Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law is housed in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Encina Commons
615 Crothers Way, Stanford, CA
Alice Siu, the Associate Director of CDDRL’s Deliberative Democracy Lab (DDL), presented her work at a CDDRL research seminar on the effect of deliberation on how people think about political issues, particularly in the current polarized context.
DDL and its partners organized discussions on contentious issues, ranging from climate change to institutional democratic reforms, among hundreds of participants from wide-ranging demographic and political backgrounds. For a total of 12 hours, participants discussed topics through an AI-assisted deliberation platform. They were polled before and after deliberation and compared to a control group who did not engage in the discussions.
The results showed a consistent and significant opinion change among participants following deliberation, with movement towards consensus across party affiliations. Satisfaction with democracy dramatically improved, especially among Republicans, who shifted from 18.9% to 50.1% satisfaction. Evidence showed an increase in participants’ trust and empathy toward individuals with opposing opinions.
The effects of these conversations persisted after the intervention. Three months after deliberation, participants continued to feel more positively about those they disagreed with. Results show that 41.7% agreed that those with opposing viewpoints “have good reasons; there are just better ones on the other side,” compared to 31% before deliberation and 33% immediately after. These long-term effects manifested in the participants’ political participation as well. One year after a climate-focused deliberation, participation in discussions was correlated with stronger support for a Democratic-controlled congress before the 2022 midterm elections.
These results demonstrate that democracy can be strengthened through deliberation. However, for a substantial, long-lasting impact, deliberation must be scaled significantly. To do so, technology must be leveraged. For example, using an AI instead of a human moderator may improve affordable access to deliberation platforms. Furthermore, deliberation should occur in educational settings from the middle school to the graduate level. Investing in youth’s communication skills and civic engagement affords them tools to uphold our democracy for generations. Challenging but empathic conversations with those from differing viewpoints must be encouraged. While this research offers reasons for optimism, a more scalable model must be developed to ensure large-scale participation in robust discourse; at DDL, Siu is leading this effort to bring deliberation to entire societies through the AI-assisted Stanford Online Deliberation Platform.
Alice Siu, Associate Director of CDDRL’s Deliberative Democracy Lab, demonstrates the wide-ranging effects of deliberation on democracy.
Erin Baggot Carter and Brett Carter describe how Beijing’s repression reaches all the way to American classrooms.
Ali Çarkoğlu, a political scientist specializing in elections, voting behavior, and Turkish politics, presented an analysis of Turkey's electoral dynamics from 1990 to 2023 at a CDDRL research seminar. His study focused on the interplay between social cleavages, democratic backsliding, and their impact on political competition and voter behavior. Using data from the World Values Survey and Turkish Election Studies, Çarkoğlu explored the rise of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the enduring influence of cultural divides on Turkey’s political landscape.
Central to his analysis was the "alla Turca kulturkampf," a concept describing the deep-rooted center-periphery divide in Turkish politics. This cleavage reflects a cultural conflict between two contrasting societal visions: the Kemalist ideal of secularism, gender equality, and scientific rationalism versus the pro-Islamist focus on tradition, religion, and family values. Despite the AKP’s success in bringing peripheral groups into the state’s institutional core, these cultural divides persist as a primary source of polarization. Çarkoğlu argued that this polarization has entrenched partisan loyalty and overshadowed other factors in shaping voter behavior.
A key theme of the presentation was Turkey's democratic backsliding, characterized by the erosion of democratic institutions, curtailment of civil liberties, and electoral manipulation. Çarkoğlu noted that Turkey ranks 148th on the liberal democracy index, illustrating its significant democratic decline. He linked these trends to heightened polarization, which weakens opposition forces and reduces the influence of traditional electoral cleavages. Instead of fostering competitive elections, the political landscape is increasingly dominated by entrenched party loyalties and identity-driven politics.
