1) how “representative” groups are chosen – selecting group participants on the basis of superficial criteria such as population demographics or political identity. He does not take into account personality traits (e.g. the Big Five Traits) or first and second derivative criteria such as how the participants learn, work, and socialize. If one places several introverted, empathetic persons sharing one ideology in group settings with a select few who are manipulative extroverts of the opposite ideology, it is no wonder the “results” of such a group process are skewed towards the ideology of the manipulative extroverts.

2) how individual opinions and decisions are affected by a group process – in an uncontrolled environment, people form opinions in a variety of ways, from unfettered individual introspection to group conformism. By enforcing group interaction with consensus goals, people who would otherwise reach one opinion or decision in a free and unfettered environment can be coerced into an opinion opposite to an otherwise considered and educated perspective.

In Fishkin’s drive for an “educated” populace with egalitarian ideals, he either sorely neglects clear lessons of group dynamics or simply chooses to use them for his own devices. Which is it, Dr. Fishkin?

This post was mentioned on Twitter by oupblog: Watch the people speak: http://bit.ly/3iaPuY…