Inside the Black Box: Citizens' Evaluations of Deliberation during the Oregon Citizens' Initiative Review

Deliberative democracy has provided ground for interactions between normative political theory and empirical political science. By focusing primarily on outcomes, scholars have left a gap in the literature regarding what goes on during the deliberative process. What happens in the black box? Utilizing data from the Oregon Citizens' Initiative Review (CIR), I assess citizens' evaluations of the deliberative process as it occurs. The CIR brings together a panel of randomly-selected citizens to evaluate ballot measures during a multi-day public review. Previous research has demonstrated that “winners” and “losers” have significantly different perceptions of deliberation and politics more generally. While the data indicate there were differences between the majority and minority, by allowing minority members to produce their own reports on the issue under discussion, the CIR mitigates these effects. This can inform deliberative practice by making designers sensitive to giving minority members of the public a voice in deliberations.