Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns Michael Patrick, B.A. University of Washington Department of Geography Abstract: Qualitative methods inform the design of a participatory system in two ways; the generation of system requirements and enabling large groups of public participants to use quali- tative methods themselves as ‘participant researchers’ to self discover their own value systems. This then allows the incorporation of these multiple personal perspectives and realities into de- liberative discussion of major transportation infrastructure investments. Discourse analysis, content analysis, and textual analysis along with multiple forms of participant observation were used to identify key aspects foronline interview techniques and evaluate their application for de- ployment via the Internet. Deliberative processes deploy across varying spectrum from macro-scale societal paradigms down through group discussion process and eventually grounding in the individual’s own state- ments of belief. Discourse and content analysis is used to derive a discourse typology to identify the roles and transformations of information in the system, to expose the mechanisms of author- ity, social interactions and knowledge building. This typology is used along with textual analysis of online venues to select the most appropriate communication genre. A framework for address- ing the multiple geographic scales of not only traditional coordinate systems of location andtime, but other axes of values and representations is suggested to coherently position and relate concepts occurring in the initial interview and following deliberative processes. A purposeful elicitation method based on that framework that accommodates the cognitive and epistemological processes of the individual is proposed that can facilitate self discovery andprovide rich source material for group processes, while neutralizing and mitigating undesirable influences. Two examples of a transportation concerns elicitation interview using this structure are compared; one highly structured using Internet Instant Messaging and another using semi- structured conventional face to face. The IM interview was condensed into narrative form andconcept maps generated using NLP/STP (Natural Language Processing / Shallow Text Parsing. By using geo-demographics; an typical transportation concern was extrapolated to the regionalpopulation and spatially located using GIS.
31
Embed
Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
Michael Patrick, B.A.
University of Washington Department of Geography
Abstract: Qualitative methods inform the design of a participatory system in two ways; the generation of system requirements and enabling large groups of public participants to use quali-
tative methods themselves as ‘participant researchers’ to self discover their own value systems.
This then allows the incorporation of these multiple personal perspectives and realities into de-liberative discussion of major transportation infrastructure investments. Discourse analysis,
content analysis, and textual analysis along with multiple forms of participant observation were
used to identify key aspects foronline interview techniques and evaluate their application for de- ployment via the Internet.
Deliberative processes deploy across varying spectrum from macro-scale societal paradigms
down through group discussion process and eventually grounding in the individual’s own state-
ments of belief. Discourse and content analysis is used to derive a discourse typology to identifythe roles and transformations of information in the system, to expose the mechanisms of author-
ity, social interactions and knowledge building. This typology is used along with textual analysis
of online venues to select the most appropriate communication genre. A framework for address-ing the multiple geographic scales of not only traditional coordinate systems of location and
time, but other axes of values and representations is suggested to coherently position and relate
concepts occurring in the initial interview and following deliberative processes.
A purposeful elicitation method based on that framework that accommodates the cognitive
and epistemological processes of the individual is proposed that can facilitate self discovery and provide rich source material for group processes, while neutralizing and mitigating undesirable
influences. Two examples of a transportation concerns elicitation interview using this structureare compared; one highly structured using Internet Instant Messaging and another using semi-
structured conventional face to face. The IM interview was condensed into narrative form and
concept maps generated using NLP/STP (Natural Language Processing / Shallow Text Parsing. By using geo-demographics; an typical transportation concern was extrapolated to the regional
population and spatially located using GIS.
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
80% of those airliners would be filled with passengers sick from Ebola just before aircraft itself
exploded. Our software systems and communications are provided be corporations with their
own economic and power agendas which rarely align with the needs of typical users. Software is
all about power, and it is so brittle, complex and delicate that it can rarely accommodate chang-
ing realities and emerging conditions.