The presentation also highlighted the significant social and economic changes Turkey has undergone since 1990. Urbanization surged from 61% in 1992 to 78% in 2024, while agriculture’s share of employment dropped from 45% to 17%. Economic growth has raised per capita income from $2,000 to $10,000, but inequality remains pervasive, and safety nets are inadequate. Women’s labor force participation remains low at 35%, and educational disparities persist. Household sizes have decreased, and the dependency ratio has dropped from 65 to 47 over 30 years. However, these societal shifts have had limited political consequences, as electoral dynamics remain anchored in longstanding cultural cleavages.
Çarkoğlu’s findings indicated that Turkey’s party system has remained "frozen" for the past three decades. While socio-demographic factors play a declining role in explaining voter behavior, attitudinal variables such as group identity and cultural values have gained prominence. This shift reflects how polarization has solidified, with partisan loyalty reinforcing competitive authoritarianism.
Çarkoğlu emphasized that the weakening of electoral cleavages has facilitated democratic backsliding by reducing opposition effectiveness and enabling strategic manipulation. Despite rapid social change, entrenched cultural divides and polarization have prevented political transformation. His research underscores the importance of addressing institutional decline, polarization, and social inequality to combat democratic erosion. Turkey’s experience offers critical lessons for other unconsolidated democracies facing similar challenges.
Using data from the World Values Survey and Turkish Election Studies, CDDRL Visiting Scholar Ali Çarkoğlu explores the rise of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the enduring influence of cultural divides on Turkey’s political landscape.
This "Meet Our Researchers" series showcases the incredible scholars at Stanford’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL). Through engaging interviews conducted by our undergraduate research assistants, we explore the journeys, passions, and insights of CDDRL’s faculty and researchers.
Dr. Didi Kuo is a Center Fellow at Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), manager of the Program on American Democracy in Comparative Perspective at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL), and co-director of CDDRL's Fisher Family Honors Program. Her research focuses on democratization, political reform, corruption, and the evolution of political parties. She is the author of Clientelism, Capitalism, and Democracy (Cambridge University Press, 2018) and the forthcoming The Great Retreat: How Political Parties Should Behave and Why They Don’t (Oxford University Press, 2025). Dr. Kuo has been an Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fellow at New America and is a non-resident fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. She received a PhD in political science from Harvard University, an MSc in Economic and Social History from Oxford University, where she studied as a Marshall Scholar, and a BA from Emory University.
I first became interested in politics growing up in the American South during the early stages of today’s polarized era. Living in a deeply conservative area during the rise of partisan media and in Newt Gingrich’s congressional district sparked my curiosity about politics and its broader implications.
In college, my interest expanded beyond American democracy. Post-Cold War debates on democratization and the U.S.’s role in promoting democracy, particularly during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11, shaped my desire to explore democracy, governance, and international policy—questions that remain critical today.
I majored in political science, pursued graduate studies in the UK, and worked at think tanks where I saw PhDs bridging research and policy. This inspired me to pursue a doctorate. After earning my PhD, I was fortunate to join CDDRL as a postdoctoral fellow, where I’ve found the ideal environment to explore these issues and contribute to broader discussions on democracy and development.
I don’t tend to think of my findings as particularly “exciting” in the traditional sense, as they often reaffirm long-standing conventional wisdom. However, one key insight that my research reinforces is that stable and thriving democratic societies require not just strong democratic institutions but also robust intermediary organizations.
My new book focuses on political parties, which are a prime example of these intermediary organizations. Much of my research highlights the importance of understanding not just what governments and institutions look like, but how they link to society. How do they connect with citizens? How do they convince citizens that government actions are meaningful and worthwhile? These are critical questions for democracy.
I believe you cannot fully grasp concepts like governance, democracy, or even state capacity without understanding the role of these intermediaries. They play a vital role in bridging the gap between institutions and the public, ensuring that democracy is not just about structures but about meaningful engagement with citizens. This finding matters because, without these linkages, even the strongest institutions risk losing public trust and legitimacy.
When I arrived at Stanford 10 years ago, I noticed a disconnect: while political science views strong political parties as essential for democratic success, public opinion often sees them as a problem. At CDDRL, I observed how many outside academia dislike or even distrust parties, despite their historical link to stability and democratic consolidation.
