<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Civic Studies &#187; John Gastil</title>
	<atom:link href="http://civicstudies.org/category/john-gastil/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://civicstudies.org</link>
	<description>An intellectual community of researchers and practitioners dedicated to building the emerging field of civic studies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2026 14:08:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.41</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Testing Assumptions in Deliberative Democratic Design: A Preliminary Assessment of the Efficacy of the Participedia Data Archive as an Analytic Tool</title>
		<link>http://ncdd.org/rc/item/12253/</link>
		<comments>http://ncdd.org/rc/item/12253/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:00:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Keiva Hummel]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deliberation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Gastil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Journal of Public Deliberation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Journals & Newsletters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online & hi-tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public engagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reports & Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ncdd.org/rc/?p=12253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 31-page article,&#160;Testing Assumptions in Deliberative Democratic Design: A Preliminary Assessment of the Efficacy of the Participedia Data Archive as an Analytic Tool (2017), was written by John Gastil, Robert C. Richards Jr, Matt Ryan, and Graham Smith and&#160;published in the&#160;Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 13: Iss. 2. In the article, the authors discuss how deliberative process design affects participants and the resulting policy, they then tested their hypotheses using case studies from Participedia.net, and finally offer implications for their theory. Read an excerpt of [&#8230;] <a href="http://ncdd.org/rc/item/12253/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://civicstudies.org/2018/04/16/testing-assumptions-in-deliberative-democratic-design-a-preliminary-assessment-of-the-efficacy-of-the-participedia-data-archive-as-an-analytic-tool/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="" length="0" type="" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deliberating While Voting: The Antecedents, Dynamics, And Consequences Of Talking While Completing Ballots In Two Vote-By-Mail States</title>
		<link>http://ncdd.org/rc/item/9948</link>
		<comments>http://ncdd.org/rc/item/9948#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:00:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Keiva Hummel]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Studies & Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deliberation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Gastil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Journal of Public Deliberation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public engagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ncdd.org/rc/?p=9948</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The study,&#160;Deliberating While Voting: The Antecedents, Dynamics, And Consequences Of Talking While Completing Ballots In Two Vote-By-Mail States&#160;(2015), by&#160;Justin Reedy and John Gastil was&#160;published in&#160;Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 11: Iss. 1. The paper explores how the deliberative process occurs for citizens who voted by mail in Oregon and Washington, and how this influenced the way voters felt about the process itself. From the Abstract An overlooked context for citizen deliberation occurs when voters discuss their ballots with others while completing them at home. Voting [&#8230;] <a href="http://ncdd.org/rc/item/9948">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://civicstudies.org/2015/08/11/deliberating-while-voting-the-antecedents-dynamics-and-consequences-of-talking-while-completing-ballots-in-two-vote-by-mail-states/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="" length="0" type="" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Everyone Counts: Could Participatory Budgeting Change Democracy?</title>
		<link>http://ncdd.org/rc/item/9293</link>
		<comments>http://ncdd.org/rc/item/9293#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2015 19:10:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Keiva Hummel]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books & Booklets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[great for beginners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[great for public managers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[highly recommended]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Gastil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Participatory Budgeting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public engagement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ncdd.org/rc/?p=9293</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Written by Josh Lerner, Executive Director of the Participatory Budgeting Project&#160;(PBP),&#160;Everyone Counts&#160;was commissioned by the McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State to celebrate the Participatory Budgeting Project winning the inaugural Brown Democracy Medal in April 2014. According to John Gastil, Director of the McCourtney Institute for Democracy, &#8220;The Participatory Budgeting Project exemplifies the essential features the award committee was looking for in its inaugural recipient. Political and economic inequality is part of the American national discussion, and participatory budgeting helps empower marginalized groups that [&#8230;] <a href="http://ncdd.org/rc/item/9293">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://civicstudies.org/2015/01/17/everyone-counts-could-participatory-budgeting-change-democracy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="" length="0" type="" />
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
