Reason Against the Machine: Future Directions for Mass Online Deliberation

TL;DR

This paper reviews digital mass deliberation platforms, highlighting current technical approaches, their limitations in ensuring high-quality deliberation, and proposing future interdisciplinary research directions to address social and cultural challenges.

Contribution

It provides a comprehensive review of existing design features for large-scale online deliberation and offers recommendations for integrating interdisciplinary insights to improve deliberation quality.

Findings

Focus on technical fixes for scaling up deliberation

Neglect of social, cultural, and inequality considerations

Need for interdisciplinary research bridging theory, design, and engineering

Abstract

Designers of online deliberative platforms aim to counter the degrading quality of online debates. Support technologies such as machine learning and natural language processing open avenues for widening the circle of people involved in deliberation, moving from small groups to "crowd" scale. Numerous design features of large-scale online discussion systems allow larger numbers of people to discuss shared problems, enhance critical thinking, and formulate solutions. We review the transdisciplinary literature on the design of digital mass deliberation platforms and examine the commonly featured design aspects (e.g., argumentation support, automated facilitation, and gamification) that attempt to facilitate scaling up. We find that the literature is largely focused on developing technical fixes for scaling up deliberation, but may neglect the more nuanced requirements of high quality deliberation. Current design research is carried out with a small, atypical segment of the world's population, and much research is still needed on how to facilitate and accommodate different genders or cultures in deliberation, how to deal with the implications of pre-existing social inequalities, how to build motivation and self-efficacy in certain groups, and how to deal with differences in cognitive abilities and cultural or linguistic differences. Few studies bridge disciplines between deliberative theory, design and engineering. As a result, scaling up deliberation will likely advance in separate systemic siloes. We make design and process recommendations to correct this course and suggest avenues for future research