« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER TWO METHODOLOGY AND RATIONALE
Methodology - strengths and limitations of a Citizens' Jury approach
2.1 A Citizens' Jury is a unique approach to qualitative research in that it enables members of the public to make informed decisions on complicated issues. The premise behind the approach is that, given enough time (3 days in this case) and information, members of the public can make decisions about complicated issues. The rationale behind any Citizens' Jury is that the informed recommendations of the jurors will feed into decision-making.
2.2 The Citizens' Jury was made up of 24 participants who were randomly selected and demographically representative members of the public. 4 Jurors heard from a variety of experts during the three days, deliberated about government communications and presented their findings at the end of the event. Jurors received a fee for their time.
2.3 The Citizens' Jury model was selected to enable the Scottish Executive to explore public perceptions of government communications broadly, rather than to answer all its specific questions conclusively. It is important to acknowledge what a Citizens' Jury can and cannot do in terms of answering research questions.
2.4 As a deliberative process, the findings represent participants' views and opinions given access to information, evidence and opinion about the topic. This inevitably influences how jurors respond. As such, it does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the general public ( i.e. what people say prior to information and deliberation) but does give an idea of what citizens might think given full information about a subject. Also, a Jury only involves a small number of people (no more than 25) which means that the findings cannot be generalised across the entire population. Similarly, due to the qualitative nature of the research methodology, it is not possible to reflect findings in statistical terms or to reflect trends. However the jury process does allow a two-way discussion of complex subjects and encourages jurors to adopt a citizen perspective, rather than a self-interested viewpoint.
Agenda and discussion guide
2.5 Jury facilitators used an agreed facilitators' guide to structure the discussions. A range of enabling techniques was also used during the course of discussion. The enabling techniques and materials included the following:
- Pre-task: Jurors were asked to bring three pieces of 'Government communications' to understand what people perceived government communications to be. Relatively few jurors completed the exercise, therefore, it is not reported in detail
- Direct questions and answer (Q&A), i.e. moderated group discussions
- Mapping exercises using shuffle cards on different types of communication
- Briefing notes on Scottish Executive and its role, definition of communications, list of Scottish Executive campaigns and consultations
- Scottish Executive communications: using examples from the One Scotland, Healthier Scotland and Anti-Social Behaviour campaigns across paid and unpaid platforms ( e.g.TV, Radio, Press and Poster campaigns; other editorial platforms, including Talking Scotland, Life Matters, newspaper columns; news coverage of ministerial speeches / interviews, other news coverage)
- Examples of language / phrases used by ministers in context, e.g. speeches
- Collage techniques to identify communications 'heaven' and 'hell' benchmarks.
Expert witnesses
2.6 Independent expert witnesses were recruited and briefed by Opinion Leader Research from lists supplied by the Scottish Executive. The aim of the three sessions with expert witnesses was to develop jurors' knowledge and understanding of Scottish Executive communications, as well as jurors hearing presentations from experts with a specific 'point of view' and/or expertise.
2.7 All were asked to speak for a limited amount of time (between 5 and 15 minutes depending on the session) to allow plenty of time for questions and discussion afterwards.
Rationale
2.8 The research was commissioned to explore questions relating to effective government communication and civic participation in Scotland. With the creation of devolved government in Scotland, came a strong emphasis on creating an open, accessible and participative approach to engage with the Scottish people, particularly those groups traditionally excluded from the democratic process. In particular, the Consultative Steering Group of the Scottish Parliament stressed the need to "adopt procedures and practices that people will understand, that will engage their interest, and that will encourage them to obtain information and exchange views." 5 Effective communications are recognised as a fundamental part of this approach.
2.9 Where appropriate, we also indicate the relevance of the original Phillis Review Group conclusions to this research through the report (and a summary of the main Phillis Review Group conclusions is appended). The Phillis Review Group explored different ways of structuring and managing government communications. It highlighted the breakdown in trust between government and politicians, the media and the general public at the time. This was thought to have led to disillusionment and disengagement with politics and democratic processes within different groups in society. While the remit of the review group was UK-wide, no research was conducted in Scotland to inform its work. In summary, we believe the Review Group conclusions remain highly relevant in Scotland, despite some differences highlighted below:
- Location: Scotland (rather than other UK countries)
- Context: At a different time / against a different social context ( i.e. introduction of new legislation, such as Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act). Scottish Executive is a newer organisation, operating in a different social context, and using different brand architecture to UK Government; as such, this can make direct comparisons difficult
- Approach: The Phillis Review Group report and recommendations were based on a consultation with civil servants, external experts, and the general public; the Scottish Executive study was based on public opinion only
- Methodology: To meet the range of detailed questions of interest to the Scottish Executive, the Citizens' Jury approach used in Scotland was smaller in scale and adopted a different methodology to the qualitative, deliberative workshops conducted by Opinion Leader Research to inform the Phillis Review
- Focus: The Phillis Review Group recommendations were based on evidence from a range of sources, including research, and focused on internal process to ensure a fair and effective government communications process; the Scottish Executive research study focused on communications outputs rather than the processes that produce them.
2.10 It is worth highlighting at the outset that we found that the majority of jurors had limited knowledge and understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the Scottish Executive. Their perceptions of the Scottish Executive were influenced by their views on government more generally, and they often did not differentiate between the Scottish Executive and other levels of government (eg. Westminster, local government). This is an important finding in its own right, and the jurors' views on the Scottish Executive need to be considered with this in mind.
2.11 For clarity, the term Scottish Executive is used throughout this report to describe jurors' references to Scottish government. However, it is important to bear in mind the low awareness of the title 'Scottish Executive', and low understanding of its roles and responsibilities, when considering findings.
« Previous | Contents | Next »