My book was inspired by this gap. It defends political parties, arguing that many of democracy’s challenges over the past 50 years stem from weaker parties—not stronger ones. My goal is to challenge the narrative that parties are the problem and show how strengthening them is key to addressing today’s democratic challenges.
That's a critical question. Angelo Panebianco’s 1988 concept of the "electoral-professional party" highlights how professionalized parties prioritize winning elections over grassroots connections—a trend that has only intensified with today’s competitive elections and internal party factions.
Despite electoral success through strategies like PR and micro-targeting, parties struggle to meaningfully connect with voters, leading to dissatisfaction, distrust, and rising disillusionment. This indicates that a purely electoral focus is unsustainable.
Parties are unlikely to shift strategies without electoral losses. For instance, Democrats must rebuild trust and align policies with popular interests, while Republicans face the challenge of reconciling their traditional structure with the influence of the MAGA faction.
Both parties need to balance professionalization with public engagement by fostering grassroots connections and building sustainable support. Without recalibration, they risk further alienating voters and undermining trust in democratic institutions.
That’s a great question, and we’re already seeing a partisan realignment. Historically, Democrats and left-leaning parties represented the working class, but now they increasingly draw support from highly educated urban professionals. Meanwhile, right-leaning parties, traditionally backed by elites, are gaining support from the working class.
This shift, driven by education and economic divides, challenges both parties. Democrats must balance appealing to urban professionals and working-class voters, while Republicans struggle to reconcile small-government policies with the needs of a working-class base.
State and local parties may offer insights by experimenting with coalition-building strategies, such as Democrats succeeding in rural areas or centrist Republicans challenging MAGA influence. These cleavages create both opportunities and uncertainty, and how parties manage these divisions will shape the future of U.S. partisanship.
As parties have become more professionalized, their community engagement has become episodic, focused mainly around elections. This has left advocacy and organizing to NGOs, civic groups, and social movements, many of which operate independently or are even anti-party.
To reclaim their social role, parties need to maintain a consistent presence in communities year-round, addressing local issues and collaborating with civic groups. NGOs and social movements, in turn, should see parties as potential partners rather than adversaries, working together to institutionalize their causes and foster democratic engagement.
This relationship should be a two-way street—parties investing in communities and NGOs collaborating within the party system. Together, they can rebuild connections and create a more integrated approach to representation and problem-solving.
I recommend Making Democracy Work by Robert Putnam. While Putnam is better known for Bowling Alone, this book initially captured my interest in political science. It compares governance in northern and southern Italy, introducing the concept of social capital as critical to local institutions' success. Putnam demonstrates how formal institutions and society are deeply interconnected, linking contemporary outcomes to historical legacies of conquest and political development.
Reading it in college while traveling through Italy was transformative—it brought the book to life and showed how political science connects institutions, societies, history, and economics. It’s a great introduction to the field, encouraging young researchers to tackle complex questions and piece together relationships to understand political challenges like democratic backsliding. Each piece of research adds to a larger puzzle, making this work so rewarding.
Examining democratization, political reform, and the role of political parties with FSI Center Fellow Dr. Didi Kuo.
The Chinese government is revolutionizing digital surveillance at home and exporting these technologies abroad. Do these technology transfers help recipient governments expand digital surveillance, impose internet shutdowns, filter the internet, and target repression for online content? We focus on Huawei, the world’s largest telecommunications provider, which is partly state-owned and increasingly regarded as an instrument of its foreign policy. Using a global sample and an identification strategy based on generalized synthetic controls, we show that the effect of Huawei transfers depends on preexisting political institutions in recipient countries. In the world’s autocracies, Huawei technology facilitates digital repression. We find no effect in the world’s democracies, which are more likely to have laws that regulate digital privacy, institutions that punish government violations, and vibrant civil societies that step in when institutions come under strain. Most broadly, this article advances a large literature about the geopolitical implications of China’s rise.
A first-year studying political science and international relations, Soraya is interested in the intersection of democratic promotion and great power politics, studying the causes of democratic recession and development. She has also done research on domestic gender equity and child wellbeing policy. As a Hoover Institution NSAF mentee, she is exploring national security policy.
The faculty and staff of Stanford's Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL), as well as the undersigned alumni of the Fisher Family Summer Fellows Program (FFSF, formerly known as the Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program, DHSF), demand the immediate and safe release of our friend and colleague, Jesús Armas, who has been kidnapped by agents of the Venezuelan government.
Jesús has bravely worked with the opposition to promote fair elections and uphold democracy in Venezuela. His abduction is a blatant act of repression aimed at silencing his vital work for freedom and justice.
We call on the Venezuelan government to release Jesús immediately and urge the international community to condemn this attack on democracy and human rights. Jesús inspires us all, and we stand united in solidarity with him and his fight for a brighter future for Venezuela.
Signed,
Tatevik Matinyan, Armenia (DHSF 2022)
Daria Minsky, Belarus (DHSF 2022)
Mariana Mello, Brazil (DHSF 2022)
Tainah Pereira, Brazil (DHSF 2022)
Assefa Getaneh, Ethiopia (DHSF 2022)
Zurab Sanikidze, Georgia (DHSF 2022)
Gabriel Reyes Silva, Guatemala (DHSF 2022)
Ritu Sain, India (DHSF 2022)
Aida Aidarkulova, Kazakhstan (DHSF 2022)
Carol Kiangura, Kenya (DHSF 2022)
Jacqueline Akinyi Okeyo Manani, Kenya (DHSF 2022)
Ainura Usupbekova, Kyrgyz Republic (DHSF 2022)
Alaa Al Sayegh, Lebanon (DHSF 2022)
Jad Maalouf, Lebanon (DHSF 2022)
Natasha E. Feghali, Lebanon (DHSF 2022)
Mariela Saldivar Villalobos, Mexico (DHSF 2022)
Bulgantuya Khurelbaatar, Mongolia (DHSF 2022)
Sarita Pariyar, Nepal (DHSF 2022)
Dr. Babatunde Omilola, Nigeria (DHSF 2022)
Daniel Alfaro, Peru (DHSF 2022)
Andréa Ngombet, Republic of Congo (DHSF 2022)
Jamus Lim, Singapore (DHSF 2022)
Anchal Baniparsadh, South Africa (DHSF 2022)
Geline Alfred Fuko, Tanzania (DHSF 2022)
Ornella Moderan, Togo (DHSF 2022)
Denis Gutenko, Ukraine (DHSF 2022)
Nariman Ustaiev, Ukraine (DHSF 2022)
Yulia Bezvershenko, Ukraine (DHSF 2022)
Rayhan Asat, Uyghur human rights lawyer / USA (DHSF 2022)
Tien Trung Nguyen, Vietnam (DHSF 2022)
Brett Carter, Assistant Professor, University of Southern California; Hoover Fellow, Stanford University; Affiliate, CDDRL, Stanford University, USA
Biljana Spasovska, Executive Director, BCSDN, North Macedonia (FFSF 2024)
Sunny Cheung, Hong Kong (FFSF 2023)
Hector Fuentes, Visiting Scholar at CDDRL, Venezuela (FFSF 2024)
Erik Jensen, Affiliated Faculty, CDDRL, USA
Khatia, Former member of the Parliament, Georgia (FFSF 2024)
Mykhailo Pavliuk, Chernivtsi Oblast Legislature, Ukraine (FFSF 2023)
Alice Siu, Deliberative Democracy Lab, USA
María Ignacia Curiel, Researcher at Poverty, Violence and Governance Lab, CDDRL, Stanford, USA
Thao Dinh, Coordinator of Civil Society Forum, Vietnam (FFSF 2024)
Tem Fuh, Project Manager, Institute for Security Studies, Kenya (FFSF 2023)
Dagva, Open Society Forum, Mongolia (FFSF 2024)
Margaret Levi, Senior Fellow, CDDRL, USA
Halyna Yanchenko, Member of Parliament of Ukraine, Ukraine (FFSF 2023)
Iaroslav Liubchenko, Head of the Department on Building Integrity in The Defence and Security Sector at the National Agency on Corruption Prevention, Ukraine (FFSF 2023)
Nora Sulots, Communications Manager, CDDRL, USA
Cristofer Correia, Voluntad Popular, Venezuela (FFSF 2023)
Stephen Stedman, Senior Fellow, CDDRL, Stanford, USA
Sally Abi Khalll, Oxfam, Lebanon (FFSF 2023)
