PARTICIPANT INFORMATION PAGE
for
‘DIGITAL FORUMS
FOR
POLICY MAKING’
-
an empirical study
This page provides all the information you need as a to know about participating
in this study.
Complete THIS survey to begin your participation!
Aims of the Study:
To test the use of a digital forum as a space for discussing and proposing policy, and measure the ease of use, user participation, perceived quality of democracy, and consensus-building capacity of the test.
“Why should I participate?”
STEP 1: SURVEY
STEP 2: DISCUSSION EXERCISE
Proposal Stage
-
Open 7 days
Voting
Stage
-
Open 24 hours
STEP 3: FEEDBACK
Participation:
Your participation involves 3 STEPS:
Step 1 is an ONLINE SURVEY.
You will be asked for information to help the researcher analyze data, as well your contact details and consent.
Step 2 is a DISCUSSION EXERCISE.
A simulated decision-making process where you will discuss and propose policy regarding a ‘Challenge’.
Step 3 is a FEEDBACK QUESTIONNAIRE.
You will be contacted via the email you provide in the SURVEY about the dates for the DISCUSSION EXERCISE.
You will be given 10 shares for completing Step 2 and 5 additional shares for completing Step 3.
Discussion Exercise
The discussion exercise is the main body of this study. You and other participants are tasked to propose and discuss policy solutions to a ‘Challenge’ and vote on the proposals, thus simulating a decision-making process
It ill begin on the 29th of January 2024.
It has 2 STAGES.
1) The PROPOSAL STAGE, where you and other participants will have 7 DAYS to engage with the ‘Challenge’ and each others’ proposals online.
2) The VOTING STAGE, where you and other participants will have 24 HOURS to cast your vote for the best policy between the three most popular proposals.
Both stages of the Discussion Exercise will be hosted on a private community on Reddit.
You will be provided with an pseudonymous account by the researcher for privacy.
A link to the community and details to your account will be sent to the contact email you provide in the Survey.
5 TASKS
What to do in the
Discussion Exercise
(this is what the forum will look like)
1. Post proposals
2. Comment on proposals
3. Upvote proposals
4. Reply to comments
5. Edit proposals
Your participation in the Discussion Exercise should look something like this:
- Read proposals. Ask yourself: Do I think this would be a good policy? If YES...
- Upvote! Once the Proposal Stage closes you will vote on the three most upvoted posts, so upvote those posts you’d like to see in the Voting Stage.
- Write and post your own policy proposal. Can you think of any ways you’ve seen this Challenge or similar issues tackled? Can you think of a good way to address the problem? Post it and see if with others’ input you can come up with good policy!
- Discuss! Respond to comments on your Post. Reply to others’ posts or comments on other posts. Collaborate with your peers to achieve the best policy!
- Edit your proposal if your peers suggest good additions. Remember, the aim of the exercise is to collectively come up with the best policy solution.
What is a POLICY PROPOSAL?
A brief outline of a suggested course of action to address a specific issue or problem.
How do you write one?
Answer these three questions in your proposal:
- WHAT is your suggested course of action? (Objectives, desired outcome)
- HOW would you take that course of action? (Changes to be implemented)
- WHY is this the right course of action? (Pros and Cons)
The ‘Challenge’
You don’t have to have preference! You will be randomly assigned to a group if you don’t.
Each participant will be assigned to a group of their preference.
Each group is assigned a different ‘Challenge’ to discuss and propose policy to.
GROUP A
GROUP C
GROUP B
How should digital platforms implement a legal ‘due process’?
How should digital platforms regulate their users’ speech?
How should democracies tackle low voter turnout among young people?
‘CHALLENGE’
There is currently no effective means to appeal or settle a dispute between users, and between users and the digital platform, on major social media platforms. These platforms are increasingly necessary for some peoples’ livelihoods. Outside of aappealing to the platform creators, there is currently no claimant or appeal system against defamation and ‘cancellation.
There are great content moderation expectations on large social media firms to limit false information, hate speech, and extremism on their platforms. The measures taken on some platforms have been criticized for being too extreme, too lax, or biased. As of yet, there is no consensus on how much and how speech should be regulated on social media.
Low voter turnout, a phenomenon increasingly present in democratic countries, is a sign of ill-health in democratic systems.
For example, in the UK:
Voters aged 18-24 present the lowest turnout among the age cohorts, where it is just above 50%. The UK average is 67.3%.
Problem
Some Context
1/ Make a digital jury system.
2/ Select users to weigh in on contested account bannings by randomly selecting non-contacts of the banned account.
3/Though this may clog the system and demand more human oversight, it presents an appeals system where the users have weight on the outcome and the system avoids internal corruption.
1/ Add ‘friction’ to social media that prevents rapid sharing of information
2/ Public posts take 1 hour to be made public after they are published.
3/ Disinformation and hate speech cannot spread in public forums as rapidly. This prevents snowballing of false information and hate parades.
1/ Make voting compulsory
2/ Impose a civil offence charge on non-voters.
3/ It may cause people to vote without being motivated, but it may drive people to become informed and will lead to more people voting.
Example Proposals
THANK YOU!
You can access the Survey (Step 1) and begin your participation by clicking this LINK or scanning this code:
PRIVACY
All your personal information will be kept private. Only the researcher will be able to access the data and to associate your data with yourself.
RESEARCHER CONTACT
Please contact the researcher if you have any questions and issues:
Guillermo Pablos Murphy
2527948p@student.gla.ac.uk
CONSENT
Consent to participate in this research may be retracted at any time with no penalty. You may cease your participation at any time.
Please inform the researcher if you no longer plan to participate.