摘要
In this paper, we explore conceptualizations of ‘ordinary’ citizens common in public engagement forums on emerging technologies and assumptions from deliberative theory that ordinary people are more likely to be appropriately ‘changed’ through deliberative processes facilitated by experts. Looking at a large US public forum event [the National Citizens Technology Forum (NCTF)], we asked: What were the goals for this exercise and how did they shape conceptualizations of ordinariness and representativeness? Whose goals and conceptualizations were they? Were the engaged citizens ordinary and representative—and were they changed by the exercise? Our exploration revealed that exercise organizers conceived of ordinary citizens as people lacking science and technology backgrounds, without advocacy or business connections to the technologies at hand, and demographically reflecting the US population. Exercise materials also implied that ideal ordinary participants would lack strong opinions and emotions about these technologies. Actual NCTF participants, however, tended to be more educated, have higher incomes, and to be more liberal than the US public, and participants from all backgrounds had a range of relevant knowledge, experiences and opinions about science and technology. They were changed by the exercise in complex and conflicting ways—based as much on their own knowledge and reflections on relational dynamics as on exercise processes, interactions with experts, and information provided in the exercise. We argue that inadequately explored ideas about ordinary citizens are highly problematic. Further, invisible assumptions about what is ‘normal’ among experts and status quo institutions serve to reify the lay–expert divide that engagement exercises are intended to counteract.
中文摘要
在本文中，我们探讨了新兴技术公共参与论坛中常见的“普通”公民的概念，以及审议理论中的假设，即普通人更有可能通过专家推动的审议过程得到适当的“改变”。看着美国一个大型公共论坛活动[国家公民技术论坛（NCTF）]，我们问道：这项活动的目标是什么？它们是如何塑造普通性和代表性的概念的？他们是谁的目标和概念？参与的公民是普通的和有代表性的吗？他们是否因演习而改变了？我们的探索表明，演习组织者将普通公民视为缺乏科学和技术背景的人，与现有技术没有宣传或商业联系，并且在人口统计学上反映了美国人口。锻炼材料还暗示，理想的普通参与者对这些技术缺乏强烈的意见和情感。然而，实际的NCTF参与者往往比美国公众受教育程度更高，收入更高，更自由，来自各种背景的参与者都有一系列关于科学和技术的相关知识、经验和意见。他们在锻炼过程、与专家的互动以及锻炼中提供的信息的基础上，以复杂和冲突的方式改变了他们自己的知识和对关系动力学的思考。我们认为，对普通公民的思想探索不足是非常有问题的。此外，关于专家和现状机构之间什么是“正常”的无形假设，有助于具体化参与活动旨在抵消的非专业分歧。