Also, any Internet based participatory system will be fundamentally affected by ‘Digital Di-
vide’ issues. Since the access is via the Internet, this predisposes a certain population with tech-
nology provision and familiarity with online genres of communication, which can seriously un-
der-represent certain populations because of economic class, age, and minority status. Even if the
individual has Internet access, their level of comfort about privacy engaging in any process that
explores their personal lifestyle around transportation will impact recruitment and process. Edu-
cational status will have a serious influence; the process also requires a certain level of literacy,
the expectation that the participants will generally compose complete sentences and perhaps
short paragraphs. Most of all, a person’s attitude and patience will be stressed by the seemingly
repetitive nature of the questions. The other influence is that the geo-demographics reflects their
residence, and says little of their space time trajectory, place of work or other aspects of their ex-
perience.
Resources
The primary resources needed for my project are already present in an academic environment
– ready access to a widely varied selection of journals across different academic disciples, access
to the campus network for connectivity and applications. While these preliminary structured in-
terviews could be accomplished with existing IM clients, the software to analyze and generate
the natural language processing from the transcripts was beyond my skill level and required the
assistance of an external programming team. Another key resource was volunteers to participate
in the interviews and provide feedback on the techniques. The most important resource was ac-
cess to the variety of my fellow researchers on the team, who provided critical feedback, discus-sion, guidance and reading suggestions and the support of my principal investigator for the grant.
Introduction and background
Designing any software system is, in the beginning, a qualitative exercise. The main diffi-
culty was shear breadth of the subject – transportation touches every person and institution at all
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
levels of society, and affects environmental, economic and equity issues. In a corporate environ-
ment, one first looks to the market of the enterprise, external to the business itself, because the
system also needs to account for interactions with vendors and customers and regulatory agen-
cies. Only then does one turn to examine the internal business model. In the commercial sector,
these forces are essentially economic and objective in nature, and directly reflect to the products
and services of the company, describing a ‘value network’. The architect relies on qualitative
methods to discover these via examining corporate documents, conducting interviews, writing
use case narratives and building user stories. These yield the overall patterns and aspects. The
goal is to establish a compelling metaphor – an analogy common to both the architect and cus-
tomer that resonates with the activities being performed. The use of metaphors is compelling be-
cause it allows the users to communicate their activities readily in ordinary language, and the
metaphor can provide the beginnings of structure for the system. The software development ef-
fort had no compelling metaphor to guide progress.
While this conceptual path works well in a business environment, it rapidly hit the rocks
when applied to a public system because the users were everybody and the subjects were diverse,
and the roles obscure. Critical discourse analysis and textual analysis of the public discourse
about transportation was attempted to identify the spheres of discourse, reasoning, and the chan-
nels of communication between them. This analysis examined multiple sources: institutional,
agency, and NGO documents, news media articles, editorials and letters from readers. Severalexamples culled from this analysis provide insight into dividing the public sphere and relating
those parts to public participation. A discourse typology was then derived from these insights,
and the system described according to the discourse spheres and information channels between
them.
The Public and the Politics in the Puget Sound
Recent major transportation projects in the NW have a dismal record of success. Recently
citizens of Seattle voted to short circuit the conventional government process and undertake amulti-billion dollar capital transportation project, the Monorail, outside the existing governmen-
tal institutions supposedly responsible for transportation improvements8. This came up for sev-
eral public votes before finally being scrapped because of cost over runs and a steadily increas-
ing perception of unrealistic cost benefit ratios and distrust of agency management. In another
case, when the state legislature with rare bipartisan cooperation passed a significant capitaliza-
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
tion funded by a gas tax for transportation projects based on the recommendations of technical
experts and planners, a swift and overwhelming grass root counter narrative appeared, culminat-
ing in an anti-gas tax citizen initiative.
When we examine what was said in the media, the issues and themes were more emotional
than logical, and a reaction not against the projects themselves, but rather a backlash against the
institutions themselves. This citizen initiative with 14,000 volunteers collected more than
420,000 signatures in 32 days to place the measure on the ballot. Initiative organizer Ron Carl-
son stated in the Seattle Times9:
“Opponents of the initiative admit they're stunned (and to be completely candid, so are initiative support-ers). But what does it all mean? … People aren't ignorant about transportation. In fact, they understand it
probably better than any other issue. Why? Because they travel every day. So does everyone they know.
They see what their taxes are buying. They talk about it with family, friends, neighbors and co-workers on aregular basis. People aren't trying to have it "both ways." The oft-repeated claim that the public is demand-
ing improvements it doesn't want to pay for is simply not true … People are angry because they're not get-ting what they paid for. What people want is one thing: congestion relief.”
