Science and Technology
Paragraphs

We are on the verge of a revolution in public sector decision-making processes, where computers will take over many of the governance tasks previously assigned to human bureaucrats. Governance decisions based on algorithmic information processing are increasing in numbers and scope, contributing to decisions that impact the lives of individual citizens. While significant attention in the recent few years has been devoted to normative discussions on fairness, accountability, and transparency related to algorithmic decision-making based on artificial intelligence, less is known about citizens’ considered views on this issue. To put society in-the-loop, a Deliberative Poll was thus carried out on the topic of using artificial intelligence in the public sector, as a form of in-depth public consultation. The three use cases that were selected for deliberation were refugee reallocation, a welfare-to-work program, and parole. A key finding was that after having acquired more knowledge about the concrete use cases, participants were overall more supportive of using artificial intelligence in the decision processes. The event was set up with a pretest/post-test control group experimental design, and as such, the results offer experimental evidence to extant observational studies showing positive associations between knowledge and support for using artificial intelligence.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
AI & SOCIETY
Authors
Sveinung Arnesen
Troy Saghaug Broderstad
James S. Fishkin
Mikael Poul Johannesson
Alice Siu
Authors
Deliberative Democracy Lab
Nora Sulots
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab, housed within the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), in collaboration with Meta and the Behavioral Insights Team, has unveiled the results of the Meta Community Forum on Generative AI, based on the method of Deliberative Polling®. This groundbreaking event, part of a series of efforts by Meta to consult the public, engaged 1,545 participants in scientific samples from Brazil, Germany, Spain, and the United States. In each country, it offered the public’s views, both before and after deliberation, about future directions for the development of AI chatbots and how they should interact with humans.

“AI poses novel challenges, and these four national experiments revealed the public’s considered judgments about what it should — or should not — be able to use it for. National samples grappled with the pros and cons of each proposal and had their questions answered by panels of competing experts. This report shows what they concluded,” said James Fishkin, Senior Fellow at FSI and Director of the Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab.

AI poses novel challenges, and these four national experiments revealed the public’s considered judgments about what it should — or should not — be able to use it for.
James Fishkin
Director, Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab

Much of the agenda focused on specific proposals answering ten basic questions, including:

  • Which sources should AI chatbots draw information from?
  • Should AI chatbots use the user’s past conversations to improve user experience?
  • Should AI chatbots use the user’s online activity to personalize interactions?
  • Should AI chatbots be designed to be human-like?
  • Should users be allowed to use AI chatbots for romantic relationships?


The deliberators in each country were convened on the Stanford Online Deliberation Platform, developed by the Stanford Crowdsourced Democracy Team. This platform is AI-assisted and moderates video-based discussions in small groups of ten. 

Participants noted a generally positive impact of AI, with an increase in positive perceptions post-forum. "This shift in viewpoint, especially notable among those previously unfamiliar with AI, underscores the value of informed discussion in shaping public opinion," remarked Alice Siu, Senior Research Scholar at FSI and Associate Director of the Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab.

The forum's methodical approach, with deliberations in 166 small groups and a separate control group for each country, ensured that the outcomes accurately reflected the effects of the deliberative process. Findings indicated that users and non-users of AI began to bridge their differences, aligning closer in their attitudes towards AI after the forum.

Siu also emphasized the significance of the event’s feedback, noting that "the high ratings from participants affirm the forum’s success in making complex discussions accessible and relevant. It is an encouraging sign for the future of democratic engagement with technology."

The Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab is dedicated to deepening our understanding of deliberative democracy processes and their application to critical contemporary issues like AI. The insights from this forum will inform ongoing research and policy recommendations, ensuring that AI evolves in a manner that considers diverse values and voices across the globe.

The project report is available below:

For detailed information on the forum’s conclusions or forthcoming projects, please reach out to James Fishkin (Director, Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab) or Alice Siu (Associate Director, Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab) or visit the Deliberative Democracy Lab website.

