 IES panel study, along with questions on environmental attitudes. Jurors were surveyed on key attitudes, immediately before and after a deliberation. The core questions for deliberation were also part of the 2004 IES panel study, conducted nine months after the jury deliberations and including all jurors. Large opinion shifts against waste incineration were observed during deliberation, and some of these shifts remained observable nine months later. However, a troubling feature of the experiment was the extent to which key “stakeholders” who expected to be on the “losing” side of the deliberation were able to influence and probably de-legitimize the eventual outcome by withholding their cooperation in the entire process.

Heuristic and Systematic Biased Processing of Political Messages: Effects of Candidate Preference and the Level of Interest in Politics on Attitudes toward Issues

Public Attitudes About Political Participation on the Internet: Do People Perceive Political Activities Performed Online and Offline to be Equally Effective?

Panel Attrition and its Effects on Results from a Longitudinal Study: An Examination of Changes in Participants and Attitudes in a Web-based Panel Survey of HIV and AIDS Stigma Attitudes

Creating Better Citizens? Effects of a Model Citizens' Assembly on Student Political Attitudes and Behavior