These examples demonstrate that the complete failure of politicians and various special inter-
est groups to address the public’s perceptions and values. We can look underneath at how this
hegemonic condition occurs by examining the membership, minutes, and recommendations of
the January 2000 Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation 10. The membership included most
of the typical political elite and vested interests, with only two members from so-called ‘public
interest’ groups (labor unions with their own vested interests), and notably ‘Public Opinion’ was
last on their agenda of 16 items and was barely touched on. Although this group did an extensive
review of everything from freight mobility to studded snow tires, the only public input was from
a very narrowly focused telephone multiple choice stacked deck survey of 800 voters. Still, it
was noted in the minutes by the Chair that:
“… it is hard to know what will cause people to believe their government is efficient and how best
to shed light on efficiency issues. The perceived detachment from government does not help, and he
questioned how we can instill a sense of personal engagement – the equivalent of a community roof-
raising – for transportation improvements.”
It was then recommended that the state add a ‘theme’ to their public relations messaging. How to
relate to the public was discussed in very condescending terms:
“… The presentations led some to wonder if there was a disconnect between the public perceptionand the reality. It was noted that the speakers had only presented one side…. Some expressed the
opinion that these objective criteria might prevent small, passionate groups from unduly influencing
the process in their favor … Since the public has a limited appetite for specific details, it would re-
quire significant effort to tailor a message that frames the issue in appropriate terms. … It would behelpful, however, if these costs could be put into terms that people could readily understand.”
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
It is interesting to note that this gas repeal initiative by a close margin nearly imposed the
public’s ‘reality’ by slashing available funding by 60%, and what most people complained about
not having enough transparency in the process ( in other words not enough ‘specific details’).
The panel recommendations only described the public input as related to the specific agenda
items of the commission – not what the public thought was important. Overall, the commission’s
recommendations barely mentioned ecological issues and totally ignored equity issues.
An examination of the Washington State Department of Transportation 11 web site for public
outreach reveals one outreach effort to form focus groups in response to the failure of Referen-
dum 51 in 2003 on three subjects: A potential ‘better driving habits’ advertising campaign to re-
duce congestion, the use of tolls and HOT lanes and the update of the Washington Transportation
Plan – these three topics are two mice and an elephant. WSDOT spent $70,000 to gather 98 peo-
ple participated in 10 focus groups. The notable point here is that while most corporations spend
from 5% to 15% of their total budgets on market research, this agency spent only $70,000 to
gather public feedback information on tens of billions of dollars on capital improvements for up-
coming years. Compare this three order of magnitude difference to what a local company spends
on discovering the public’s needs and communicating the value of their products and services to
the public ( Sales and Marketing) in this area12
:
“S&M ( Sales and Marketing ) Spending as a Percent of Total Company Revenues - We asked our survey re- spondents to tell us the percent of total company revenue they spend on “all forms of sales and marketing,”
and we found that the overall average was 20.7%, with half of the companies in our sample reporting S&M spending between 12% and 26%. (As a point of reference, Microsoft currently spends 18%-19% of its reve-
nues on sales and marketing.) The real surprise, however, is that company size and product price seem to
have almost no impact on this ratio.”
The only other means of public engagement is the ballot box during the multi-year election
cycles – the equivalent of driving a car and only being able to steer only hard left or hard right
only for a few seconds on the freeway. The antagonist relations brought forward in this latent
content analysis reveal three important spheres of discourse within the public sphere, each with
their own argumentative style of knowledge production, and the information channels which link
them – The Executives, the Technical Experts, and the Public Participants.
Argument Theory (AT)
Public policy formation has, at its core, the critical discussion of potentially conflicting value
systems during deliberation, and how those values eventually expressed as public policies. Mar-
tin Wachs and Joseph L. Schofer 13
in “Abstract Values and Concrete Highways” note that the
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
semantics and ambiguity of high-level abstractions of “Values, Goals, Objectives” are difficult to
translate into specific policies and plans, but there is a need to go still further, beyond the seman-
tics of the terms themselves to examine how the communicative processes present influence the
epistemological processes in the public sphere14, 15
. Recent developments in the area of Argu-
ment Theory provide a means of developing a typology of discourse for the information spaces
and transformations occurring between these discourse spheres while engaging in public policy
formation, and a means of characterizing them.