Read More

Collage of modern adults using smart phones in city with wifi signals
News

Results of First Global Deliberative Poll® Announced by Stanford’s Deliberative Democracy Lab

More than 6,300 deliberators from 32 countries and nine regions around the world participated in the Metaverse Community Forum on Bullying and Harassment.
cover link Results of First Global Deliberative Poll® Announced by Stanford’s Deliberative Democracy Lab
A voter casts their ballot in the Kentucky Primary Elections at Central High School on May 16, 2023 in Louisville, Kentucky.
Q&As

New National Deliberative Poll Shows Bipartisan Support for Polarizing Issues Affecting American Democracy

"America in One Room: Democratic Reform" polled participants before and after deliberation to gauge their opinions on democratic reform initiatives, including voter access and voting protections, non-partisan election administration, protecting against election interference, Supreme Court reform, and more. The results show many significant changes toward bipartisan agreement, even on the most contentious issues.
cover link New National Deliberative Poll Shows Bipartisan Support for Polarizing Issues Affecting American Democracy
Alice Siu delivers a TEDxStanford talk
News

Deliberative Polling: A Path to Bridging Divides

In a TEDxStanford talk, Alice Siu discusses how applying and spreading deliberative democracy can better engage us all in our shared public problems.
cover link Deliberative Polling: A Path to Bridging Divides
All News button
1
Subtitle

A multinational Deliberative Poll unveils the global public's nuanced views on AI chatbots and their integration into society.

Date Label
Paragraphs

The Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab, in collaboration with Meta and the Behavioral Insights Team, has unveiled the results of the second Meta Community Forum, based on the method of Deliberative Polling. This groundbreaking event engaged 1,545 participants from Brazil, Germany, Spain, and the United States. In each country, it offered the public’s views, both before and after deliberation, about future directions for the development of AI chatbots and how they should interact with humans.

The Deliberative Democracy Lab (DDL) at Stanford University is housed within the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.

The Crowdsourced Democracy Team (CDT) at Stanford University is housed within the Department of Management Science and Engineering.

Report Contributors (in alphabetical order): Samuel Chang, Estelle Ciesla, Michael Finch, James Fishkin, Lodewijk Gelauff, Ashish Goel, Ricky Hernandez Marquez, Shoaib Mohammed, and Alice Siu.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Reports
Publication Date
Subtitle

"What principles should guide generative AI’s engagement with users?"

Authors
Samuel Chang
Estelle Ciesla
Michael Finch
James S. Fishkin
Lodewijk L. Gelauff
Ashish Goel
Ricky Hernandez Marquez
Shoaib Mohammed
Alice Siu
-
AI in Education Deliberative Poll for High School Educators

Are you worried about the impact AI can have on your classroom or excited about its potential? Do you wonder how you can utilize AI in your teaching or do you feel like it dehumanizes the learning process? Are you eager to learn about what “Artificial Intelligence” entails and how it can impact your classroom? 

If any of these questions have crossed your mind, we invite you to join Stanford's Deliberative Democracy Lab on Saturday, May 18, from 10:00 am to 2:45 pm (Pacific Time) to discuss with fellow educators how AI should be used and regulated in schools. You will discuss policies regarding the use of AI in schools — whether it should be banned from the Wi-Fi or left up to teachers and students to discern what “appropriate usage” means. You will also get to meet and ask questions to experts in the fields.

This will be an online event hosted on Stanford's Online Deliberation Platform. There will be sessions between deliberating teachers and expert panels where there will be Q&A time. Further details will be emailed to you.

SCHEDULE

10:00 am - 11:15 am: First Small Group Deliberation Session

11:15 am - 12:00 pm: Plenary Session 1

12:00 pm - 12:45 pm: Break

12:45 pm - 2:00 pm: Second Small Group Deliberation Session

2:00 pm - 2:45 pm: Plenary Session 2

This event is being led by students at The Quarry Lane School, Saratoga High School, and Lynbrook High School.

Online.

Open to high school educators only.

Workshops
Authors
Rachel Owens
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

In a CDDRL seminar series talk, Daniel Chen — Director of Research at the French National Center for Scientific Research and Professor at the Toulouse School of Economics — examined whether data science can improve the functioning of courts and unlock their impact on economic development. Improving courts’ efficiency is paramount to citizens' confidence in legal institutions and proceedings.

In a nationwide experiment in Kenya, Chen and his co-authors employed data science techniques to identify the causes of case backlog in the judicial system. They developed an algorithm to identify major sources of court delays for each of Kenya’s 124 court stations. Based on the algorithm, they compiled a one-page report — specific to the local court and tailored to that month’s proceedings — which provided an analysis of court adjournments, reasons for delay, and tangible action items.

To measure the effect of these one-pagers, Chen established two treatment groups and one control. Those in the first treatment group received a singular one-pager, sent just to the courts. The second received one for the courts and one for a Court User Committee (CUC). The committee, which consists of lawyers, police, and members of civil society, was asked to discuss the one-pagers during their quarterly meetings. 

To measure the relevant effects, the authors examined three primary outcomes, namely: (1) adjournment (or case delay) rates; (2) quality and citizen satisfaction; and (3) measures of economic development, including contracting, investment, and business creation. 

