Deliberative E-Rulemaking Project: Challenges to Enacting Real World Deliberation

Journal of Information Technology and Politics

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 82-96

  Stromer Galley, Jennifer ^a   Webb, Nick ^a   Muhlberger, Peter ^b  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

E rulemaking; government rulemaking; natural language processing; online deliberation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861006287     PISSN: 19331681     EISSN: 1933169X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19331681.2012.635971     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Barabas, J. 2004. How deliberation affects policy opinions. American Political Science Review, 98: 687-701.
2. Benhabib, S. 1994. Deliberative rationality and models of democratic legitimacy. Constellations, 1: 26-52.
3. Bohman, J. 1996. Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Bunt, H. 1994. Context and dialogue control. THINK, 3: 19-31.
5. Cardie, C., Farina, C., Aizaj, A., Rawding, M. and Purpura, S. A study in rule-specific issue categorization for e-rulemaking. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Digital Government Research. May. Montreal, Canada
6. Carlitz, R., & Gunn, R. (2005). E-rulemaking: A new avenue for public engagement. Journal of Public Deliberation, 1(1). http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol1/iss1/art7/
7. Chambers, S. 1996. Reasonable democracy: Jürgen Habermas and the politics of discourse, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
8. Conover, P. J., Searing, D. D. and Crewe, I. M. 2002. The deliberative potential of political discussion. British Journal of Political Science, 32: 21-62.
9. Converse, P. E. 1964. "The nature of belief systems in mass publics". In Ideology and discontent, Edited by: Apter, D. E. 206-261. New York: Free Press.
10. De Figueiredo, J. M. 2006. E-rulemaking: Bringing data to theory at the Federal Communications Commission. Duke Law Journal, 55: 969-993.
11. Delli Carpini, M. X. and Keeter, S. 1996. What Americans know about politics and why it matters, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12. Dillman, D. A. 2000. Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method, 2nd, New York: J. Wiley.
13. Dryzek, J. S. 2002. Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations, New York: Oxford University Press.
14. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S. and Tinkler, J. 2006. Digital era governance: IT corporations, the state, and e-government, New York: Oxford University Press.
15. Eliasoph, N. 1998. Avoiding politics: How Americans produce apathy in everyday life, New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Endenburg, G. 1998. Sociocracy: The organization of decision-making, Delft, Netherlands: Eburon.
17. Endenburg, G. and Pearson, M. 1998. Sociocracy as social design: Its characteristics and course of development, as theoretical design and practical project, Delft, Netherlands: Eburon.
18. Farrar, C., Fishkin, J. S., Green, D. P., List, C., Luskin, R. C. and Levy Paluck, E. 2010. Disaggregating deliberation's effects: An experiment within a deliberative poll. British Journal of Political Science, 40: 333-347.
19. Fellbaum, C., ed. 1998. WordNet: An electronic lexical database, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Fung, A. 2002. Creating deliberative publics: Governance after devolution and democratic centralism. The Good Society, 11(1): 66-71.
21. Gastil, J., Black, L. W., Deess, E. P. and Leighter, J. 2008. From group member to democratic citizen: How deliberating with fellow jurors reshapes civic attitudes. Human Communication Research, 34: 137-169.
22. Gigone, D. and Hastie, R. 1997. The impact of information on small group choice. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 72: 132-140.
23. Gilens, M. November 2000. Political ignorance and American democracy. Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association Meeting November, Chicago, IL
24. Glynn, C. J., Hayes, A. F. and Shanahan, J. 1997. Perceived support for one's opinions and willingness to speak out: A meta-analysis of survey studies on the "spiral of silence.". Public Opinion Quarterly, 61: 452-463.
25. Gutmann, A. and Thompson, D. 1996. Democracy and disagreement, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26. Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S. and Vollrath, D. A. 1997. The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processes. Psychological Bulletin, 121: 43-64.
27. Kerwin, C. M. 2003. Rulemaking: How government agencies write law and make policy, 3rd, Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
28. List, C., Luskin, R. C., Fishkin, J., & McLean, I. (2006). Deliberation, single-peakedness, and the possibility of meaningful democracy: Evidence from deliberative polls. PSPE Working Paper No. 1. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1077752
29. Luskin, R. C. 1987. Measuring political sophistication. American Journal of Political Science, 31: 856-899.
30. Luskin, R. C., Fishkin, J. S. and Jowell, R. 2002. Considered opinions: Deliberative polling in Britain. British Journal of Political Science, 32: 455-488.
31. McDaniel, J. (2009, March 20). NPS calls lead ban announcement a "misstep." NRAhuntersrights.org. http://www.nrahunterrights.org/Article.aspx?id=1712 (http://www.nrahunterrights.org/Article.aspx?id=1712)
