This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about cookies.

Hypothesis

Find a hypothesis, data, and a CHI community

Changes at "Operationalizing and Measuring online democratic deliberation with hybrid methods and open participation."

Compare view mode:
HTML view mode:

Body

  • -["
    Context
    Skeptics of deliberative democracy question the practical viability of deliberative democracy: its ideals have been criticized as utopian and its forums have been dismissed as mere experiments, with no hope of being effectively institutionalized.
    Hypothesis
    Does the digital participation process increase trust in democracy?
    Collaboration
    Creating an open space with list and definition of indicators / Metrics - Custom Fields proposals . Hierachización ---> activating the metadeicim community - governance - next open an hibrid debate politco - diseño y participant Experience.
    Related data
    We use data from the Conference on the Future of Europe online participation platform, which is based on Decidim
    Indicators
    Deliberation, Relevance, Width / Depth
    Evaluation
    Contributors will prioritze indicators (MVP), propose new criterio and indicators. Nomenclature, enrich definition of indicators, operationalization (depth level is not enough)
    "]
  • +["
    Context
    Skeptics of deliberative democracy question the practical viability of deliberative democracy: its ideals have been criticized as utopian and its forums have been dismissed as mere experiments, with no hope of being effectively institutionalized. On the other hand avoid participatory washing at the insititutional level.
    Hypothesis
    Does the digital participation process increase trust in democracy?
    Collaboration
    Creating an open space with list and definition of indicators / Metrics - Custom Fields proposals . Hierachización ---> activating the metadeicim community - governance - next open an hibrid debate politco - diseño y participant Experience.
    Related data
    We use data from the Conference on the Future of Europe online participation platform, which is based on Decidim
    Indicators
    Deliberation, Relevance, Width / Depth
    Evaluation
    Contributors will prioritze indicators (MVP), propose new criterio and indicators. Nomenclature, enrich definition of indicators, operationalization (depth level is not enough)
    "]
  • -["<xml><dl class=\"decidim_awesome-custom_fields\" data-generator=\"decidim_awesome\" data-version=\"0.7.2\"><dt name=\"textarea-1635451235315\">Context</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451235315\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Skeptics of deliberative democracy question the practical viability of deliberative democracy: its ideals have been criticized as utopian and its forums have been dismissed as mere experiments, with no hope of being effectively institutionalized.</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451312580\">Hypothesis</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451312580\" name=\"text\"><div>Does the digital participation process increase trust in democracy?</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451372562\">Collaboration</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451372562\" name=\"text\"><div>Creating an open space with list and definition of indicators / Metrics - Custom Fields proposals . Hierachización ---&amp;amp;gt; activating the metadeicim community - governance - next open an hibrid debate politco - diseño y participant Experience.</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451427513\">Related data</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451427513\" name=\"text\"><div>We use data from the Conference on the Future of Europe online participation platform, which is based on Decidim</div></dd><dt name=\"textarea-1635451479530\">Indicators</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451479530\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Deliberation, Relevance, Width / Depth</div></dd><dt name=\"textarea-1635451518445\">Evaluation</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451518445\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Contributors will prioritze indicators (MVP), propose new criterio and indicators. Nomenclature, enrich definition of indicators, operationalization (depth level is not enough)</div></dd></dl></xml>"]
  • +["<xml><dl class=\"decidim_awesome-custom_fields\" data-generator=\"decidim_awesome\" data-version=\"0.7.2\"><dt name=\"textarea-1635451235315\">Context</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451235315\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Skeptics of deliberative democracy question the practical viability of deliberative democracy: its ideals have been criticized as utopian and its forums have been dismissed as mere experiments, with no hope of being effectively institutionalized. On the other hand avoid participatory washing at the insititutional level.</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451312580\">Hypothesis</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451312580\" name=\"text\"><div>Does the digital participation process increase trust in democracy?</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451372562\">Collaboration</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451372562\" name=\"text\"><div>Creating an open space with list and definition of indicators / Metrics - Custom Fields proposals . Hierachización ---&amp;amp;amp;gt; activating the metadeicim community - governance - next open an hibrid debate politco - diseño y participant Experience.</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451427513\">Related data</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451427513\" name=\"text\"><div>We use data from the Conference on the Future of Europe online participation platform, which is based on Decidim</div></dd><dt name=\"textarea-1635451479530\">Indicators</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451479530\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Deliberation, Relevance, Width / Depth</div></dd><dt name=\"textarea-1635451518445\">Evaluation</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451518445\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Contributors will prioritze indicators (MVP), propose new criterio and indicators. Nomenclature, enrich definition of indicators, operationalization (depth level is not enough)</div></dd></dl></xml>"]
