Everyday conversation in the deliberative process: An analysis of communicative exchanges in discussion groups and their contributions to civic and political socialization;La conversation quotidienne et le processus de délibération: Une analyse des échanges communicationnels dans les groupes de discussion et de leur contribution à la socialisation civique et politique

Journal of Communication

Volumn 60, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 611-635

  Marques, Ângela C S ^a   Maia, Rousiley C M ^b  

^a Social Communication Program   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF MINAS GERAIS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Civic and political socialization and group discussions; Deliberative process; Everyday conversations

Indexed keywords

CIVIL SOCIETY; COMMUNICATION; DEMOCRACY; INCOME DISTRIBUTION; POLITICAL RELATIONS; SOCIAL POLICY; THEORETICAL STUDY;

BRAZIL;

EID: 78149388022     PISSN: 00219916     EISSN: 14602466     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01506.x     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Bennett, S., Flickinger, R., & Rhine, S. (2000). Political talk over here, over there, over time. British Journal of Political Science, 30, 99-119.
2. Black, L. W. (2008). Deliberation, storytelling and dialogic moments. Communication Theory, 18, 93-116.
3. Bohman, J. (1996). Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Bohman, J. (1997). Deliberative democracy and effective social freedom: Capabilities, resources, and opportunities. In J. Bohman & W. Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics (pp. 321-348). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Bryman, A. (2001). Focus groups. In A. Bryman (Ed.), Social research methods (pp. 335-351). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
6. Burkhalter, S., Gastil, J., & Kelshaw, T. (2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communication Theory, 12, 398-422.
7. Carey, M. A. (1994). The group effect in focus groups: Planning, implementing, and interpreting focus groups research. In J. Morse (Ed.), Critical issues in qualitative research methods (pp. 224-241). London: Sage.
8. Chambers, S. (2003). Deliberative democracy theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6, 307-326.
9. Conover, P., & Searing, D. (2005). Studying 'everyday political talk' in the deliberative system. Acta Politica, 40, 269-283.
10. Conover, P., Searing, D., & Crewe, I. (2002). The deliberative potential of political discussion. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 21-62.
11. Cooke, M. (2000). Five arguments for deliberative democracy. Political Studies, 48, 947-969.
12. Dryzek, J. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond-Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
13. Duchesne, S., & Haegel, F. (2004). La polititisation des discussions, au croisement des logiques de specialisation et de conflictualisation. Revue Française de Science Politique, 54, 877-909.
14. Eliasoph, N. (1997). Close to home: The work of avoiding politics. Theory and Society, 26, 605-647.
15. Eliasoph, N. (2000). Where can Americans talk politics? Civil society, intimacy, and the case for deep citizenship. The Communication Review, 4, 65-94.
16. Fearon, J. D. (1998). Deliberation as discussion. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (pp. 44-68). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
17. Fraser, N. (1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 109-142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Gamson, W. (1992). Talking politics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
19. Gastil, J. (2008). Political communication and deliberation. London: Sage.
20. Gomes, W., & Maia, R.C.M. (2008). Comunicação e Democracia-Problemas e perspectivas. São Paulo, Brazil: Ed. Paulus.
21. Goodin, R. (2006). Talking politics: Perils and promises. European Journal of Political Research, 45, 235-261.
22. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (1999). Democratic disagreement. In S. Macedo (Ed.), Deliberative politics: Essays on democracy and disagreement (pp. 243-279). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
23. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action: Lifeworld and system-A critique of functionalism reason (Vol. 2). Boston: Beacon Press.
24. Habermas, J. (1997). Direito e democracia: entre facticidade e validade (Vol. 2). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Tempo Brasileiro.
25. Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16, 411-426.
26. Huckfeldt, P., Johnson, P., & Sprague, J. (2004). Political disagreement: The survival of diverse opinions within communication networks. New York: Cambridge University Press.
27. Kim, J., & Kim, E. J. (2008). Theorizing dialogic deliberation: everyday political talk as communicative action and dialogue. Communication Theory, 18, 51-70.
