🧠What The Study Did
A national field experiment convened more than 500 registered voters from around the country for in-depth deliberation over a long weekend on five major issues facing the nation. A separate pre–post control group was asked the same questions to enable before-and-after comparison.
đź“‹ How Change Was Measured
Short surveys administered before and after the weekend captured shifts in both policy attitudes and affective polarization. The design paired rich, face-to-face group deliberation with a pre–post assessment and a control cohort asked identical questions.
🔎 Key Findings
- Deliberators exhibited large, depolarizing changes in policy attitudes following the weekend of discussion.
- The same group also showed large decreases in affective polarization—reduced negative feelings toward opposing partisans.
- These changes are reported for the deliberator cohort; a pre–post control group was included in the study protocol and was asked identical items.
🧠How These Results Are Interpreted
The paper develops a rationale and hypotheses to explain why intensive deliberation produced these depolarizing effects, and it contrasts those accounts with a strand of literature that would have expected deliberation to intensify polarization instead.
🚀 What This Means Going Forward
A brief concluding discussion considers which elements of this deliberative “antidote” might be scalable for broader public engagement and democratic repair.