Deletions
  • -["
    Context
    Skeptics of deliberative democracy question the practical viability of deliberative democracy: its ideals have been criticized as utopian and its forums have been dismissed as mere experiments, with no hope of being effectively institutionalized.
    Hypothesis
    Does the digital participation process increase trust in democracy?
    Collaboration
    Creating an open space with list and definition of indicators / Metrics - Custom Fields proposals . Hierachización ---&amp;gt; activating the metadeicim community - governance - next open an hibrid debate politco - diseño y participant Experience.
    Related data
    We use data from the Conference on the Future of Europe online participation platform, which is based on Decidim
    Indicators
    Deliberation, Relevance, Width / Depth
    Evaluation
    Contributors will prioritze indicators (MVP), propose new criterio and indicators. Nomenclature, enrich definition of indicators, operationalization (depth level is not enough)
    "]
Additions
  • +["
    Context
    Skeptics of deliberative democracy question the practical viability of deliberative democracy: its ideals have been criticized as utopian and its forums have been dismissed as mere experiments, with no hope of being effectively institutionalized. On the other hand avoid participatory washing at the insititutional level.
    Hypothesis
    Does the digital participation process increase trust in democracy?
    Collaboration
    Creating an open space with list and definition of indicators / Metrics - Custom Fields proposals . Hierachización ---&amp;amp;gt; activating the metadeicim community - governance - next open an hibrid debate politco - diseño y participant Experience.
    Related data
    We use data from the Conference on the Future of Europe online participation platform, which is based on Decidim
    Indicators
    Deliberation, Relevance, Width / Depth
    Evaluation
    Contributors will prioritze indicators (MVP), propose new criterio and indicators. Nomenclature, enrich definition of indicators, operationalization (depth level is not enough)
    "]
Deletions
  • -["<xml><dl class=\"decidim_awesome-custom_fields\" data-generator=\"decidim_awesome\" data-version=\"0.7.2\"><dt name=\"textarea-1635451235315\">Context</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451235315\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Skeptics of deliberative democracy question the practical viability of deliberative democracy: its ideals have been criticized as utopian and its forums have been dismissed as mere experiments, with no hope of being effectively institutionalized.</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451312580\">Hypothesis</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451312580\" name=\"text\"><div>Does the digital participation process increase trust in democracy?</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451372562\">Collaboration</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451372562\" name=\"text\"><div>Creating an open space with list and definition of indicators / Metrics - Custom Fields proposals . Hierachización ---&amp;amp;gt; activating the metadeicim community - governance - next open an hibrid debate politco - diseño y participant Experience.</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451427513\">Related data</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451427513\" name=\"text\"><div>We use data from the Conference on the Future of Europe online participation platform, which is based on Decidim</div></dd><dt name=\"textarea-1635451479530\">Indicators</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451479530\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Deliberation, Relevance, Width / Depth</div></dd><dt name=\"textarea-1635451518445\">Evaluation</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451518445\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Contributors will prioritze indicators (MVP), propose new criterio and indicators. Nomenclature, enrich definition of indicators, operationalization (depth level is not enough)</div></dd></dl></xml>"]
Additions
  • +["<xml><dl class=\"decidim_awesome-custom_fields\" data-generator=\"decidim_awesome\" data-version=\"0.7.2\"><dt name=\"textarea-1635451235315\">Context</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451235315\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Skeptics of deliberative democracy question the practical viability of deliberative democracy: its ideals have been criticized as utopian and its forums have been dismissed as mere experiments, with no hope of being effectively institutionalized. On the other hand avoid participatory washing at the insititutional level.</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451312580\">Hypothesis</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451312580\" name=\"text\"><div>Does the digital participation process increase trust in democracy?</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451372562\">Collaboration</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451372562\" name=\"text\"><div>Creating an open space with list and definition of indicators / Metrics - Custom Fields proposals . Hierachización ---&amp;amp;amp;gt; activating the metadeicim community - governance - next open an hibrid debate politco - diseño y participant Experience.</div></dd><dt name=\"text-1635451427513\">Related data</dt><dd id=\"text-1635451427513\" name=\"text\"><div>We use data from the Conference on the Future of Europe online participation platform, which is based on Decidim</div></dd><dt name=\"textarea-1635451479530\">Indicators</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451479530\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Deliberation, Relevance, Width / Depth</div></dd><dt name=\"textarea-1635451518445\">Evaluation</dt><dd id=\"textarea-1635451518445\" name=\"textarea\"><div>Contributors will prioritze indicators (MVP), propose new criterio and indicators. Nomenclature, enrich definition of indicators, operationalization (depth level is not enough)</div></dd></dl></xml>"]
Version number 2 out of 2 Show all versions Go back to proposal
Version author
Avatar: Olivier Schulbaum Olivier Schulbaum
Version created at 23/11/2021 16:06