Not Too Long, Not Too Short: Goldilocks Principle of 'Optimal' Reflection Time on Online Deliberation Platforms

TL;DR

This study investigates how reflection time affects online deliberation quality through two user studies, identifying an optimal reflection duration and testing interface nudges to encourage reflection, with mixed effects on user experience.

Contribution

It introduces the Goldilocks principle for reflection time in online deliberation and evaluates interface nudges to promote optimal reflection durations.

Findings

Optimal reflection time improves deliberation quality.

Interface nudges extend reflection periods but do not necessarily enhance quality.

Reflection time is especially beneficial for users with initially short deliberations.

Abstract

The deliberative potential of online platforms has been widely examined but the impact of reflection time on the quality of deliberation remains under-explored. This paper presents two user studies involving 100 and 72 participants respectively, to investigate the impact of reflection time on the quality of deliberation in minute-scale deliberations. In the first study, we identified an optimal reflection time for composing short opinion comments. In the second study, we introduced four distinct interface-based time nudges aimed at encouraging reflection near the optimal time. While these nudges may not improve the quality of deliberation, they effectively prolonged reflection periods. Additionally, we observed mixed effects on users' experience, influenced by the nature of the time nudges. Our findings suggest that reflection time is crucial, particularly for users who typically deliberate below the optimal reflection threshold.