Deliberative research and public dialogue
PSP has used deliberative research methods to explore a variety of science-based issues but the method applies to any complex area of public policy, including pensions, the provision of public services and health and safety.
Deliberative research is a technique that is central to exploring views on issues about which the public may have little or no knowledge or where they will be given information on which to reflect. Our early work, such as Biobank: A Question of Trust, used initial sessions to assess baseline attitudes and knowledge and our more recent work, such as Exploring public attitudes to climate change and the barriers and motivators to travel behaviour change, has also used early sessions to understand baseline behaviour. Subsequent sessions enable lay participants to learn about a topic, ask questions and discuss the issues with a variety of experts, including research scientists, policy makers and campaigning groups. Final sessions can be used to draw out recommendations from participants; which as an exercise often reveals deeply held values. The concluding session can also be used to revisit topics discussed in the initial session to explore how attitudes, as well as knowledge, have changed. The discussions are audio recorded and analysed in a qualitative social research framework.
The outcomes from deliberative research projects range from an understanding of attitudes towards a topic to an appreciation of the values that underpin these attitudes and both hopes and concerns for the future. This method can also identify the key pieces of information to enable deeper public engagement with the topic.
This research method has the added benefit of bringing scientists, policy-makers and practitioners together with the lay public. Not only does this mean that these ‘experts’ can see and hear first-hand from the public, they also get a chance to explain and refine their ideas in the face of direct feedback and challenge. Clients have told us that the insight gained by being present not only helps them to better understand reports, but also to be more confident in defending and using the findings.
PSP regularly uses this technique to provide science policy-makers with an understanding of the public’s perspectives on new and developing scientific research and technology. In designing this type of research, factors that need to be considered include how much participants might know about the subject; how best to stimulate discussion; the amount of information we might provide in advance; the nature of the conversations that are likely to take place; the size and composition of the groups; and, of course, the objectives and required outputs and the client’s role in the process.
- See examples of our deliberative research projects
Dialogue events
Dialogue exercises are not research, although they often include many of the same elements, the objectives are different. Dialogue exercises enable an exchange of views and seek to improve mutual understanding between those who actively take part, and to enable co-creation of research projects, products, services, policies or regulation, without the need for a long report on the public’s attitudes and values. This means that clients have to take an active part. Moreover, participants appreciate direct client involvement. There is often an initial level of cynicism that dialogue activities are “window-dressing” or “tick-box exercises”. Meeting the people who will use the information helps participants to feel that their views will have an influence.
Implicit in our approach to dialogue is an appreciation that different parties bring different sets of knowledge that are all useful in considering a specific issue. Subject experts may bring a detailed technical knowledge, whilst others can bring a broader perspective or analogies from other walks of life. When we run dialogue activities we make it clear that ‘experts’ are there to support conversations, not dominate them. They may be taking part to present a specific opinion or explain a course of action, but this will always be in the context of other options that will be offered by other ‘experts’.
Citizens’ juries or consensus conference are examples of dialogue events, but we tend not to offer off the shelf products. Each project is different, requiring different types of participants, who may be able to devote different amounts of time and will require more or less external stimulus depending on their familiarity with the topic.
It is important to remember that participants are likely to have become personally involved in the topic and it is now agreed good practice to provide feedback to participants, and to include them in dissemination activities where possible.
Examples of our deliberative research projects are: