This article draws on the deliberative play framework to examine empirical examples of storytelling in an online deliberative forum: The Oregon Citizen Assembly (ORCA) Pilot on COVID-19 Recovery. ORCA engaged 36 citizens in deliberation about state policy through an online deliberative process spanning seven weeks. Drawing on literature on small stories in deliberation, we trace stories related to a policy proposal about paying parents to educate children at home. Our analysis demonstrates that storytelling activities accomplish aspects of deliberative play through introducing uncertainty, resisting premature closure, and promoting an “as if” frame that allows groups to explore the scope and implications of proposals. Forum design influences interaction and our analysis suggests that technology use and timing are key design features that can facilitate or inhibit deliberative play.
BächtigerA.DryzekJ. S.MansbrigeJ.WarrenM. E. (2018). The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy. Oxford University Press.
3.
BambergM.GeorgakopoulouA. (2008). Small stories as a new perspective in narrative and identity analysis. Text & Talk, 28(3), 377–396. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2008.018
4.
BatesonG. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chandler Publishing.
BlackL. W. (2009). Listening to the city: Difference, identity, and storytelling in online deliberative groups. Journal of Public Deliberation, 5(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.76
7.
BlackL. W. (2012). How people communicate during deliberative events. In NabatchiT.WeiksnerM.GastilJ.LeighningerM. (Eds.), Democracy in motion: Evaluating the practice and impact of deliberative civic engagement (pp. 59–78). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199899265.003.0004
8.
BlackL. W. (2013). Framing democracy and conflict through storytelling in deliberative groups. Journal of Public Deliberation, 9(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.153
9.
BurkhalterS.GastilJ.KelshawT. (2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communication Theory, 12(4), 398–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00276.x
10.
CarcassonM.SprainL. (2016). Beyond problem solving: Reconceptualizing the work of public deliberation as deliberative inquiry. Communication Theory, 26(1), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12055
11.
CohenJ. (1996). Procedure and substance in deliberative democracy. In BenhabibS. (Ed), Democracy and difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political (pp. 95–119). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691234168-006
CraigR. T. (2023). Introduction: Deliberative play. American Behavioral Scientist, 67(8), 951–962.
14.
DillardK. N. (2013). Envisioning the role of facilitation in public deliberation. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41(3), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2013.826813
15.
FisherW. R. (1984). Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument. Communication Monographs, 51(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758409390180
16.
FrankA. W. (1995). The wounded storyteller: Body, illness, and ethics. University of Chicago Press.
17.
FraserN. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, 25/26(25/26), 56–80. http://www.jstor.org/stable/466240
18.
GastilJ.AndersonC.BlackL. W.BurkhalterS.HanS-H.ReedyJ., et al. (2021). Convening a minipublic during a pandemic: A case study of the Oregon Citizens’ Assembly Pilot on COVID-19 Recovery. Digital Government: Research and Practice.
19.
GastilJ.BlackL. W. (2018). Deliberation in communication studies. In BächtigerA.DryzekJ.MansbridgeJ.WarrenM. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy (pp. 502–517). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198747369.013.47
20.
GastillJ.KnoblochK. R. (2020). Hope for democracy: How citizens can bring reason back into politics. Oxford University Press.
21.
HabermasJ. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. MIT Press.
22.
LukianovaE.SteffensmeierT. (2020). “Well, in the case of my mom . . .” personal stories as negotiable arguments in public forums. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 9(3), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.19005.luk
RyfeD. M. (2006). Narrative and deliberation in small group forums. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34(1), 72–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880500420226
SetäläM.SmithG. (2018). Mini-publics and deliberative democracy. In BächtigerA.DryzekJ. S.MansbridgeJ.WarrenM. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy (pp. 300–314). Oxford University Press.
28.
SprainL.HughesJ. M. F. (2015). A new perspective on stories in public deliberation: Analyzing small stories in discussions about immigration. Text & Talk, 35(4), 531–551. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2015-0013
29.
TracyS. J. (2020). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. Wiley.
30.
von BertalanffyL. (1968). General systems theory: Foundations, development, applications. George Braziller.
31.
WeickK. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. SAGE.
