skip to main content
10.1145/3406865.3418562acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Democratic Reflection: Nudging Citizens? Democratic Engagement with Political Election Debates

Published: 17 October 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Nudges are increasingly adopted by governments to promote social welfare, but there is an open debate on the ethics of nudges and their application in highly contested domains. We present a tool for nudging citizens? democratic engagement with political election debates. Democratic Reflection is a moment-by-moment second screen interaction technology for capturing audience feedback to time-based stimuli like speeches, TV debates, or video replays. While viewing the stimuli, users select from a matrix of icons, each describing a reflective nudge and instant audience reaction. Initial insights from the applications of this technology in the 2015, 2017 and 2019 UK elections, suggest that the reflective nudges enabled by Democratic Reflection can promote active engagement with politics, and may increase the willingness of people to be involved in political processes in the future.

Supplementary Material

ZIP File (de1013aux.zip)
The Auxiliary Material includes a 30 second Demo Video in mp4. It also includes a read-me text with the Auxiliary Material Description.
MP4 File (de1013.mp4)
Supplemental video

References

[1]
SM Astrid Bin, Fabio Morreale, Nick Bryan-Kinns, and Andrew P McPherson. 2017. In-the-moment and beyond: Combining post-hoc and real-time data for the study of audience perception of electronic music performance. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 263--281.
[2]
John Bohannon. 2016. Government 'nudges' prove their worth.
[3]
Christine Clavien. 2018. Ethics of nudges: A general framework with a focus on shared preference justifications. Journal of Moral Education, Vol. 47, 3 (2018), 366--382.
[4]
Anna De Liddo, Brian Plüss, and Paul Wilson. 2017. A novel method to gauge audience engagement with televised election debates through instant, nuanced feedback elicitation. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communities and Technologies. 68--77.
[5]
Eric Gilbert, Tony Bergstrom, and Karrie Karahalios. 2009. Blogs are echo chambers: Blogs are echo chambers. In 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE, 1--10.
[6]
Daryna Grechyna. 2020. Technological Progress and Political Disengagement. Available at SSRN 3570643 (2020).
[7]
Philipp Grunewald and T Baar. 2019. Training active listening by using digital technologies . https://bit.ly/2CYkw12 Last accessed: 2020-07--28.
[8]
Civic Hall. 2016. Making the UK's political debates more responsive to public needs . https://civichall.org/civicist/political-debates-more-responsive-public-needs/ Last accessed: 2020-07--28.
[9]
Daniel Halpern and Jennifer Gibbs. 2013. Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 29, 3 (2013), 1159--1168.
[10]
Daniel Kahneman. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow .Macmillan.
[11]
Yiling Lin. 2018. A critical examination of nudge on theoretical and ethical grounds . Ph.D. Dissertation. Queen Mary University of London.
[12]
Nichola Jayne Raihani. 2013. Nudge politics: efficacy and ethics. Frontiers in psychology, Vol. 4 (2013), 972.
[13]
Samuli Reijula, Jaakko Kuorikoski, Timo Ehrig, Konstantinos Katsikopoulos, and Shyam Sunder. 2018. Nudge, Boost, or Design? Limitations of behaviorally informed policy under social interaction. (2018). https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/zh3qw
[14]
Bryan Semaan, Heather Faucett, Scott P Robertson, Misa Maruyama, and Sara Douglas. 2015. Designing political deliberation environments to support interactions in the public sphere. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3167--3176.
[15]
Bryan C Semaan, Scott P Robertson, Sara Douglas, and Misa Maruyama. 2014. Social media supporting political deliberation across multiple public spheres: towards depolarization. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing . 1409--1421.
[16]
Cass R Sunstein. 2015. The Ethics of Nudging. Yale Journal on Regulation, Vol. 32, 2 (2015), 413.
[17]
Cass R Sunstein. 2016. The ethics of influence: Government in the age of behavioral science .Cambridge University Press.
[18]
Cass R Sunstein. 2017. People like nudges (mostly). In Human Agency and Behavioral Economics . Springer, 17--39.
[19]
Scott Wright and John Street. 2007. Democracy, deliberation and design: the case of online discussion forums. New media & society, Vol. 9, 5 (2007), 849--869.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Exploring the Impact of AI-generated Image Tools on Professional and Non-professional Users in the Art and Design FieldsCompanion Publication of the 2024 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing10.1145/3678884.3681890(451-458)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2024
  • (2023)Using Technology to Unite Us: Can Disagreement be a Catalyst for Consensus Building?ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society10.1145/3585066.358507151:2(12-13)Online publication date: 21-Feb-2023
  • (2023)Nudges, emojis, and memes: Mapping interpassivity theory onto digital civic cultureCommunication and Democracy10.1080/27671127.2023.225249457:2(252-274)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
CSCW '20 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2020 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing
October 2020
559 pages
ISBN:9781450380591
DOI:10.1145/3406865
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 October 2020

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. audience feedback interaction
  2. critical thinking and sensemaking technologies
  3. crowdsourcing citizen feedback
  4. nudges
  5. political election debates
  6. second screen interaction

Qualifiers

  • Abstract

Funding Sources

Conference

CSCW '20
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 2,235 of 8,521 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

CSCW '25

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)36
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
Reflects downloads up to 16 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Exploring the Impact of AI-generated Image Tools on Professional and Non-professional Users in the Art and Design FieldsCompanion Publication of the 2024 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing10.1145/3678884.3681890(451-458)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2024
  • (2023)Using Technology to Unite Us: Can Disagreement be a Catalyst for Consensus Building?ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society10.1145/3585066.358507151:2(12-13)Online publication date: 21-Feb-2023
  • (2023)Nudges, emojis, and memes: Mapping interpassivity theory onto digital civic cultureCommunication and Democracy10.1080/27671127.2023.225249457:2(252-274)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2023
  • (2021)Designing collective intelligence to improve the democratic publicNorsk medietidsskrift10.18261/ISSN.0805-9535-2021-02-0628:2(01-08)Online publication date: 4-Jun-2021

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media