Mädler, David (2025) Who Has a Voice? The Role of Group Composition and Gender on Perceived Contribution to Group Deliberation. Bachelor thesis, Psychology.
|
Text
Maedler5170990Who-Has-a-Voice-The-Role-of-Group-Composition-and-Gender-on-Perceived-Contribution-to-Group-Deliberation.pdf Download (815kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Citizens’ assemblies have been heralded as a promising and valuable measure to address and engage in complex societal issues, such as climate change (policies). Ensuring diversity of perspectives is crucial to Citizens’ assemblies in order to be representative of the broader population. But while a diverse representation of perspectives might be facilitated, not all individuals feel equally enabled to contribute. In fact, research has shown that in heterogeneous groups, members of the (ethnic/cultural) minority group contributed less compared to individuals from the majority group. In the current study, we investigate whether different group compositions with regards to gender affect participants’ levels of perceived contribution. Based on theory of power imbalances between groups of differing social status, we hypothesize that levels of perceived contribution will be lower in the mixed-gender groups, while this relationship will be moderated by gender. We held 20 small-group discussions (10 homogeneous, 10 heterogeneous), in which participants (N = 36) were asked to find group consensus, before assessing their perception of contribution to deliberation. Results showed that perceived contribution was significantly higher among participants in the single-gender compared to the mixed-gender groups. Furthermore, a marginally significant moderation effect of gender was found, with women reporting higher levels of perceived contribution in the single-gender group while no difference between group conditions was found for men. Practical implications of the findings for policy-making and facilitators of deliberative measures, such as the potential benefits of all-female groups or single-gender break-out sessions are discussed. Limitations of the study and future research perspectives are proposed.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Bachelor) |
|---|---|
| Supervisor name: | Eichholtzer, A.C. |
| Degree programme: | Psychology |
| Differentiation route: | None [Bachelor Psychology] |
| Date Deposited: | 02 Jul 2025 08:59 |
| Last Modified: | 02 Jul 2025 08:59 |
| URI: | http://gmwpublic.studenttheses.ub.rug.nl/id/eprint/5212 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |