Public Policy Center, University of Nebraska
Prompting Deliberation about Nanotechnology: Information, Instruction, and Discussion Effects on Individual Engagement and Knowledge
Date of this Version
PytlikZillig, Lisa M.; Hutchens, Myiah J.; Muhlberger, Peter; and Tomkins, Alan J. (2017) "Prompting Deliberation about Nanotechnology: Information, Instruction, and Discussion Effects on Individual Engagement and Knowledge," Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 13 : Iss. 2 , Article 2.
Available at: https://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol13/iss2/art2
Deliberative (and educational) theories typically predict knowledge gains will be enhanced by information structure and discussion. In two studies, we experimentally manipulated key features of deliberative public engagement (information, instructions, and discussion) and measured impacts on cognitive-affective engagement and knowledge about nanotechnology. We also examined the direct and moderating impacts of individual differences in need for cognition and gender. Findings indicated little impact of information (organized by topic or by pro-con relevance). Instructions (prompts to think critically) decreased engagement in Study 1, and increased it in Study 2, but did not impact postknowledge. Group discussion had strong positive benefits for self-reported cognitive-affective engagement across studies. Also, for some types of engagement, effects were more positive for women than men. When predicting knowledge, there also was some evidence that discussion was more positive for women than men. Finally, need for cognition positively predicted engagement and knowledge gains, but rarely moderated the experimental effects. Given these mixed results, future research should continue to test theoretical assumptions about the effects of specific deliberative design features.
Administrative Law Commons, Counseling Commons, Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, Family Law Commons, Juvenile Law Commons, Law and Psychology Commons, Law and Society Commons, Psychology Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Public Deliberation. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Public Deliberation by an authorized editor of Public Deliberation.