Working Papers Overview

Nigeria Deliberative Town Hall Bende: Opinions & Vote Intention About the Honourable
Marco Castradori, Michael A. Neblo, William Minozzi

This working paper explores the effects of attending a hybrid Deliberative Town Hall (DTH) held on 27 January 2024 in Bende, Nigeria, focused on infrastructural development. Embedded within a field experiment, the study evaluates how participation in the event shaped attendees' national versus ethnic identity. Data was collected through both pre- and post-event surveys, with outcomes grouped across multiple thematic families.

Nigeria Deliberative Town Hall Bende: National v. Ethnic Identity
Marco Castradori, Michael A. Neblo, William Minozzi

On February 3, 2024, the Democracy Institute organized a hybrid online/in-person Deliberative Town Hall in Baruten/Kaiama, Nigeria. The event focused on the policing infrastructure of the area. This working paper details the findings of a field experiment conducted at the event. It studies the effects of attending the town hall on the attendees’ sense of national versus ethnic identity.

Nigeria Deliberative Town Halls Baruten/Kaiama: Current Evaluations of Nigerian Democracy’s Future
Marco Castradori, Michael A. Neblo, William Minozzi

On February 3, 2024, a hybrid online and in-person Deliberative Town Hall was organized by the Democracy Institute in Baruten/Kaiama, Nigeria. The event’s topic was the policing infrastructure and its development in the area. This work was a collaborative effort by Marco Castradori, Michael Neblo, and William Minozzi.

This working paper details a field experiment with both pre- and post-event surveys. The study’s primary goal was to measure the effects of attending the town hall on the participants' current evaluations of Nigerian democracy.

Logos, Ethos, & Pathos: Mechanisms of Persuasion in a Deliberative Field Experiment
Michael A. Neblo, Kevin M. Esterling, David Lazer, William Minozzi
APSA Annual Meeting Paper 

This paper presents a field experiment in which constituents engaged in online deliberative sessions with their members of Congress to study how persuasion operates through Aristotle’s rhetorical modes: logos (reason), ethos (credibility), and pathos (emotion). The results show that pro-immigration legislators were able to persuade both co-partisan and opposing constituents—largely through logical arguments and emotional appeals—while anti-immigration legislators had limited persuasive impact, primarily managing to neutralize opposing views rather than convert them. 

A Theory of Deliberation as Interactive Reasoning
Michael Neblo, David Siegel, William Minozzi
APSA Annual Meeting Paper 

This paper introduces a formal model of the “ideal speech situation,” where participants in deliberation aim to understand and be understood rather than to influence outcomes strategically. It examines how consensus emerges through reason-giving and challenges among actors, and how the dynamics of deliberation shift depending on the group's composition.  

Thrasymachus's Blush: Political Psychology and the Road to Democratic Realism
Michael A. Neblo, William Minozzi

This article explores the emotional and social dimensions of blushing, arguing that it plays a crucial role in signaling moral character, sincerity, and social attunement. By examining philosophical, psychological, and physiological perspectives, the author shows how blushing functions as a visible, involuntary expression that reinforces ethical behavior and social trust. 

Expertise and the Promise of Non-Electoral Representation: A National Field Experiment on Deliberation with Congressional Committee Leaders
Jungbae An, William Minozzi, Michael A. Neblo