Ivetta Sergeeva, Postdoctoral Fellow, CDDRL, Russia
Valentin Bolotnyy, Kleinheinz Fellow, Hoover Institution, USA
Gulsanna Mamediieva, Georgetown University, USA (FFSF 2023)
Tamar Khulordava, Former MP, founder of Egeria Solutions, Georgia (FFSF 2023)
Francis Fukuyama, Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, and Director, Ford Dorsey Masters in International Policy, Stanford, USA
Betilde Muñoz-Pogossian, Director of Social Inclusion at the Organization of American States, USA (DHSF 2021)
Sophie Richardson, Visiting Scholar, CDDRL, Stanford University, USA
Diego Zambrano, Professor of Law, Stanford Law School, USA/Venezuela
Beatriz Magaloni, Graham H. Stuart Professor, Political Science and Senior Fellow, FSI, Stanford University, USA and Mexico
Didi Kuo, Center Fellow, CDDRL, USA
Dinsha Mistree, Affiliated Researcher, CDDRL; Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, USA
Evan Mawarire, Senior Fellow, USA (DHSF 2018)
Raihana Maqbool, Independent Journalist, India (DHSF 2021)
Alon Tal, Visiting Professor, USA/Israel
Nikita Makarenko, Independent Journalist, Uzbekistan (DHSF 2021)
Ghina Bou Chakra, Amnesty International, Lebanon (FFSF 2023)
Alberto Díaz Cayeros, Senior Fellow, CDDRL, Stanford University, USA / Mexico
Aisha Yesufu, Citizens Hub, Nigeria (DHSF 2021)
Gillian Slee, Gerhard Casper Fellow in Rule of Law, CDDRL, USA
Victor Spinu, Parliament of the Republic of Moldova, Republic of Moldova (FFSF 2024)
Denis Gutenko, AirLittoral Cofounder, Ukraine (DHSF 2022)
Ali Carkoglu, Political Scientist, CDDRL Visiting Scholar, USA
Jamie O'Connell, Lecturer in Residence, Stanford Law School and Affiliated Scholar, CDDRL, USA
Ruben Mascarenhas, National Joint Secretary, Aam Aadmi Party, India (FFSF 2023)
Kumi Naidoo, Payne Distinguished Lecturer, 2023-25, USA / South Africa
Mary-Therese Heintzkill, Program Manager, CDDRL, USA
James Fearon, Professor, Stanford University, USA
Kim Juárez Jensen, Poverty, Violence, and Governance Lab, USA
Larry Diamond, Senior Fellow, Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, Stanford University, USA
Manasi Subramaniam, India (FFSF 2023)
We are concerned and outraged to learn of the state-sponsored abduction of 2022 Fisher Family Summer Fellow Jesús Armas by agents of the Maduro regime in Venezuela. We urge the regime to release him from detention immediately.
Once a centralizing force of the democratic process, political parties have eroded over the past fifty years. In her new book, The Great Retreat: How Political Parties Should Behave and Why They Don't, Didi Kuo explores the development of political parties as democracy expanded across the West in the nineteenth century. While parties have become professionalized and nationalized, they have lost the robust organizational density that made them effective representatives. After the Cold War, the combination of a neoliberal economic consensus, changes to campaign finance, and shifting party priorities weakened the party systems of Western democracies. In order for democracy to adapt to a new era of global capitalism, The Great Retreat makes the case for stronger parties in the form of socially embedded institutions with deep connections to communities and citizens.
Kuo will give a brief talk about the book before being joined by Jake Grumbach, Julia Azari, and Bruce Cain for a panel discussion.
