累积审议的概念:将系统方法与更健康的规范性联系起来,评估在线讨论中意见的形成

IF 2.8 2区 管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology Pub Date : 2023-11-10 DOI:10.1002/asi.24850
Svetlana S. Bodrunova
{"title":"累积审议的概念:将系统方法与更健康的规范性联系起来,评估在线讨论中意见的形成","authors":"Svetlana S. Bodrunova","doi":"10.1002/asi.24850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Online opinion formation has received much scholarly attention since the mass proliferation of social networks. Inter alia, online opinions have been viewed as a new part of public deliberation. However, the pre-Internet era's vision on deliberation imposes extremely high demands on users as deliberators. We argue that opinion formation online neither pursues the goals nor follows the rules of institutionalized consensus-oriented round-table deliberative processes. Moreover, the growing academic evidence shows that opinion formation online is predominantly cumulative, not deliberative in nature. Thus, we introduce the concept of cumulative deliberation as an alternative and addition to classic institutional deliberation and argue that it describes opinion formation online more precisely. Importantly, it allows for two crucial additions to the deliberation theory, which are the use of systemic approaches to measuring and predicting public opinion and new normativity that sees a user as an initially neutral discussion unit. It also allows for healthier distinction between “natural” user communication and intentional counter-deliberative distortions in online communication, like computational propaganda or cyberbullying. We end up with suggesting a research agenda on cumulative deliberation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48810,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology","volume":"75 10","pages":"1202-1215"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The concept of cumulative deliberation: Linking systemic approaches to healthier normativity in assessing opinion formation in online discussions\",\"authors\":\"Svetlana S. Bodrunova\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/asi.24850\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Online opinion formation has received much scholarly attention since the mass proliferation of social networks. Inter alia, online opinions have been viewed as a new part of public deliberation. However, the pre-Internet era's vision on deliberation imposes extremely high demands on users as deliberators. We argue that opinion formation online neither pursues the goals nor follows the rules of institutionalized consensus-oriented round-table deliberative processes. Moreover, the growing academic evidence shows that opinion formation online is predominantly cumulative, not deliberative in nature. Thus, we introduce the concept of cumulative deliberation as an alternative and addition to classic institutional deliberation and argue that it describes opinion formation online more precisely. Importantly, it allows for two crucial additions to the deliberation theory, which are the use of systemic approaches to measuring and predicting public opinion and new normativity that sees a user as an initially neutral discussion unit. It also allows for healthier distinction between “natural” user communication and intentional counter-deliberative distortions in online communication, like computational propaganda or cyberbullying. We end up with suggesting a research agenda on cumulative deliberation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology\",\"volume\":\"75 10\",\"pages\":\"1202-1215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.24850\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.24850","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自社交网络大规模普及以来,网络舆论的形成受到了学术界的广泛关注。其中,网络舆论被视为公共审议的新组成部分。然而,前互联网时代的商议视野对作为商议者的用户提出了极高的要求。我们认为,网络舆论的形成既不追求以共识为导向的制度化圆桌商议过程的目标,也不遵循其规则。此外,越来越多的学术证据表明,网络舆论的形成主要是累积性的,而非审议性的。因此,我们引入了 "累积性商议 "这一概念,作为对经典制度性商议的替代和补充,并认为它能更准确地描述网络舆论的形成。重要的是,它允许对商议理论进行两个关键性的补充,即使用系统方法来衡量和预测公众舆论,以及将用户视为初始中立讨论单位的新规范性。它还能更健康地区分 "自然的 "用户交流和网络交流中有意的反审议扭曲,如计算宣传或网络欺凌。最后,我们提出了关于累积审议的研究议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The concept of cumulative deliberation: Linking systemic approaches to healthier normativity in assessing opinion formation in online discussions

Online opinion formation has received much scholarly attention since the mass proliferation of social networks. Inter alia, online opinions have been viewed as a new part of public deliberation. However, the pre-Internet era's vision on deliberation imposes extremely high demands on users as deliberators. We argue that opinion formation online neither pursues the goals nor follows the rules of institutionalized consensus-oriented round-table deliberative processes. Moreover, the growing academic evidence shows that opinion formation online is predominantly cumulative, not deliberative in nature. Thus, we introduce the concept of cumulative deliberation as an alternative and addition to classic institutional deliberation and argue that it describes opinion formation online more precisely. Importantly, it allows for two crucial additions to the deliberation theory, which are the use of systemic approaches to measuring and predicting public opinion and new normativity that sees a user as an initially neutral discussion unit. It also allows for healthier distinction between “natural” user communication and intentional counter-deliberative distortions in online communication, like computational propaganda or cyberbullying. We end up with suggesting a research agenda on cumulative deliberation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
8.60%
发文量
115
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) is a leading international forum for peer-reviewed research in information science. For more than half a century, JASIST has provided intellectual leadership by publishing original research that focuses on the production, discovery, recording, storage, representation, retrieval, presentation, manipulation, dissemination, use, and evaluation of information and on the tools and techniques associated with these processes. The Journal welcomes rigorous work of an empirical, experimental, ethnographic, conceptual, historical, socio-technical, policy-analytic, or critical-theoretical nature. JASIST also commissions in-depth review articles (“Advances in Information Science”) and reviews of print and other media.
期刊最新文献
Cover Image Issue Information Cover Image Issue Information Embodied and dialogical basis for understanding humans with information: A sustainable view
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1