Results showed the intervention was associated with a 22 percent improvement in adjournments, or a decline in trial length by 120 days. They found that there was no effect on either the number of cases filed or the proxies for quality. Citizen satisfaction rates also went up, with a reduction in complaints about speed and quality, and the intervention was associated with an increase in formal written contracts and higher wages.

Read More

María Ignacia Curiel presents during CDDRL's research seminar
News

Do Institutional Safeguards Undermine Rebel Parties?

CDDRL postdoctoral fellow’s findings show that institutional safeguards meant to guarantee the representation of parties formed by former rebel groups may actually weaken such parties’ grassroots support.
cover link Do Institutional Safeguards Undermine Rebel Parties?
Larry Diamond speaks during CDDRL's research seminar
News

Is the World Still in a Democratic Recession?

Is the world still in a democratic recession? Larry Diamond — the Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at FSI — believes it is.
cover link Is the World Still in a Democratic Recession?
Janka Deli presents during CDDRL seminar
News

Can Markets Save the Rule of Law?: Insights from the EU

CDDRL postdoctoral fellow challenges the conventional wisdom that deterioration in the rule of law generates decline in economic vitality.
cover link Can Markets Save the Rule of Law?: Insights from the EU
All News button
1
Subtitle

Improving courts’ efficiency is paramount to citizens' confidence in legal institutions and proceedings, explains Daniel Chen, Director of Research at the French National Center for Scientific Research and Professor at the Toulouse School of Economics.

Date Label
-
Donuts & Democracy

Are you interested in discussing Generative AI on Stanford’s campus? Feeling excitement or existential dread about the ethics of Gen AI, ChatGPT in the classroom, and the role it plays in your life? Join a group of diverse Stanford students for a structured discussion on Democracy Day (NO CLASSES), Tuesday, November 7, at 9:30 am @ OLD UNION!

📣 These events will be structured similarly to a Deliberative Poll, a format that has been run in over 34 countries around the world to engage citizens on public policy issues. You do not need any prior knowledge of any of these topics to participate; you will be provided with brief learning materials in advance to contextualize the issues being discussed.

🤝🏿 This event is being organized by students and faculty from Stanford University, in partnership with CDDRL's Deliberative Democracy Lab.

Old Union at Stanford
520 Lasuen Mall, Stanford, CA 94305

This event is only open to current Stanford students.

-
2023 SU-DD Fellows CDDRL's 2023 Strengthening Ukrainian Democracy and Development Fellows: (L to R) Halyna Yanchenko, Konstantyn Chyzhyk, Olena Kutsai, Anton Turupalov, Gulsanna Mamediieva, and Mykhailo Pavliuk. Rod Searcey

Please join us on Monday, August 28, to meet CDDRL's six Strengthening Ukrainian Democracy and Development (SU-DD) Fellows. SU-DD is a 10-week training program for Ukrainian practitioners and policymakers. Launched in the fall of 2022, the program provides a unique opportunity for mid-career practitioners working on well-defined projects aimed at strengthening Ukrainian democracy, enhancing human development, and promoting good governance.

Meet our Ukrainian fellows and learn first-hand about what they have been working on during their time at Stanford. Hear about their respective projects, each focusing on actionable ways to support Ukraine’s recovery from Russia’s invasion, and find out more about how these practitioners and policymakers plan to launch their rebuilding efforts when they return to Ukraine in September.

This event is taking place in-person only. There will not be an online component.

AGENDA


12:30-12:35 — Introduction (Kathryn Stoner, Mosbacher Director of CDDRL)
12:35-12:55 — Olena Kutsai
1:00-1:20 — Mykhailo Pavliuk
1:25-1:45 — Gulsanna Mamediieva
1:45-2:00 — Break
2:00-2:20 — Konstantyn Chyzhyk
2:25-2:45 — Halyna Yanchenko
2:50-3:10 — Anton Turupalov


Reuben W. Hills Conference Room (Encina Hall East, 2nd floor)
616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford, CA 94305

Panel Discussions
Authors
Melissa De Witte
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Every day, data scientists are analyzing vast amounts of information about the world, using computational methods to find new ways to understand a problem or phenomenon, and deciding what to do about it.

But it’s not enough to use data on its own – it must be understood within its social and political context as well, according to Stanford political scientist Jeremy Weinstein. This year, Weinstein, along with Stanford statisticians Guenther Walther and Chiara Sabatti, has launched two new degrees: a Bachelor of Science in Data Science and a Bachelor of Arts in Data Science & Social Systems.

Read the full story in the Stanford Report.

