This was presented at mySociety's TICTeC Show & Tell event, which was held virtually on 20th April 2021. More details on the event can be found here: https://tictec.mysociety.org/showandtells/2021
2. Average Member of Congress represents
700,000 people
Current constituent communication
methods do not provide meaningful
methods of dialogue and
understanding
Methods for deliberative engagement
online may be able to help
3. Average Member of Congress represents
700,000 people
Current constituent communication
methods do not provide meaningful
methods of dialogue and
understanding
Methods for deliberative engagement
online may be able to help
4. Average Member of Congress represents
700,000 people
Current constituent communication
methods do not provide meaningful
methods of dialogue and
understanding
Methods for deliberative engagement
online may be able to help
12. An online, week-long, asynchronous,
single-topic forum for deliberation
12
Representative Sample
Quasi-Anonymous
13. Recruitment
• Recruited 300 constituents using
random representative sampling. Half
attend the forum, half are control.
• Out of 150 invited, 51 attended the
forum in some capacity (commenting
or reading comments).
• Fairly representative of district, but
males and educated persons
(w/graduate degreed) were over-
represented.
13
14. Recruitment
• Recruited 300 constituents using
random representative sampling. Half
attend the forum, half are control.
• Out of 150 invited, 51 attended the
forum in some capacity (commenting
or reading comments).
• Fairly representative of district, but
males and educated persons
(w/graduate degreed) were over-
represented.
14
15. Recruitment
• Recruited 300 constituents using
random representative sampling. Half
attend the forum, half are control.
• Out of 150 invited, 51 attended the
forum in some capacity (commenting
or reading comments).
• Fairly representative of district, but
males and educated persons
(w/graduate degreed) were over-
represented.
15
17. General Findings - Discussion
• Constituents engaged
substantively
• Member comments reflects
a “presentation of self”
(Fenno, 1978)
• Some constituents were
disappointed by the overall
engagement from the
Member.
“The civility of this conversation is
encouraging…There must be a
willingness to engage the issue in ALL
neighborhoods, not isolating the
homeless to underserved or
underprivileged locations…All of us must
not be NIMBY’s but rather cooperator’s
in implementing the solutions…”
18. General Findings - Discussion
• Constituents engaged
substantively
• Member comments reflects
a “presentation of self”
(Fenno, 1978)
• Some constituents were
disappointed by the overall
engagement from the
Member.
“I’m completely with you that we need
to understand the problem before we
can think about solutions. Before I came
to Congress, I studied [a relevant topic]
and played a key role securing [finances]
for [local] families hurt by the [related]
crisis.”
19. General Findings - Discussion
• Constituents engaged
substantively
• Member comments reflects
a “presentation of self”
(Fenno, 1978)
• Some constituents were
disappointed by the overall
engagement from the
Member.
“Felt the member didn’t directly engage
with anything that was said, but more
just provided lines from [their] resume.
Played it very safe.”.
20. Survey Findings
• No change to internal or external political
efficacy, or approval.
• Constituents felt a significantly higher impact
on the Member's decision-making compared
to previous forms of engagement.
• Most constituents want more forums like
this. A quarter wished it lasted longer than a
week.
0%
21. Survey Findings
• No change to internal or external political
efficacy, or approval.
• Constituents felt a significantly higher impact
on the Member's decision-making compared
to previous forms of engagement.
• Most constituents want more forums like
this. A quarter wished it lasted longer than a
week.
+40%
22. Survey Findings
• No change to internal or external political
efficacy, or approval.
• Constituents felt a significantly higher impact
on the Member's decision-making compared
to previous forms of engagement.
• Most constituents want more forums like
this. A quarter wished it lasted longer than a
week.
+88%
25. 25
Findings From Staff Interview
“Many of the people who left
comments [and] wanted to engage
offered what I describe as
substantive [compare to] what we
see on other social media platforms.
I thought that was really positive.”
1. Substantive
engagement.
2. Opportunities for Staff
Collaboration
26. 26
1. Substantive
engagement.
2. Opportunities for Staff
Collaboration
“One thing I thought was helpful [was]
the timing. There was a deadline by
which this would be over, but within
that deadline [you could] respond
whenever you wanted [which] opened
up opportunities for us as a team.
For example, for me to touch base with
our policy staff, to talk about
homelessness….”
Findings From Staff Interview
28. What it all means
1. There is potential here
2. Institutional barriers exists
3. Staff are vital
28
Member-driven deliberative could improve the
relationships of constituents with representatives in
Congress. Asynchronicity could play an important role.
29. What it all means
1. There is potential here
2. Institutional barriers exists
3. Staff are vital
29
This one experiment required significant work. Need to
overcome norms, political pressures, and current
congressional capacity.
30. What it all means
1. There is potential here
2. Institutional barriers exists
3. Staff are vital
30
Embrace the congressional enterprise and offer staff more
support.
Small civic engagement company that works directly with Congress. They do not sell or exchange information about users to any outside
organization except Congress.
It is well known in software design and development that 50-80% of the cost of any software system is in the maintenance of the software. By working with an established company, I tried to ensure the opportunity for long-term use and maintenance. If Members find the tool useful, they can continue using the
product on their own.
TOPIC WAS CHOSEN BY THE MEMEBR AND THEIR STAFF.
Representee Sampling is unique here
It’s something Members of Congress don’t have access to on the inside due to regulatory reasons (you can’t contact people who haven’t contacted your office), and cost reasons (it’s REALLY expensive to find panels like this)
There samples are currently biased.
They were offering solutions and recognizing community tensions
providing a sense of qualification for their job, identification with their constituents, and empathy.
providing a sense of qualification for their job, identification with their constituents, and empathy.
After explaining this to me, the staffers felt my tone of surprise to this information. It was clear in my initial meeting with the Member and throughout my mail exchanges with staff that POPVOX and I assumed the Member would be participating. In defense, the communications director noted that “Many Members of Congress aren’t involved [in this kind of online engagement] to the point where they would”. The other staffer chimed to say that this Member was more engaged than any other Member they had worked with – a remark that was, I’m assuming, meant to justify their absence.
After explaining this to me, the staffers felt my tone of surprise to this information. It was clear in my initial meeting with the Member and throughout my mail exchanges with staff that POPVOX and I assumed the Member would be participating. In defense, the communications director noted that “Many Members of Congress aren’t involved [in this kind of online engagement] to the point where they would”. The other staffer chimed to say that this Member was more engaged than any other Member they had worked with – a remark that was, I’m assuming, meant to justify their absence.
This forum had a longer and more flexible time horizon than typical engagements with constituents (e.g., in-person town hall events. This sets the stage for quality participation. Participants were highly satisfied with the asynchronous week-long style of deliberation, and the staff found impact there.
Of course, synchronous engagement has its benefits as well. The real-time presence of the Member and their staff could also increase constituents’ feelings of connectedness and investment in the experience. It could also keep Members accountable by encouraging them to show up for at least part of the conversation. Looking forward, I believe a collection of both in-person, real-time, and digital opportunities are key to constituent engagement. I