Utilizing “On Tap” Experts in Deliberative Forums: Implications for Design

References

• Aakhus, M. (2001). Technocratic and design stances toward communication expertise: How GDSS facilitators understand their work. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 29, 341–371. doi:10.1080/00909880128113
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aakhus, M. (2007). Communication as design. Communication Monographs, 74, 112–117. doi:10.1080/03637750701196383
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aakhus, M. (2011). Crafting interactivity for stakeholder engagement: Transforming assumptions about communication in science and policy. Health Physics, 101, 532–535. doi:10.1097/HP.0b013e318222ede0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aakhus, M., & Jackson, S. (2005). Technology, interaction, and design. In K. Fitch & R. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 411–436). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Aakhus, M., & Laureij, L. V. (2012). Activity, materiality, and creative struggle in the communicative constitution of organizing: Two cases of communication design practice. Language and Dialogue, 2, 41–59. doi:10.1075/ld.2.1.03aak
   Google Scholar
• Aakhus, M., & Rumsey, E. (2010). Crafting supportive communication online: A communication design analysis of conflict in an online support group. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 38, 65–84. doi:10.1080/00909880903483581
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abelson, J., Lomas, J., Eyles, J., Birch, S., & Veentra, G. (1995). Does the community want devolved authority? Results of deliberative polling in Ontario. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 153, 403–413.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucchi, M. (2009). Beyond technocracy: Science, politics and citizens. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, J., Harrison, C., & Filius, P. (1998). Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environment and Planning A, 30, 1445–1460. doi:10.1068/a301445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carcasson, M. (2012). The cycle of deliberative inquiry: Re-conceptualizing the work of public deliberation. In J. Goodwin (Ed.), Between scientists & citizens: Proceedings of a conference at Iowa State University (pp. 85–98). Ames, IA: Great Plains Society for the Study of Argumentation.
   Google Scholar
• Carcasson, M., & Sprain, L. (2010). Key aspects of the deliberative democracy movement. Public Sector Digest. Retrieved from http://www.publicsectordigest.com
   Google Scholar
• Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2002). The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32, 235–296. doi:10.1177/0306312702032002003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2008). Rethinking expertise. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crosby, N., & Nethercutt, D. (2005). Citizens juries: Creating a trustworthy voice of the people. In J. Gastil & P. Levine (Eds.), The deliberative democracy handbook (pp. 111–119). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, S. R. (2008). Constructing communication: Talking to scientists about talking to the public. Science Communication, 29, 413–434. doi:10.1177/1075547008316222
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, G., & Burgess, J. (2004). Challenging the ‘view from nowhere’: Citizen reflections on specialist expertise in a deliberative process. Health & Place, 10, 349–361. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2004.08.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. S. (2010). Foundations and frontiers of deliberative governance. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fahnestock, J. (1986). Accommodating science: The rhetoric life of scientific facts. Written Communication, 3, 275–296. doi:10.1177/0741088386003003001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, experts, and the environment: The politics of local knowledge. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fishkin, J. (2009). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gastil, J. (2008). Political communication and deliberation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Gastil, J., & Black, L. W. (2008). Public deliberation as the organizing principle of political communication research. Journal of Public Deliberation, 4, article 3.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, J. (2011). Accounting for the appeal to the authority of experts. Argumentation, 25, 285–296. doi:10.1007/s10503-011-9219-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagendijk, R., & Irwin, A. (2006). Public deliberation and governance: Engaging with science and technology in contemporary Europe. Minerva, 44, 167–184. doi:10.1007/s11024-006-0012-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartelius, E. J. (2010). The rhetoric of expertise. Boulder: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hendriks, C. M. (2005). Consensus conferences and planning cells: Lay citizen deliberation. In J. Gastil & P. Levine (Eds.), The deliberative democracy handbook (pp. 80–110). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (2002). Stealth democracy: Americans' beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knobloch, K., Gastil, J., Reedy, J., & Walsh, K. C. (2013). Did they deliberate? Applying an evaluative model of democratic deliberation to the Oregon Citizens’ Initiative Review. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41, 105–125. doi:10.1080/00909882.2012.760746
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacLean, S., & Burgess, M. M. (2010). In the public interest: Assessing expert and stakeholder influence in public deliberation about biobanks. Public Understanding of Science, 19, 486–496. doi:10.1177/0963662509335410
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahdik, Z. P., & Keith, W. M. (2011). Expertise as argument: Authority, democracy, and problem-solving. Argumentation, 25, 371–384. doi:10.1007/s10503-011-9221-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owens, S. (2011). ‘Engaging the public’: Information and deliberation in environmental policy. Environment and Planning A, 32, 1141–1148. doi:10.1068/a3330
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patrosky, H. (2006). Success through failure: The paradox of design. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Petts, J., & Brooks, C. (2006). Expert conceptualizations of the role of lay knowledge in environmental decisionmaking: Challenges for deliberative democracy. Environment and Planning A, 38, 1045–1059. doi:10.1068/a37373
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priest, S. H. (Ed.). (2010). Encyclopedia of science and technology communication (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, D. F. (2008). Deliberative democratic theory and empirical political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 497–520. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.081306.070555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yankelovich, D. (1991). Coming to public judgment: Making democracy work in a complex world. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
   Google Scholar