A foot in the door? The impact of a real-world deliberative process on citizens' attitudes toward deliberative mini-publics (DMPs).
- 1University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
- 2Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract
This study examines whether exposure to a deliberative mini-public (DMP) shapes citizens' attitudes toward this specific form of democratic innovation. Using panel surveys conducted before and after Luxembourg's 2022 Climate Assembly (Klima-Biergerrot, KBR), we compare three groups: participants (direct exposure), informed non-participants (indirect exposure), and uninformed non-participants (no exposure). Our causal mediation analyses reveal a "foot-in-the-door" effect: when political authorities organize a national DMP, it boosts public support for future DMPs and increases willingness to participate. This effect is powerful when coupled with a positive evaluation of the outcomes and, to a lesser extent, of the process itself. While participants show the greatest attitudinal shift, informed non-participants also exhibit a weaker but similar trend. Overall, organizing a national DMP helps familiarize citizens with deliberative practices and strengthens their legitimacy, thereby contributing to the "deliberative wave" becoming eventually a lasting democratic trend rather than a short-lived experiment.
Related
- Public attitudes toward access to public health services for non-citizens in Türkiye
- Impact of Culturally Competent Nutrition Education on Healthy Habit Attitudes in Refugee and Immigrant Children
- Vocabulaire pour les marchés publics : une nomenclature européenne
- Exploring the feasibility, acceptability and impact of genomic newborn screening for rare diseases in England: A study protocol for the Generation Study - Process and Impact Evaluation (Version 2)
- Impact of Process Parameters on the Quality Attributes of High-Dose Metformin Hydrochloride Film-Coated Tablets
BibTeX
@article{paulis2026foot,
title = {{A foot in the door? The impact of a real-world deliberative process on citizens' attitudes toward deliberative mini-publics (DMPs).}},
author = {Emilien Paulis and Davide Vittori and Jean-Benoit Pilet and Lisa Verhasselt and Sebastien Rojon and Raphaël Kies},
journal = {Humanities \& social sciences communications},
year = {2026},
month = aug,
doi = {10.1057/s41599-026-08654-2},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42928733},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - A foot in the door? The impact of a real-world deliberative process on citizens' attitudes toward deliberative mini-publics (DMPs).
AU - Emilien Paulis
AU - Davide Vittori
AU - Jean-Benoit Pilet
AU - Lisa Verhasselt
AU - Sebastien Rojon
AU - Raphaël Kies
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/08/11
JO - Humanities & social sciences communications
DO - 10.1057/s41599-026-08654-2
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42928733
AB - This study examines whether exposure to a deliberative mini-public (DMP) shapes citizens' attitudes toward this specific form of democratic innovation. Using panel surveys conducted before and after Luxembourg's 2022 Climate Assembly (Klima-Biergerrot, KBR), we compare three groups: participants (direct exposure), informed non-participants (indirect exposure), and uninformed non-participants (no exposure). Our causal mediation analyses reveal a "foot-in-the-door" effect: when political authorities organize a national DMP, it boosts public support for future DMPs and increases willingness to participate. This effect is powerful when coupled with a positive evaluation of the outcomes and, to a lesser extent, of the process itself. While participants show the greatest attitudinal shift, informed non-participants also exhibit a weaker but similar trend. Overall, organizing a national DMP helps familiarize citizens with deliberative practices and strengthens their legitimacy, thereby contributing to the "deliberative wave" becoming eventually a lasting democratic trend rather than a short-lived experiment.
SN - 2662-9992
ER -