The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy
André Bächtiger, Jane J. Mansbridge, J. Dryzek
et al.
Deliberative democracy has been the main game in contemporary political theory for two decades and has grown enormously in size and importance in political science and many other disciplines, and in political practice. The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy takes stock of deliberative democracy as a research field, as well as exploring and creating links with multiple disciplines and policy practice around the globe. It provides a concise history of deliberative ideals in political thought while also discussing their philosophical origins. It locates deliberation in a political system with different spaces, publics, and venues, including parliament and courts but also governance networks, protests, mini-publics, old and new media, and everyday talk. It documents the intersections of deliberative ideals with contemporary political theory, involving epistemology, representation, constitutionalism, justice, and multiculturalism. It explores the intersections of deliberative democracy with major research fields in the social sciences and law, including social and rational choice theory, communications, psychology, sociology, international relations, framing approaches, policy analysis, planning, democratization, and methodology. It engages with practical applications, mapping deliberation as a reform movement and as a device for conflict resolution. It documents the practice and study of deliberative democracy around the world, in Asia, Latin America, Africa, Europe, and global governance. And it provides reflections on the field by pioneering thinkers.
497 sitasi
en
Political Science
SemEval-2026 Task 6: CLARITY -- Unmasking Political Question Evasions
Konstantinos Thomas, Giorgos Filandrianos, Maria Lymperaiou
et al.
Political speakers often avoid answering questions directly while maintaining the appearance of responsiveness. Despite its importance for public discourse, such strategic evasion remains underexplored in Natural Language Processing. We introduce SemEval-2026 Task 6, CLARITY, a shared task on political question evasion consisting of two subtasks: (i) clarity-level classification into Clear Reply, Ambivalent, and Clear Non-Reply, and (ii) evasion-level classification into nine fine-grained evasion strategies. The benchmark is constructed from U.S. presidential interviews and follows an expert-grounded taxonomy of response clarity and evasion. The task attracted 124 registered teams, who submitted 946 valid runs for clarity-level classification and 539 for evasion-level classification. Results show a substantial gap in difficulty between the two subtasks: the best system achieved 0.89 macro-F1 on clarity classification, surpassing the strongest baseline by a large margin, while the top evasion-level system reached 0.68 macro-F1, matching the best baseline. Overall, large language model prompting and hierarchical exploitation of the taxonomy emerged as the most effective strategies, with top systems consistently outperforming those that treated the two subtasks independently. CLARITY establishes political response evasion as a challenging benchmark for computational discourse analysis and highlights the difficulty of modeling strategic ambiguity in political language.