In this article, we shed light on selected aspects of (non)deliberation drawing on a sample of 525 statements from the Slovenian Parliament made during discussions on the proposed Family Act between 2009 and 2011. Applying a conceptually refined Discourse Quality Index (DQI), we explore the following deliberative standards: participation of actors, argumentation of claims presented within the discussions, and (dis)respect. The results show a relatively low level of deliberation in terms of most of the DQI standards. In addition to the relatively high share of statements without argument and disrespect, consistent differences can be observed according to the gender of the speakers, their (non)support of the Family Act, and the fact of whether they were a spokesperson for a political group, civil society or the government.
COBISS.SI-ID: 33786973
Respect in communication is one of the key criteria for good deliberation, yet it is one of the unclearest concepts in the field of deliberation research with many critical issues in approaches to its measurement. The main purpose of the article is to present theoretical challenges in an attempt to produce a clearer definition of respect in deliberation, which then serves as a criterion to evaluate the validity of existing approaches to measuring respect in deliberation. On the basis of understanding respect as a factor influencing other components of deliberation, a hypothesis is formed which serves to analyse the criterion%s validity. When applying a logistic regression on a sample of discussions on the Family Act, the weak criterion validity of the alternative measurement instrument was found. However, this warrants further optimisation of the measurement instrument.
COBISS.SI-ID: 33787229
The paper conceptualises interpersonal communication as a cooperative dialogue, unlike the conflict and instrumental conceptions of communication. The dialogic maxims are the following: active and equal participation of all communicators, mutual respect and responsibility, frank and open communication, openness to changing one%s own views, co-creation of meaning. Dialogue is not only a way of interpersonal communication, but is primarily an inner orientation or epistemological position for which it is necessary to make a conscious decision, and it demands development. Instead of competition, conformity, dishonesty, (covert or overt) antagonism, mistrust, dialogue brings cooperation, solidarity, trust, mutual responsibility, and care. As such, dialogue is a normative ideal which is relatively rarely realised in practice. In this article, we investigate factors in a social context that impede its implementation. These are on one hand institutionally assigned or acquired positions, which often imply asymmetry in the distribution of communications options (actually the currently predominant institutional frameworks and communication practices within them) while, on the other hand, we mention the personal (psychological) factors that hamper the dialogical stance.
COBISS.SI-ID: 33787485