Presentation from Panel on Recent Perspectives on Online Deliberation, 67th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, San Diego, May 26, 2017

1. Edited, Transcribed, and Annotated Dialogue:
Transforming Face to Face Discussion into
Online Deliberation
Todd Davies
Symbolic Systems Program &
Center for the Study of Language and
Information
Stanford University
ICA, San Diego
May 26, 2017

2. First use of term in Google Ngram:
Blackshaw, L., & Fischhoff, B. (1988). Decision making in online
searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,
39(6), 369.

3. Examples of OD research
Community planning processes often leave out key stakeholders because they rely on face to face
meetings that not everyone can make – need online tools for joining the deliberation.
Davies, T., Sywulka, B., Saffold, R., & Jhaveri, R. (2002). Community democracy online: A preliminary report from
East Palo Alto. American Political Science Association (Boston)
Different main deliberation methods all lead to substantial changes in knowledge and/or attitudes over
and above background information
Carman, K. L., et al. (2015). Effectiveness of public deliberation methods for gathering input on issues in
healthcare: Results from a randomized trial. Social Science & Medicine, 133, 11-20..
Online deliberation methods do not appear to negatively affect equality of participation relative to face
to face methods, except for a small effect on racial disparity (African-American versus White).
Showers, E., Tindall, N., & Davies, T. (2015, August). Equality of Participation Online Versus Face to Face:
Condensed Analysis of the Community Forum Deliberative Methods Demonstration. In International Conference
on Electronic Participation (pp. 53-67). Springer International Publishing.
Content analysis of video recordings shows range of inter-coder reliabilities for a framework developed
in the context of face-to-face activist meetings in Europe.
Bolotin, J. et al. (forthcoming). Meeting Democracy Redux: Content Analysis of General Assembly Video
Recordings from the Movement. In 2017 International Conference on Deliberation and Decision Making:
Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Civic Tech. Springer International Publishing.

8. dialogue

9. Synchronous F2F dialogue is…
easier for contributors to the dialogue
a richer modality for expression

10. Face to face dialogue is…
more motivating for participants than online
forums (Showers, Tindall, & Davies 2015)
more natural for most people than any other
medium

11. Asynchronous text is…
preferred by many users after it is produced
easier to search and browse
more citable
better for deep comprehension (Wolf, 2008)

12. Transcription is becoming…
cheaper (with help from automation)
legally or socially expected for accessibility

13. Formally publishing a dialogue…
makes it available to a wider and time-unlimited
audience
facilitates citation in follow-on literature

14. Ex-post editing and annotation…
provides more time for deliberative care
allows for the insertion of additional evidence
and references

17. Edited, Transcribed, and Annotated
Dialogue: Elements
Edits
• transcription error corrections
• copy edits
• focus deletions
Annotations
• (inline) additions: elaborations, clarifications, factual corrections,
takebacks
• footnotes, references, asides, additional information
Transcriptions
• spoken words
• audiovisual aids
• speaker identifications and affiliations
• setting details

18. Edited, Transcribed, and Annotated
Dialogue: Goals
Each person (contributor, observer, or user)
interacts with the material in their preferred
modality
No loss of record
Contributors are allowed to improve upon their
original utterances
Contributors are accountable for what they claim

19. Edited, Transcribed, and Annotated
Dialogue: Research Questions
Do pre- and post-(edited, annotated) versions
differ on deliberative quality?
Do users find ETAD materials easy to interact
with?
What procedures for ETAD lead to the best
outcomes (quality, ease of use, etc.)?