Deliberation and polarization: a multi-disciplinary review

In recent years, deliberative democracy has drawn attention as a potential way of fighting polarization. Allowing citizens to exchange arguments and viewpoints on political issues in group, can have strong conflict-mitigating effects: it foster opinion changes (thereby overcoming idea-based polarization), improve relations between diametrically opposed groups tackling affective forms polarization, such polarization). However, these results conflict with social psychological communication studies which find that communicative encounters lead further polarization even group think. The question therefore arises under conditions interactions decrease Based multidisciplinary systematic review the literature, includes wide diversity ranging from short classroom discussions multi-weekend citizen assemblies, this paper reports several findings. First, we argue effects are conditional how those types were conceptualized across disciplines. More precisely, depolarizing when adhere framework, polarizing they do not. Second depend design factors often implemented studies. Finally, our analysis shows much more work needs be done unravel test exact causal mechanism(s) underlying polarization-reducing deliberation. Many mechanisms identified, but few able adjudicate deliberation affects