Didi Kuo is a Center Fellow at the Freeman-Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. Her research interests include democratization, political parties, state-building, and the political economy of representation. She is the author of The Great Retreat: How Political Parties Should Behave - and Why They Don't (Oxford University Press, 2025) and Clientelism, Capitalism, and Democracy: the Rise of Programmatic Politics in the United States and Britain (Cambridge University Press, 2018). She was an Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fellow at New America, is a non-resident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and is an adjunct fellow at the Niskanen Center.
Jake Grumbach is an associate professor at the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. He was previously associate professor of political science at the University of Washington and a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics at Princeton.
He studies the political economy of the United States, with interests in democratic institutions, labor, federalism, racial and economic inequality, and statistical methods. His book, Laboratories Against Democracy (Princeton University Press 2022), investigates the causes and consequences of the nationalization of state politics.
Before graduate school, he earned a B.A. from Columbia University and worked as a public health researcher. Outside of academia, he's a nerd for 70s funk/soul and 90s hip hop, as well as a Warriors fan.
Julia Azari is Professor of Political Science at Marquette University. An active public-facing scholar, she has published commentary on presidential and party politics in FiveThirtyEight, Politico, Vox, The New York Times, The Washington Post, MSNBC, and The Guardian.
Her scholarly work has appeared in journals such as The Forum, Perspectives on Politics, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Foreign Affairs, and Social Science History. She has contributed invited chapters to books published by the University Press of Kansas, University of Pennsylvania Press, Cambridge University Press, and University of Edinburgh Press. Azari is the author of Delivering the People’s Message: The Changing Politics of the Presidential Mandate (Cornell, 2014), coeditor of The Presidential Leadership Dilemma (SUNY, 2013), and co-editor of The Trump Legacy (under contract, University Press of Kansas).
Bruce E. Cain is a Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and Director of the Bill Lane Center for the American West. He received a BA from Bowdoin College (1970), a B Phil. from Oxford University (1972) as a Rhodes Scholar, and a Ph D from Harvard University (1976). He taught at Caltech (1976-89) and UC Berkeley (1989-2012) before coming to Stanford. Professor Cain was Director of the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley from 1990-2007 and Executive Director of the UC Washington Center from 2005-2012. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2000 and has won awards for his research (Richard F. Fenno Prize, 1988), teaching (Caltech, 1988 and UC Berkeley, 2003), and public service (Zale Award for Outstanding Achievement in Policy Research and Public Service, 2000). His areas of expertise include political regulation, applied democratic theory, representation, and state politics. Some of Professor Cain’s most recent publications include “Malleable Constitutions: Reflections on State Constitutional Design,” coauthored with Roger Noll in University of Texas Law Review, volume 2, 2009; “More or Less: Searching for Regulatory Balance,” in Race, Reform and the Political Process, edited by Heather Gerken, Guy Charles and Michael Kang, CUP, 2011; and “Redistricting Commissions: A Better Political Buffer?” in The Yale Law Journal, volume 121, 2012. He is currently working on a book about political reform in the US.
In-person: William J. Perry Conference Room (Encina Hall, 2nd floor, 616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford)
Online: Via Zoom
Encina Hall, C150
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305
Didi Kuo is a Center Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University. She is a scholar of comparative politics with a focus on democratization, corruption and clientelism, political parties and institutions, and political reform. She is the author of The Great Retreat: How Political Parties Should Behave and Why They Don’t (Oxford University Press, forthcoming) and Clientelism, Capitalism, and Democracy: the rise of programmatic politics in the United States and Britain (Cambridge University Press, 2018).
She has been at Stanford since 2013 as the manager of the Program on American Democracy in Comparative Perspective and is co-director of the Fisher Family Honors Program at CDDRL. She was an Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fellow at New America and is a non-resident fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. She received a PhD in political science from Harvard University, an MSc in Economic and Social History from Oxford University, where she studied as a Marshall Scholar, and a BA from Emory University.
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.
![[Left to right]: Michael McFaul, Marshall Burke, Steven Pifer, Oriana Skylar Mastro, Didi Kuo, and Amichai Magen on stage.](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/375x211_x2/public/2024-10/fsi_reunion_2024_panel_hero.png?h=c4d9845d&itok=tBJruaUE)