Also, a refinement and definition of deliberation itself and relating it to discourse was
needed, and it needed to be related to practical planning situations. There is much written at the
abstract level of ‘Communicative Action’ 16 and competing models of consensus, conflict, and
competition, such as “Agonistic Pluralism”17
and more other, more open frameworks18
. All
have roots in Searle, Grice and Austen and so all or any will require addressing the details of the-
ory around how people engage in discourse in public forums, and specifically in computer medi-
ated communication genres on the Internet. Argument Theory provides a means of linking socie-
tal discourse and identifying a potential theoretical model for reconciling these larger societal
discourse spheres with the communications of individuals engaging in deliberation
In Coalescent Argumentation19
, Michael Gilbert reconciles the varied schools of thought in
Argument Theory into a more overarching view, including the three historically important AT
approaches: Perelman‘s New Rhetoric, Toulmin and the DWC Model, and Naess‘ Precization.
These have informed later approaches, the Dialecticians, Grice and the Cooperative Principle,
the Speech Theorists, E. M. Barth’s Formalism, the Informal Logicians, Communication Theo-
rists, and recently Feminist contributions. Reviewing these models reveals three that can be as-
signed to our spheres of discourse – the Rhetorical, the Logical, and the Pragma-Dialectical.
We recognize that Rhetorical as the dominant tradition constructing the discourse sphere of
our politicians and public administrators ( the classic ‘debate’ format ), that formal logic domi-
nates in the positivist objective technical discourse sphere of planners and engineers, and theAmsterdam School around Pragma-Dialectics has specific qualities which align to the discourse
sphere of ordinary citizens. These three argument modes (Rhetorical, Logical, Dialectical) can be
used as the basis for a typology for examining the public policy discourse and demonstrate how
these fundamentally different methods of discourse cause inevitable disconnect with publics’
perception, epistemology and reaction to transportation policies.
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
channels also gives insight into the power relationships by assignation of content production and
consumption, that of author and reader.
For example, currently there is little public deliberation as information flows between the
Executive discourse sphere and Technical discourse sphere and the public often can only begin
its discourse after a specific project is well along the design path, with a consequent generation
of lawsuits as the means of engagement.
Focus on the Pragma-Dialectical
This Discourse Typology now allows important system architecture decisions to be made.
Clearly, if our participatory software system was to serve the public participants, the primary in-
formation channel is purely based on Pragma-Dialectical meaning production, and the secondary
information channels involve transformations to and from the Logical and Rhetorical to the
Pragma-Dialectical. Our project can not possibly address either the purely Logical or Rhetorical
channel, or the information transformations between them, as they essentially happen behinf
closed doors.
Paraphrased from Gilbert, the Pragma-Dialectical approach for modeling argument interac-
tions relies on the actual practices and assertions of two or more persons arguing in a situation,
as opposed to an describing the argument as an ‘artifact’. The approach is ‘pragmatic’ because
they are concerned with the practical task of arguing and dialectic because they see argument as
a social process occurring between two arguers. It is based on Austin's and especially Searle’s
notion of speech acts 20. An argument is composed of individual speech acts that taken collec-
tively form a single speech act complex that establishes meaning. While this approach somewhat
ignores accidental or emotional effects, it does incorporate conditions of felicity, sincerity, rec-
ognition, satisfaction. This approach attempts to provide a model for argumentation while incor-
porating standards of rationality and orderliness. The major drawback to rigorous application of
this approach is that it ignores "elaborations, clarifications, anecdotes, and side-lines" which will
also have important information and meaning. While much argument simply does not follow asufficiently routine process to allow the identification of the requisite components for speech act
identification after the fact, this is can occur au priori within the constraints of a software system
if it based on speech act production.
