Dominik Hangartner is a Ph.D. student at the University of Berne. His research focuses on quantitative methodology with an emphasis on causal inference from observational data. He has published on the (non-)monetary benefits of social networks (Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 2005 and European Sociological Review 2006), the correlation between body height and social stratification (Soziale Welt 2006) and the estimation of hazard risk for different types of car drivers (Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, forthcoming).
Mixing Habermas with Bayes: Methodological and Theoretical Advances in the Study of Deliberation
Article first published online: 20 JAN 2011
2007 The Swiss Political Science Review
Swiss Political Science Review
Volume 13, Issue 4, pages 607–644, Winter 2007
How to Cite
Hangartner, D., Bächtiger, A., Grünenfelder, R. and Steenbergen, M. R. (2007), Mixing Habermas with Bayes: Methodological and Theoretical Advances in the Study of Deliberation. Swiss Political Science Review, 13: 607–644. doi: 10.1002/j.1662-6370.2007.tb00091.x
- Issue published online: 20 JAN 2011
- Article first published online: 20 JAN 2011
- Bayesian Multi-level Models;
- Antecedents of Deliberation;
- Political Institutions;
- Political Psychology;
- Party Deliberation
Two challenges stand out in the study of deliberation: the development of appropriate methodological tools and the development of more unified analytical frameworks. On the one hand, analysing deliberative processes is demanding and time-consuming; hence we tend to have only few and non-randomly selected cases at the group or context level. In addition, the real world of deliberation presents us with a complex matrix of nested, cross-classified, and repeated speakers. This article shows that Bayesian multi-level modelling provides an elegant way to tackle these methodological problems. On the other hand, we attempt to enrich comparative institutionalism with individual characteristics and psychologically relevant variables (such as group composition). Focusing on Swiss and German parliamentary debates we show that institutional factors - in particular, consensus systems -, the gender composition of committees and plenary sessions, and age matter for the quality of deliberation. Furthermore, we also show that partisan affiliation - government or opposition status of MPs - affects deliberative quality and can refine institutional arguments. We conclude that a multi-level approach to deliberation focusing on contextual and actor-related characteristics and using Bayesian hierarchical modelling paves the way toward a more advanced understanding - and methodological handling - of deliberative processes.