The optimal group size of deliberative mini‐publics: A divide in perceptions
通过对比利时和英国公民的调查，发现多数人认为100人是最佳规模，但有一大群人要求超过1000人，这反映了公众对协商式微型公众规模认知的分歧。
Abstract Deliberative mini‐publics (DMPs) have the potential to bolster political trust, although poorly organized ones may worsen existing distrust. Therefore, it is essential to consider citizens' perceptions regarding their implementation. This article examines a key aspect in this regard: the optimal group size of DMPs, as perceived by the public. Three studies were conducted: an exploratory pilot study ( n = 194 Belgian citizens), Study 1 ( n = 516 UK citizens), and Study 2 ( n = 527 UK citizens), which was a preregistered replication in a representative sample. In each study, participants evaluated various DMP sizes on four dimensions of legitimacy: representativeness, deliberation quality, efficiency, and efficacy. Our findings indicate that most participants intuitively make a trade‐off between these different dimensions when evaluating how many citizens should partake in DMPs. In particular, a group of 100 citizens was identified as the size for DMPs to be perceived as representative, without compromising the perceived deliberation quality, efficiency, and efficacy. Remarkably, however, there is also a distinct and substantial group of participants who demand more than 1000 participating citizens to be satisfied. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.