Deliberative processes can alter participants’ attitudes and behavior, but deliberative minipublics connected to macro-level discourse may also influence the attitudes of non-participants. We theorize that changes in political efficacy occur when non-participants become aware of a minipublic and utilize its deliberative outputs in their decision making during an election. Statewide survey data on the 2010 and 2012 Oregon Citizens’ Initiative Reviews tested the link between awareness and use of the Citizens’ Initiative Review Statements and statewide changes in internal and external political efficacy. Results from a longitudinal 2010 panel survey show that awareness of the Citizens’ Initiative Reviews increases respondents’ external efficacy, whereas use of the Citizens’ Initiative Review Statements on ballot measures increases respondents’ internal efficacy. A cross-sectional 2012 survey found the same associations. Moreover, the 2010 survey showed that greater exposure to—and confidence in—deliberative outputs was associated with higher levels of both internal and external efficacy.
BaiocchiGHellerPSilvaM (2011) Bootstrapping Democracy: Transforming Local Governance and Civil Society in Brazil. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
2.
BohmanJ (2012) Representation in the Deliberative System. In: ParkinsonJMansbridgeJJ (eds) Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.72–94.
3.
BoulianneS (2017) Mini-publics and Public Opinion: Two Survey-Based Experiments. Political Studies66: 119–136.
4.
BoulianneS (2018) Building Faith in Democracy: Deliberative Events, Political Trust and Efficacy. Political Studies67: 4–30.
5.
BowlerSDonovanT (2002) Democracy, Institutions and Attitudes about Citizen Influence on Government. British Journal of Political Science32 (2): 371–390.
6.
ChamberS (2003) Deliberative Democratic Theory. Annual Review of Political Science6: 307–326.
7.
CohenJ (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
CrosbyNNethercuttD (2005) Citizens Juries: Creating a Trustworthy Voice of the People. In: GastilJLevineP (eds) The Deliberative Democracy Handbook Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-first Century. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, pp.111–119.
9.
DahlRA (1989) Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10.
DwyerWL (2002) In the Hands of the People. New York: St. Martin’s.
11.
FishkinJS (1991) Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12.
FishkinJS (2009) When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. New York: Oxford University Press.
13.
FournierP (2011) When Citizens Decide: Lessons from Citizen Assemblies on Electoral Reform. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14.
Fuji-JohnsonG (2015) Democratic Illusion: Deliberative Democracy in Canadian Public Policy. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
15.
FungA (2003) Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and their Consequences. The Journal of Political Philosophy11: 338–367.
FunkCL (2001) Process Performance Public Reaction to Legislative Policy Debate. In: HibbingJRTheiss-MorseE (eds) What Is It about Government that Americans Dislike?New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.193–208.
18.
GastilJ (2000) By Popular Demand: Revitalizing Representative Democracy through Deliberative Elections. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
19.
GastilJ (2004) Adult Civic Education through the National Issues Forums: Developing Democratic Habits and Dispositions through Public Deliberation. Adult Education Quarterly54: 308–328.
20.
GastilJKnoblochKR (2010) Evaluation Report to the Oregon State Legislature on the 2010 Oregon Citizens’ Initiative Review. Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
21.
GastilJLevineP (eds) (2005) The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-first Century. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
22.
GastilJBlackLWMoscovitzK (2008) Ideology, Attitude Change, and Deliberation in Small Face-To-Face Groups. Political Communication25 (1): 23–46.
23.
GastilJDeessEPWeiserPJ, et al. (2010) The Jury and Democracy: How Jury Deliberation Promotes Civic Engagement and Political Participation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24.
GastilJKnoblochKRRichardsR (2015) Empowering Voters through Better Information: Analysis of the Citizens’ Initiative Review, 2010-2014: Report Prepared for the Democracy Fund. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University.
25.
GastilJKnoblochKRReedyJ, et al. (2018) Assessing the Electoral Impact of the 2010 Citizens’ Initiative Review. American Politics Research46 (3): 534–563.
26.
GastilJRichardsRRyanM, et al. (2017) Testing Assumptions in Deliberative Democratic Design: A Preliminary Assessment of the Efficacy of the Participedia Data Archive as an Analytic Tool. Journal of Public Deliberation13: 1.
27.
GastilJRosenzweigEKnoblochKR, et al. (2016) Does the Public Want Mini-publics? Voter Responses to the Citizens’ Initiative Review. Communication and the Public1 (2): 174–192.
28.
GilmanHR (2016) Democracy Reinvented: Participatory Budgeting and Civic Innovation in America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
29.
GoodinRE (2000) Democratic Deliberation Within. Philosophy & Public Affairs29: 81–109.
30.
GoodinRE (2003) Reflective Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31.
GoodinRE (2008) Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice after the Deliberative Turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32.
GoodinREDryzekJS (2006) Deliberative Impacts: The Macro-political Uptake of Mini-publics. Politics & Society34: 219–244.
33.
GrönlundKBachtigerASetäläM (eds) (2014) Deliberative Mini-publics: Involving Citizens in the Democratic Process. Colchester: ECPR Press.
34.
HendriksCM (2006) When the Forum Meets Interest Politics: Strategic Uses of Public Deliberation. Politics & Society34: 571–602.
35.
