Psychology
Deliberative Polling and the Quality of Public Opinion
Quick fact
In a classic deliberative poll on the issue of Britain's monarchy, the percentage of participants favoring keeping the monarchy fell from 73% to 65% after deliberation (British 1994 National Deliberative Poll). This shows that informed discussion can alter even deeply held views.
Why this is interesting
We trust polls to tell us what the public wants. But what if the public could actually pause, learn the facts, and talk to each other? Would their answers change?
Read the full explanation
Understanding Deliberative Polling and the Quality of Public Opinion
Most polls capture snap judgments: people answer quickly, often without accurate information, and under the influence of media soundbites. Deliberative Polling is a structured process that attempts to measure what the public would think if it were truly informed and engaged with an issue. Here's how it works: 1. A random, representative sample of citizens is selected. 2. Participants are given balanced briefing materials, presenting arguments for and against different policy options. 3. They are then divided into small groups with trained moderators to discuss the issues. 4. Participants can also question experts and policymakers with opposing viewpoints. 5. After the deliberation, participants fill out the same questionnaire they took initially. The results show how their opinions evolved after gaining information and hearing different perspectives. The key is not to convince people to hold a particular view, but to see how their views change when they have the chance to think more deeply—a stark contrast to the fleeting, often misinformed opinions captured by traditional polls.
A deeper explanation
The mechanism behind Deliberative Polling is rooted in the theory of deliberative democracy, which holds that legitimate public opinion comes not from aggregating pre-existing, often uninformed preferences, but from reasoned, public discussion. The method is designed to correct for two known flaws of ordinary polling: 1) Information bias – most people lack time or motivation to become fully informed on complex issues; 2) Fragmentation – people rarely encounter and seriously weigh competing arguments. By providing balanced, high-quality information and ensuring respectful, moderated dialogue, deliberative polling creates the conditions for transformative opinion change. Critically, the sample remains representative, so the resulting opinions reflect what the whole public would think under ideal conditions, not just a self-selected group of activists. This offers a more democratic and epistemically sound basis for policy decisions, but it also raises challenges: are the results binding? How can deliberative mini-publics represent the un-deliberating mass public? Nevertheless, deliberative polling remains a powerful tool for improving democratic deliberation and revealing the quality of public opinion, not just its quantity.