Deliberation, single-peakedness, and the possibility of meaningful democracy: evidence from deliberative polls

Journal of Politics 75 (1):80–95 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Majority cycling and related social choice paradoxes are often thought to threaten the meaningfulness of democracy. But deliberation can prevent majority cycles – not by inducing unanimity, which is unrealistic, but by bringing preferences closer to single-peakedness. We present the first empirical test of this hypothesis, using data from Deliberative Polls. Comparing preferences before and after deliberation, we find increases in proximity to single-peakedness. The increases are greater for lower versus higher salience issues and for individuals who seem to have deliberated more versus less effectively. They are not merely a byproduct of increased substantive agreement. Our results both refine and support the idea that deliberation, by increasing proximity to single-peakedness, provides an escape from the problem of majority cycling.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-06-29
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
214 ( #33,030 of 69,142 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
18 ( #41,989 of 69,142 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.