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
If the Pragma-Dialectic approach is adopted for modeling the participants’ interactions, what
follows is a description of the elements using Speech Acts. Also, since it promotes the interac-
tions in the Participants’ discourse sphere as a social activity, it allows us to seek existing analo-
gous venues on the Internet in order to extract important aspects of Speech act complexes using
qualitative methods. It also implies that existing content from other discourse spheres on the
channels must be transformed in order to be accessible to such a process. Most important, this
provides a powerful metaphor to guide the system architecture: that PgisT is essentially at its
core a ‘Conversation’.
Reflection
While it was gratifying and exciting to finally have a useful metaphor, this metaphor met ex-
treme resistance from my cohort on the research team. And rather than use the metaphor as the
guiding principle and basis for re-factoring and future design, already existing schema and proc-esses were merely superficially labeled with matching terminology. Also, this approach meant
software tools and applications which were well beyond the domain knowledge and experience
of the team – Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics. Also, since my edu-
cational background was primarily in engineering, physics, and math, and I had never taken even
the most basic English class, I was ill equipped to further this line of research.
These factors all denigrated my theoretical ideas to a ‘hunch’. Also, the conversational
functionality was positioned as ancillary supporting activity rather than as the core conceptual
model providing the spine for the entire information trajectory of the system. In retrospect, at this
point I became an outsider to the rest of the team. While I observed and accounted for their work
in my own design, there was very little synthesis with the other’s activities. However, despite
these negative impressions, an enthusiasm set in from the realization that my approach addressed
major flaws in existing conceptualizations of collaborative software systems.
Online venues and Communication Genres
Rather than a standard computer ‘application’, the system architecture should be based on
Computer Mediated Communication, which is potentially much more successful, because people
are fundamentally more interested in interacting with other people than yet another computer ap-
plication. Also, while it is extremely difficult to reconstruct meaning and context after the fact, it
is almost trivial to preserve conversational structures which allow reconstruction and further
processing. To identify the significant aspects of the system, a manifest content analysis of exist-
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
ing online venues such as Blogs, Forums, List Servers, Chat Rooms, and Portals and communi-
cations genres such as E-mail, Instant Messaging and SMS/Text messaging (See Figure 2 a b).
This examination yielded a partial list of characteristic aspects which will influence the system
design.
Personalization – Can the messaging be formattedand timed for the convenience of the participant.
Unitization – How long are the messages, how ex-cerpts and quotes from previous messages are dis- played and structured.
Organization – How are messages and replies dis- played in the view, how is quoting handled.
Community – Are the same participants present over many topics over time, do they address each oth-ers posts, do they ask questions and help one an-other.
Intimacy – Are the participants known to each other,how is identify and anonymity handled.
Proximity and Presence – How are other users’synchronous activities visible. How is identityexpressed through profiles and posts.
Affinity - How is attention managed and filtered.How are other discussants with similar interestand views identified, do divisions and sides ap- pear.
Technical Proficiency – How difficult is it to learnand navigate the venue or genre, and gain useablecompetence.
Obligation – What is the perceived effort to read,interpret, and respond to respond to a specificmessage.
Coherence and divergence - Do people keep to the point, is it easy to track discussion threads andidentify stimulus response pairings.
Regulation - How do the participants and the systemencourage good behaviors and discourage / sanc-tion improper behaviors, are the rules explicit inan FAQ or are they implicit.
Author, Editor, and Reader – The relationships andlinkages and control.
Persistence – How long does the discussion last.
Immediacy and Latency - How fast and how manyreplies occur.
Mediums – Are other forms of content beyond plaintext used, such as images, sound, video and how isexternal content linked
Dissipation and disposition – How do discussionsgrow, branch, and terminate, the availability of ar-chives of past discussions.
Also, I acted as a participant observer, lurking in some, briefly participating in others, and es-tablished a well founded identity in some. Using e-mail and IM I experimented with discussing
transportation issues both with single persons and groups (See Figure 2 c). Instant Messaging
emerged as the preferred ‘genre’, but the only corresponding ‘venue’, the chat room, failed sub-
stantially in many aspects, especially coherence.