HeroRETolbertCJ (2004) Minority Voices and Citizen Attitudes about Government Responsiveness in the American States: Do Social and Institutional Context Matter?British Journal of Political Science34 (1): 109–121.
36.
HibbingJRTheiss-MorseE (1998) The Media’s Role in Public Negativity toward Congress: Distinguishing Emotional Reactions and Cognitive Evaluations. American Journal of Political Science42: 475–498.
37.
InghamSLevinI (2018a) Can Deliberative Minipublics Influence Public Opinion? Theory and Experimental Evidence. Political Research Quarterly71: 654–667.
38.
InghamSLevinI (2018b) Effects of Deliberative Minipublics on Public Opinion: Experimental Evidence from a Survey on Social Security Reform. International Journal of Public Opinion Research30: 51–78.
39.
JacobsLRCookFLDelli CarpiniMX (2009) Talking Together: Public Deliberation and Political Participation in America. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
40.
JacquetC (2018) The Role and the Future of Deliberative Mini-publics: A Citizen Perspective. Political Studies. Epub ahead of print 31August. DOI: 10.1177/0032321718794358.
41.
JohnsonCGastilJ (2015) Variations of Institutional Design for Empowered Deliberation. Journal of Public Deliberation11: 2.
42.
KnoblochKRGastilJ (2015) Civic (re)socialisation: The Educative Effects of Deliberative Participation. Politics35 (2): 183–200.
43.
KnoblochKRGastilJRichardsR, et al. (2012) Evaluation Report on the 2012 Citizens’ Initiative Reviews for the Oregon CIR Commission. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University.
44.
KweitMGKweitRW (2007) Participation, Perception of Participation, and Citizen Support. American Politics Research35 (3): 407–425.
45.
LeighningerM (2006) The Next Form of Democracy: How Expert Rule Is Giving Way to Shared Governance—And Why Politics Will Never Be the Same. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
46.
MacKenzieMKWarrenME (2012) Two Trust-Based Uses of Minipublics in Democratic Systems. In: ParkinsonJMansbridgeJ (eds) Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.95–124.
47.
MansbridgeJ (1999) Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System. In: MacedoS (ed.) Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.211–239.
48.
MilesM (2011) Variation in Perceptions of Democracy: The Influence of Procedural Fairness. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the American Association of Public Opinion Research, Phoenix, AZ, May 2011.
49.
MorrellME (2005) Deliberation, Democratic Decision Making and Internal Political Efficacy. Political Behavior27: 49–69.
50.
NabatchiT (2010) Addressing the Citizenship and Democratic Deficits: The Potential of Deliberative Democracy for Public Administration. The American Review of Public Administration40 (4): 376–399.
51.
NabatchiTGastilJWeiksnerM, et al. (2012) Democracy in Motion: Evaluating the Practice and Impact of Deliberative Civic Engagement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52.
NiemeyerS (2011) The Emancipatory Effect of Deliberation: Empirical Lessons from Mini-publics. Politics & Society39 (1): 103–140.
53.
NiemeyerS (2014) Scaling Up Deliberation to Mass Publics: Harnessing Mini-publics in a Deliberative System. In: GrönlundKBächtigerASetäläM (eds) Deliberative Mini-publics: Practices, Promises, Pitfalls. Essex: ECPR Press, pp.177–202.
54.
NiemiRGCraigSCMatteiF (1991) Measuring Internal Political Efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. American Political Science Review85: 1407–1413.
55.
O’DohertyKBurgessM (2009) Engaging the Public on Biobanks: Outcomes of the BC Biobank Deliberation. Public Health Genomics12: 203–215.
56.
Oregon Secretary of State (2010) Voters’ Pamphlet: Oregon General Election. Salem, OR: Oregon Secretary of State.
57.
OwenDSmithG (2015) Survey Article: Deliberation, Democracy, and the Systemic Turn. Journal of Political Philosophy23 (2): 213–234.
58.
ParkinsonJ (2006) Deliberating in the Real World: Problems of Legitimacy in Deliberative Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
59.
ParkinsonJMansbridgeJ (eds) (2012) Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. New York: Cambridge University Press.
60.
RosenstoneSJHansenJM (1993) Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
61.
Schenck-HamlinWJProcterDERumseyDJ (2000) The Influence of Negative Advertising Frames on Political Cynicism and Politician Accountability. Human Communication Research26: 53–74.
62.
SchlozmanKLBurnsNVerbaS, et al. (1995) Gender and Citizen Participation: Is There a Different Voice?American Journal of Political Science39: 267–293.
63.
SmithG (2009) Democratic Innovations: Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
64.
VerbaSSchlozmanKLBradyHE (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
65.
WarrenMEGastilJ (2015) Can Deliberative Minipublics Address the Cognitive Challenges of Democratic Citizenship?Journal of Politics77 (2): 562–574.
66.
WarrenMEPearseH (eds) (2008) Designing Deliberative Democracy: The British Columbia Citizens’ Assembly. New York: Cambridge University Press.
67.
XenosMMoyP (2007) Direct and Differential Effects of the Internet on Political and Civic Engagement. Journal of Communication57: 704–718.
68.
ZhangW (2012) Perceived Procedural Fairness in Deliberation: Predictors and Effects. Communication Research42 (3): 345–364.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
