For review look at<ref>[http://www.la1.psu.edu/cas/jgastil/pdfs/MeasuringGroupDeliberation.pdf Black, Laura W., et al. "Methods for analyzing and measuring group deliberation." Sourcebook of political communication research: Methods, measures, and analytical techniques (2011): 323-345.]‏</ref>, and look at my [http://www.mindmeister.com/372331221/_ mind map] based on the above.

’ preferences).

Those that measure deliberation directly examine the deliberative discussion to determine the extent to which the discussion corresponds to theoretical conceptions of deliberation.

'''[[DQI]]''': Measuring Political Deliberation: A [[Steenbergen - 2003 -Discourse Quality Index|Discourse Quality Index]] (2003), based on Habermas theories<ref>[http://content.csbs.utah.edu/~burbank/steenbergen2003.pdf Steenbergen, Marco R., et al. "Measuring political deliberation: a discourse quality index." Comparative European Politics 1.1 (2003): 21-48].‏</ref>.

An attmept to [[Bachtiger - 2009 - Discourse Quality Index|improve DQI]]<ref>[http://www.ash.harvard.edu/extension/ash/docs/baechtiger.pdf Bachtiger, A., et al. "Measuring deliberation 2.0: standards, discourse types, and sequenzialization." ECPR General Conference, Potsdam. 2009.]‏</ref>

Holtinger (In German)<ref>Holzinger, Katharina. 2001. Kommunikationsmodi und Handlungstypen in den Internationalen Beziehungen. Anmerkungen zu einigen irreführenden Dichotomien. Politische Vierteljahreschrift 42, 414-446</ref>

read<ref>[http://www.publicdeliberation.net/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1049&context=jpd Stromer-Galley, J. (2007). Measuring deliberation’s content: A coding scheme. Journal of Public Deliberation, 3(1), 12.]</ref>

[[argument repertoire]]

Studies using indirect measures assess deliberation based on either antecedents (for example, by measuring the extent to which conditions necessary for deliberation are met) or outcomes of the discussion (for example, by measuring post-deliberation changes in participants).