My participant observation was problematical on many fronts. Was my ‘Rationale’ for using
IM interaction as a pattern … really just a ‘Rationalization’? I am an expert computer user, tech-
nically proficient, a long time user of Instant Messaging for work and social purposes. I also en-
joy the instant gratification of feedback and its ease of access on my desktop. To mitigate these
issues I used autobiographical recollection of three examples of introducing people to instant
messaging and my observations of their adoption behaviors and their learning curves. These
were a middle aged fellow student with rudimentary computer experience in the context of a
joint class project, a senior citizen collaborating with me on the PgisT team, and a nine year old
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
This framework provides contextual dimensions of the constituent concepts within the inter-
view discourse and be conceived as an n-space ‘volume’ composed of related 'Spaces' of Pur-
view, Estate, Location, and Trajectory. Here, a ‘Space’ is defined as a conceptual area reserved
for some particular purpose, independent of it’s constituents, which will allow the production of
extended meanings. These 'Spaces' are separated by underlying models for representation, and
include the spectrum between the objective and subjective. Each 'Space' can further described as
mutually dependent axes that allow the discourse concepts to be unpacked and situated in rela-
tion to other concepts. The centrality, the upper/lower limits, and distribution of a concept's vol-
ume can be determined along the various axes.
The dimensions of particular value concepts can then be extended in relation to the entire
framework, and placed in relation to other values. The 'context' of a particular value can then be
related to other values to produce a value network or concept map. The attempt here is not to
achieve mathematical rigor, but rather to allow relationships, gaps and linkages to be identified
or discovered. These contexts can then be further refined using a soft systems theory approach to
identify the values, goals, objectives and criteria. This eventually provides a means to derive hi-
erarchies such as decision trees from a particular perspective to apply decision support tech-
niques.
Elicitation Strategy
The elicitation strategy has eight basics stages. The first requests the basic information about
the person’s Zip+4, geo-demographic segment self-identification, and transportation modes the
person is familiar with, and their tour. The second phase asks an open question of what their
general concerns about transportation in the Puget Sound area are, and they can list as many
phrases as they feel are needed. This provides the super-ordinate level of Lakoff’s schema and
these topics are then used to generate topics at the basic and subordinate level. The noun phrase
used in these concerns are extracted manually or using Computational Linguistic techniques in-
volving Natural Language / Shallow Text Processing and explored further by questions prompt-ing them to relate their direct sensory experiences in the present, the past, and a prediction along
the Time Axes.
This temporal bracketing is essential to draw out the particular nature of the change that is
being related by the interviewee, along with the coordinate terms relating to the concept. The
particular order of approach to each time period is crucial. The most immediate memory is re-
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
“Likely make the poor countries even poorer and the wealthy countries even wealthier unless
we can create literate societies with a good IT infrastructure and food.”
In the F2F interview for instance, the subject realized that while his proposed solution of
massive highway construction would help existing commuters, it would have detrimental effects
on fuel conservation and climate in the long term. Jonathan Swift is attributed with saying “It is
useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.” The elicitation of
these self generated contradictions and counter narratives is the most valuable product of this
strategy. These provide valuable points for beginning deliberation within specific frames during
follow on discussions.
