A deliberative poll is a method in which a random, representative sample is surveyed on an issue, given balanced briefing materials and facilitated discussion with access to experts, and then surveyed again. The change between the two surveys is meant to show what the public might think after informed deliberation. The method was originated by James Fishkin, and “Deliberative Polling” is his registered trademark.
Definition
Stanford’s Deliberative Democracy Lab describes Deliberative Polling as “an attempt to use public opinion research in a new and constructive way”.1 Its steps:1
- Baseline survey. “A random, representative sample is first polled on the targeted issues.”
- Briefing. “Carefully balanced briefing materials are sent to the participants.”
- Small groups. Participants develop questions in “small group discussions with trained moderators.”
- Plenary sessions. Participants question “competing experts and political leaders.”
- Post-survey. “After the deliberations, the sample is again asked the original questions.”
The Lab states that “Deliberative Polling® is a trade mark of James S. Fishkin,” with trademark fees supporting the Center’s research.1 On this site, “deliberative poll” in lower case refers to the general design; the capitalized name refers to Fishkin’s method.
Origin and history
The Deliberative Democracy Lab reports that Fishkin originated the concept in 1988 and that “Deliberative Polling® experiments have been conducted over 150 times in over 50 countries and jurisdictions”.1 The idea joins two traditions: the random sampling of modern survey research, which aims at representativeness, and the theory of deliberation, which holds that considered judgments differ from first reactions. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy summarizes the epistemic argument behind such designs: that democracy “is generally more reliable than alternative methods at producing political decisions,” with explanations including information sharing and cognitive diversity.2
How deliberative polls are used and assessed
A deliberative poll is suited to issues where first reactions may be poorly informed. Its main output is the pair of before-and-after survey results for the same people, which can be compared question by question.
Assessment raises methodological questions:
- Representativeness of attendees. A random sample is invited, but not everyone attends. Because the whole sample answered the baseline survey, attendees can be compared with non-attendees to check for differences, the same concern described under nonresponse bias.
- Cause of change. Changes could come from information, from discussion, or from the experience of being studied.
- Size and cost. In-person samples are small compared with national surveys and expensive to convene.
- Influence. A deliberative poll is advisory. Whether its results affect decisions depends on the commissioning body.
Hypothetical example. A city runs a deliberative poll on transit funding. At baseline, 40% of the sample supports a new bus tax. After briefing materials and a weekend of moderated discussion, 55% of the same people support it, and correct answers on a short knowledge quiz rise. A careful report would show both numbers, describe how attendees compared with non-attendees at baseline, and avoid presenting the 55% as what the whole city now thinks: it estimates what the city might think after similar deliberation.
Common confusions and neighboring terms
- Deliberative poll vs. ordinary poll. An ordinary poll measures opinions as they are; a deliberative poll measures them before and after deliberation.
- Deliberative poll vs. citizens’ assembly. Both use random selection and deliberation. An assembly usually produces collective recommendations; a deliberative poll produces individual survey responses.
- Deliberative poll vs. focus group. Focus groups are small, not randomly sampled, and not designed to estimate population views.
- Deliberative poll vs. opt-in sample. The deliberative poll starts from a random sample; opt-in participation does not.
How My Vote Forward uses the term
My Vote Forward does not run deliberative polls and does not describe its participant results as deliberative. Its participants are self-selected, and it records priorities and opinions without facilitated discussion. The framework’s Cases and Evaluation chapters treat deliberative methods as a benchmark: a well-run deliberative poll on the same subject could show how much participants’ views differ from considered public judgment.
What My Vote Forward can and cannot do here
My Vote Forward can explain the method and link to results published by those who run it. It cannot reproduce random selection or facilitated deliberation, and it does not use the trademarked name for its own activities.
Unresolved questions
- Could online deliberative designs keep the method’s representativeness while lowering its cost?
- How long do post-deliberation opinion changes last after participants return home?
- Should public bodies be required to respond to deliberative poll results they commission?
Sources
- Deliberative Democracy Lab, Stanford University, “What is Deliberative Polling?” deliberation.stanford.edu/what-deliberative-pollingr
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Democracy,” first published July 27, 2006, substantive revision June 18, 2024. plato.stanford.edu/entries/democracy