All News button
1
Subtitle

The gateway course for the new Data Science & Social Systems major teaches students how data can be used to address important social problems.

Paragraphs

This chapter explores the potential for gamesmanship in technology-assisted discovery. Attorneys have long embraced gamesmanship strategies in analog discovery, producing reams of irrelevant documents, delaying depositions, or interpreting requests in a hyper-technical manner. The new question, however, is whether machine learning technologies can transform gaming strategies. By now it is well known that technologies have reinvented the practice of civil litigation and, specifically, the extensive search for relevant documents in complex cases. Many sophisticated litigants use machine learning algorithms – under the umbrella of “Technology Assisted Review” (TAR) – to simplify the identification and production of relevant documents in discovery. Litigants employ TAR in cases ranging from antitrust to environmental law, civil rights, and employment disputes. But as the field becomes increasingly influenced by engineers and technologists, a string of commentators has raised questions about TAR, including lawyers’ professional role, underlying incentive structures, and the dangers of new forms of gamesmanship and abuse.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Book Chapters
Publication Date
Subtitle

In Legal Tech and the Future of Civil Justice, editor David Freeman Engstrom (Stanford Law School) and his 28 co-contributors, including Diego Zambrano, dissect the legal and policy implications of the technologies that are poised to remake the civil justice system.

Authors
Neel Guha
Peter Henderson
Diego A. Zambrano
Book Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Paragraphs

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine has heavily affected country’s research and development (R&D) sector. In particular, it has caused considerable damage to research infrastructure and forced researchers to leave their homes, ruined many research teams and paralysed their work, and stopped funding and implementation of many research projects. All these devastating consequences of the full-scale war have piled on top of the existing problems and challenges of Ukrainian science and deepened its long-term crisis.

Recognition and analysis of these systemic challenges implies that the reconstruction of the Ukrainian R&D sector cannot be seen simply as physical rebuilding of the damaged research infrastructure. It is essential to transform the R&D sphere itself and build ways for science to benefit the economy and society. To enable the ‘build back better’ principle of Ukraine’s reconstruction, science, technology and innovation should be the cornerstone of the national reconstruction strategy, and their transformation should be seen as an essential part of the EU accession. This implies that, first, the agency responsible for Ukraine’s reconstruction should have a dedicated unit supervising the R&D sector. And second, Ukraine’s R&D sector should be reformed as early as possible. At the same time, its reforms need to be systemic, accurately designed and appropriately supported. If supported by appropriate resources, the National Council on Science and Technology can start designing these reforms right away.

A crucial and urgent task is helping researchers (who have mostly stayed in Ukraine) remain researchers, that is, ensuring that they do not leave for other sectors. To this end, we suggest that the government, together with international donors, provides stipends to researchers selected on merit-based principles. Furthermore, it is important to support the development of networks and partnerships at different levels - among Ukrainian researchers; among Ukrainian and foreign researchers; among researchers, businesses and local governments. These networks and partnerships will be essential for the future reconstruction of Ukraine.

For the long-term transformation of the science sphere, we suggest the introduction of performance-based funding; the gradual transition of the most capable research teams under the new research societies (created in parallel with existing academies of sciences) with a simultaneous increase in their funding; intensifying European integration of Ukrainian science, including integration of research infrastructure; and data-driven R&D policy development, the foundation for which has been already laid. Closing the gap between education and research is also one of our key recommendations.

ABOUT THE BOOK

Image
Cover of Rebuilding Ukraine: Principles and policies

This book offers a comprehensive analysis of what Ukraine should become after the war and what tools policymakers can use to fulfill these goals. It provides perspectives from leading scholars and practitioners. While each chapter of the book covers a specific sector, there is a natural overlap across the chapters because Ukraine’s reconstruction should involve a comprehensive transformation of the country. The leitmotif of this book is clear: reconstruction is not about rebuilding Ukraine to the pre-war state; it is about a deep modernisation of the country on its path to European Union accession. All critical elements of the economy and society will have to leapfrog and undergo reforms to help Ukraine escape its post-Soviet legacy and become a full-fledged democracy with a modern economy, strong institutions and a powerful defence sector. Ukraine’s ownership of the reconstruction will be key to its success.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Book Chapters
Publication Date
Subtitle

A chapter in Rebuilding Ukraine: Principles and policies, edited by Yuriy Gorodnichenko, Ilona Sologoub, and Beatrice Weder di Mauro.

Authors
Yulia Bezvershenko
Oleksiy Kolezhuk
Book Publisher
CEPR Press, London
Subscribe to Science and Technology