The questions were stripped and the respondent’s answers were extracted, grouped and as-
sembled into a narrative form (Appendix 1) to allow the interviewee to examine the totality of
their elicited perspectives to provide a hermeneutic evaluation. The interview is very structuredand ‘conversational’, the answers are very specific to the framed questions at the moment. When
these responses are aggregated, it is important to verify that their totality is representative of the
meanings the interviewee would wish to impart. The respondents were asked to comment on the
assembled narrative, and all agreed that it did capture their perspective in a synoptic sense. The
interview also has an epistemological effect, there is knowledge building occurring as the con-
cepts are elicited along the various axes. All agreed that the interview process had also helped
them clarify their own ideas about the subject matter, and expressed a desire to learn more in ar-
eas where they found themselves lacking well founded ideas or opinions. So such a structured
interview was not neutral, it does not leave the subject the same as when it started. This is valu-
able if this is the first step in a further deliberative process, but could be questionable if the re-
search agenda is not meant to influence the subjects. Thus, if such an interview is accomplished,
we are positioning ourselves as activist researchers.24, 25
Linguistics Processing
The IM respondent’s answers were processed to extract noun phrases using Natural Lan-
guage Processing / Shallow Text Processing (NLP/STP). To test the ability of NLP/STP to cap-
ture the relevance and meaning of the responses, the keywords were concatenated into a Google
Advanced Search query. The results list was very small and contained predominantly documents
very relevant to the specific subject and geographical location of the response – considering that
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
1. Konstadinos Goulias (2003) “Transportation SystemsPlanning”, CRC Press, NY
2 Nyerges T., Brooks T., Drew C., Jankowski P., Ruther-ford G. S., and Young R. (2003), “An Internet Platform toSupport Public Participation in Transportation DecisionMaking”, National Science Foundation Grant Proposal
3. Goulias, K.C. (2000). Travel behavior and values researchfor human-centered transportation systems. “Transporta-tion in the New Millennium”. Transportation ResearchBoard, National Academy of Sciences, Washington.http://www4.nationalacademies.org/trb/homepage.nsf/we
b/millennium_ papers
4. Stephenson N., “In the Beginning...Was the CommandLine”, (1999), Harper Perennial
5. Iain Hay, Ed. 2000. Qualitative Research Methods In Human Geography. Oxford University Press.
6 England, Kim V.L. 1994. “Getting Personal: Reflexiv-ity, Positionality, and Feminist Research.” Professional
Geographer 80-89. (Course Reader)
7. Eppel N., “Security Absurdity: The Complete, Unques-tionable, And Total Failure of Information Security. - Along-overdue wake up call for the information securitycommunity.” (2006)http://www.securityabsurdity.com/failure.php
8. Lange L 2005, Monorail risk sharing idea is back, SeattlePost-Intelligencer , Wednesday, July 27, 2005
9. Carlson J. 2005, Guest columnist The reason folksflocked to the gas-tax-repeal initiative, The Seattle TimesThursday, August 4, 2005http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/200241926
7_carlson04.html10. The Blue Ribbon Commission On Transportation, Final
Recommendations to the Governor and Legislature, De-cember, 2000, Seattle, Washington 98101
11. Transportation Commission and WSDOT 2005, WSDOTPublic Attitudes Focus Groups
12. Chapman R. The Softletter Financial Handbook, Chapter 1: Metrics & Benchmarks
13. Wachs M. and Schofer J. 1969,Abstract Values and Con-crete Highways, Traffic Quarterly Jan 1969 p133-145
14. Healey P. 1992, Planning through debate: the communi-cative turn in planning theory, - Town Planning Review,1992
15. Healey P. 1996, The Communicative Turn In PlanningTheory And Its Implications For Spatial Strategy Forma-tion, Environment and planning 1996, Volume 23 p217-234
16. Habermas J 1987, The Theory of Communicative
Action. Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Func-
tionalist Reason
17. Mouffe C, For an agonistic public sphere
18. Landwehr C. 2004, Rational Choice, Deliberative
Democracy, And Preference Transformation,
Studies in Social and Political Thought
19. Gilbert M 1997, Coalescent Argumentation, Michael A.,1997, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Mahwah NJ
20. Smith B, 2003, “John Searle: From Speech Acts to SocialReality”. ontology.buffalo.edu
21. Lakoff G. 1987, Women, Fire, and Dangerous
Things : What categories reveal about the mind ,
University of Chicago Press
22. Stilwell F. “Understanding Cities and Regions: SpatialPolitical Economy”, Pluto Press, Sydney 1992
23. Rubin I.S. and Rubin H.J “Interviews as Guided
25. Cameron, J. and K. Gibson. “Participatory action re-search in a poststructuralist vein. Geoforum. 36:3:315-331. Electronic Reserve.