28. Kim, J., Wyatt, R., & Katz, E. (1999). News, talk, opinion, participation: The part played by conversation in deliberative democracy. Political Communication, 16, 361-385.
29. Kingfisher, C. P. (1996). Women on welfare: Conversational sites of acquiescence and dissent. Discourse & Society, 7, 531-557.
30. Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16, 103-121.
31. Kitzinger, J., & Farquhar, C. (1999). The analytical potential of sensitive moments in focus group discussions. In R. Barbour & J. Kitzinger (Eds.), Developing focus group research: Politics, theory and practice (pp. 156-172). London: Sage.
32. Lunt, P. & Livingstone, S. (1996). Rethinking the focus groups in media and communication research. Journal of Communication, 46, 79-98.
33. Maia, R. (Ed.). (2008). Mídia e Deliberação. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: FGV.
34. Mansbridge, J. (1999). Everyday talk in deliberative system. In S. Macedo (Ed.), Deliberative politics: Essays on democracy and disagreement (pp. 211-239). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
35. Marques, Â. (2008). "L'intersection entre le processus communicatif et la délibération publique" [on line]. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from
36. Marques, Â., & Maia, R. C. M. (2007). Dimensões da autonomia no combate à pobreza: O programa Bolsa-Família sob a perspectiva das beneficiárias. Serviço Social e Sociedade, 92, 58-85.
37. Marques, Â., & Maia, R. C. M. (2008). A conversação sobre temas políticos em contextos interativos do cotidiano. Politica & Sociedade, 7(12), 143-175.
38. Marques, Â., & Rocha, S. (2006). A produção de sentido nos contextos de recepção: Em foco o grupo focal. Fronteiras, 8, 38-53.
39. McLeod, J., Scheufele, D., Moy, P., Horowitz, E., Holbert, R., Zhang, W., et al. (1999). Understanding deliberation: The effects of discussion networks on participation in a public forum. Communication Research, 26, 743-774.
40. Meyers, G. (1998). Displaying opinions: Topics and disagreement in focus groups. Language in Society, 27, 85-111.
41. Morgan, D. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129-152.
42. Moy, P., & Gastil, J. (2006). Predicting deliberative conversation: The impact of discussion networks, media use, and political cognitions. Political Communication, 23(4), 443-460.
43. Mutz, D. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
44. Mutz, D., & Martin, P. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: the role of mass media. American Political Science Review, 95, 97-114.
45. Norris, P. (2000). A virtuous circle-Political communications in postindustrial societies. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
46. Porto, M. (1998). Muito além da informação: Mídia, cidadania e o dilema democrático. São Paulo em Perspectiva, 12, 17-25.
47. Rojas, H. (2008). Strategy versus understanding: How orientations toward political conversation influence political engagement. Communication Research, 35(4), 452-480.
48. Scheufele, D. (2000). Talk or conversation? Dimensions of interpersonal discussion and their implications for participatory democracy. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 724-741.
49. Schudson, M. (1997). Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 14, 297-309.
50. Smithson, J. (2000). Using and analyzing focus groups: Limitations and possibilities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3, 103-119.
51. Streich, G. W. (2002). Constructing multiracial democracy: To deliberate or not to deliberate? Constellations, 9, 127-153.
52. Van Dijk, T. (1999). Discourse and the denial of racism. In A. Jaworski & N. Coupland (Eds.), The discourse reader (pp. 541-558). London: Routledge.
53. Walsh, K. C. (2003). The democratic potential of civic dialogue. Text presented to the Political Behavior Research Group, Department of Political Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
54. Warr, D. (2005). It was fun.... but we don't usually talk about these things. Analyzing sociable interactions in focus groups. Qualitative Inquiry, 11, 200-225.
55. Warren, M. (2006). What should and should not be said: Deliberating sensitive issues. Journal of Social Philosophy, 37, 163-181.
56. West, C. (1995). Women's competence in conversation. Discourse & Society, 6, 107-131.
57. West, M., & Gastil, J. (2004). Deliberation at the margins: Participant accounts of face-to-face public deliberation at the 1999-2000 world trade protests in Seattle and Prague. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 5, 1-7.
58. Wyatt, R., Katz, E., & Kim, J. (2000). Bridging the spheres: Political and personal conversation in public and private spaces. Journal of Communication, 50, 71-92.
59. Young, I. (1996). Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political (pp. 120-136). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.