Difference between revisions of "Online deliberation"
From Deliberative Democracy Institiute Wiki
(→Tools for online deliberation) |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
* [http://www.delib.net/apps Delib: Super-simple apps for deliberative democracy] | * [http://www.delib.net/apps Delib: Super-simple apps for deliberative democracy] | ||
* [https://settleit.org/ Settleit] - A tool to validate the claims and their | * [https://settleit.org/ Settleit] - A tool to validate the claims and their | ||
| − | * [http://incoma.org Incoma] - | + | * [http://incoma.org Incoma] - An [[argument mapping tools|AMT]] deliberative tool. |
* [http://debatewise.org/ Debatewise] - wikidebate. | * [http://debatewise.org/ Debatewise] - wikidebate. | ||
* [http://events.kmi.open.ac.uk/essence/tools/ debate tools], by the open university in united kingdum. | * [http://events.kmi.open.ac.uk/essence/tools/ debate tools], by the open university in united kingdum. | ||
Latest revision as of 00:03, 28 July 2014
In order for a technology to be adopted, it is necessary that the perceived benefits are higher than the costs deriving from its use[1][2].
Tools for online deliberation
- PublicEvolution intresting site for mass participation.
- list of online tools
- Delib: Super-simple apps for deliberative democracy
- Settleit - A tool to validate the claims and their
- Incoma - An AMT deliberative tool.
- Debatewise - wikidebate.
- debate tools, by the open university in united kingdum.
Readings
Todd Davies and Reid Chandler, Online Deliberation Design: Choices, Criteria, and Evidence (2011)
Solving the problem that the topmost comments get all upvotes
References
- ↑ Davis, F. (1989), “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 319-40.
- ↑ Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (2003), “A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies”, Management Science, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 186-204.