32. Muhlberger, P. Attitude change in face-to-face and online political deliberation: Conformity, information, or perspective taking?. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting. August. Washington, DC
33. Muhlberger, P. Democratic deliberation and political identity: Enhancing citizenship. Paper presented at the International Society of Political Psychology, 28th Annual Scientific Meeting. July. Toronto, Ontario, Canada
34. Muhlberger, P., Stromer-Galley, J. and Webb, N. in press a. Public policy and obstacles to the virtual agora: Insights from the Deliberative E-Rulemaking Project. Information Polity,
35. Muhlberger, P., Stromer-Galley, J. and Webb, N. in press b. "An experiment in e-rulemaking with Natural Language Processing and democratic deliberation". In Citizen 2.0: Public and governmental interaction through Web 2.0 technologies, Edited by: Kloby, K. and D'Agostino, M. Hershey, PA: IGI Global Publishers.
36. National Park Service. (2009, March 10). National Park Service gets the lead out! Press release. http://home.nps.gov/applications/release/Detail.cfm?ID=855
37. Neuman, W. R. 1986. The paradox of mass politics: Knowledge and opinion in the American electorate, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38. Nirenburg, S., Somers, H. L. and Wilks, Y. A., eds. 2003. Readings in machine translation, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
39. Noelle-Neumann, E. 1993. The spiral of silence: Public opinion, our social skin, 2nd, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Noveck, B. S. 2004. The electronic revolution in rulemaking. Emory Law Journal, 53: 433-522.
41. Price, V. and Cappella, J. N. 2002. Online deliberation and its influence: The electronic dialogue project in campaign 2000. IT & Society, 1: 303-329.
42. Price, V., Cappella, J. N. and Nir, L. 2002. Does disagreement contribute to more deliberative opinion?. Political Communication, 19: 95-112.
43. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. (2009, March 26). National park lead ammo ban in doubt: NRA goes ballistic on gun-shy Obama Administration. Press release. http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/03/26-1 (http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/03/26-1)
44. Repanshek, K. (2009, March 12). National Park Service ban on lead ammo, fishing gear draws ire of Shooting Sports Foundation. National Parks Traveler. http://http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2009/03/national-park-service-ban-lead-ammo-fishing-gear-draws-ire-shooting-sports-foundation (http://http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2009/03/national-park-service-ban-lead-ammo-fishing-gear-draws-ire-shooting-sports-foundation)
45. Rosenberg, S. Can citizens decide? Political reasoning and democratic deliberation. Paper presented at the International Society of Political Psychology Scientific Meeting. July. Toronto, Ontario, Canada
46. Ryfe, D. M. 2005. Does deliberative democracy work?. Annual Review of Political Science, 8: 49-72.
47. Shafie, D. M. 2008. Participation in e-rulemaking: Interest groups and the standard-setting process for hazardous air pollutants. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 5: 399-410.
48. Shulman, S. W. 2006. Whither deliberation? Mass e-mail campaigns and the U.S. regulatory rulemaking. Journal of E-Government, 3(3): 41-64.
49. Shulman, S. W. (2009). The case against mass e-mails: Perverse incentives and low quality public participation in a federal rulemaking. Policy & Internet, 1(2). http://www.psocommons.org/policyandinternet/vol1/iss1/art2/
50. Small, S. and Strzalkowski, T. 2009. HITIQA: High-Quality Intelligence through Interactive Question Answering. Journal of Natural Language Engineering, 15: 32-56.
51. Strzalkowski, T. and Harabagiu, S., eds. 2006. Advances in open domain question answering, Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
52. Tigelaar, F. A. S., Akker, R., op den and Hiemstra, D. 2010. Automatic summarisation of discussion. Natural Language Engineering, 16: 161-192.
53. Tomkins, A., Zillig, L. P., Herian, M., Abdel-Monem, T. and Hamm, J. Public input for municipal policymaking: Engagement methods and their impact on trust and confidence. Proceedings of the 11th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference. Vol. 292, pp.41-50. New York: ACM.
54. Webb, N. and Ferguson, M. 2010. "Investigating the portability of corpus derived cue phrases for dialogue act classification". In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 977-984. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. (COLING 2008)
55. Webb, N., Hepple, M. and Wilks, Y. Dialogue act classification using intra-utterance features. Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Spoken Language Understanding. Menlo Park, CA: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.
56. Yackee, S. W. 2005. Sweet-talking the fourth branch: The influence of interest group comments on federal agency rulemaking. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16: 103-124.
57. Zeitz, C. M. 1997. "Some concrete advantages of abstraction: How experts' presentations facilitate reasoning". In Expertise in context: Human and machine, Edited by: Feltovich, P. J., Ford, K. M. and Hoffman, R. R. 43-65. Menlo Park, CA: MIT/AAAI.