Mini-publics and Public Opinion: Two Survey-Based Experiments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In intense forms of public consultations, select groups of citizens, called mini-publics, are given a large amount of information and then asked to deliberate on policy directions and make recommendations. Government officials may refuse to act upon these recommendations, unless they are convinced that the recommendations have wider support in the populace. This article presents the results of two survey-based experiments that assess the impact of mini-publics on the opinions expressed by random digit dialing samples of the general public. The survey-based experiments were conducted in 2013 (n = 400) and in 2014 (n = 400). Being informed about the mini-publics affected support for some policies, but not others. In both studies, respondents who were informed about the mini-publics reported higher levels of political efficacy compared to the condition where respondents were not informed about the mini-public. Hearing about these mini-publics helps to generate a sense of legitimacy in the political system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it