26. Kwan M. 2004, AAG Centennial Forum - Beyond Differ-ence: From Canonical Geography to Hybrid Geographies,Annals of the Association of American Geographers,2004 Blackwell-Synergy
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
mainstreets.Itendtotravelafter9:30amto11:30and between2:20and 4:00pm tokeep out ofthemaintrafficflows.IfIhavetogotothedentistordoctorsItravelwhenevertheappointmentis.…So,Imakeatleasttwotripsoutperweek,occasionallythreebut mostly I stay home and work. Pathetic.Wow,I'm thelastperson toaskaboutroutesandstreetnames.Imemorizehowtogetthereandba- sicallystickwiththatroute.….WhileIstarteddrivingearly,Ididn'tactuallygetmylicensetillIwas40.Iguess I just feel more comfortable going withsomeone else. … Actually, I guess it's SOV, butmostlytherearemyselfandmySOinthecar,thuscarpool. We do things together. … Already an-
swered that.While I starteddriving early, I didn'tactuallygetmylicense tillI was40. Iguess Ijustfeelmorecomfortablegoingwithsomeoneelse.I'mnotveryadventurous.AndItendtobelazywhenitcomestodriving.…ILOVEthebus!!!!!!Inthepastwhen Iprimarilyusedthebus Ihad somuch funwiththeotherpassengers.NowIlikeitforthecon- venience.Sincethebuscompaniesstartedrunning
bussestoRedmondmoreoften-atleastonceanhour-IcangetintotheUWordowntownandbackout again very easily.Who wouldn'twant to takethebuswhenit'ssoconvenient.…Don'tuseabikenow.Thatwas apastevent. …Too dangerous toride a bike.People don't see you and they don'tcareaboutyou.Nope,toodangerous.…Ilikethetrain because it is easy, inexpensive, and allowsmeachoiceofthingstodo.Icanknit,read,watchamovieorcombineactivities.Eventalktopeople.Ilike the train better than the bus even if it costsmore. 'Course the distances are greater by train,too.
At the Regional LevelIthinkthecityplannerslefttheplanningofaunifiedtransportationsystemtoolate.Noforesight.Thelandwhereagoodtransportationsystemcouldhavebeenputisnowfullofveryexpensivehouses.Thesefolksmustknowwherethegrowthisoccurringandwhereitislikelytooccur.Buttheydon'tseemtohaveplannedforhavingthetransportationsysteminplacetomeetthatgrowth.IshouldbeabletogetfromonelargecityontheWestsideofthemountainstoanotherviaaunifiedtransportationsystem.Itshouldbeaseasyformetogettoamini-mallanywhereintheregionfrommyhomeasitistogetfrommyhousetodowntownSeattleortheUW.
ObservationsNot surewhat you want here.… I don'tget emotionalaboutthesethings.IambasingmythoughtsonwhatI
roadintotheditchbysomeoneonacellphonecount?…My roadhas whatamounts toblind curvesonit. I al- wayshave tobe onguard. That takes away from theenjoyment.IusuallydrivetosomeplaceIcanwalk,andthenwalk.Therehavebeenanumberofpeoplekilledcrossing at crosswalks in Redmond. That leaves animpression.Hardtomissapersoninthemiddleofthe
street.Showsalackofcarelessnessonthepartofdriv- ers. We need a massive re-education program if weplantogetpeopletowalkanywhere.Thatis,thedriversneedtobeeducated-andperhapsthepedestrianswhoALWAYShavetobeonguard.Showscarelessness,nota lack of carelessness. Sometimes I can't think andtype.…
Pain.Walkingonroughroadsisharderthanwalkingonasidewalkifyouhaveadisability.Expectingthosewithdisabilities to walk on rough roads is unrealistic. Andwalking longdistances is alsoproblematic anyway. ….Students mostly do not livewithin walking distanceoftheir schools.Bussing themhas led toan epidemicofobesity. Also for the middle-aged and elderly. Eitherstoresarenotconvenientorstreetsarenotsafe."…
I'm in public health and many of the discussions areabouthowthebuiltenvironmenthasmadeitimpossiblefor manyK-12 students towalk totheirschools.Withlack of exercise and a really bad diet at school, thenumberofobesekidsisrisingprettyswiftly.We'vecre- atea non-walking,school-busdependentenvironment.Also the big schoolsmean fewer of them and longerdistancestoreachthem.2.5milesisthedistancebeforebussingstarts-andthatjustmeansthekidsaredriventoschoolbytheirparents.Sonoexercisethereeither.…
Suburbanlivingmeansthatstoresarelongdistances.Iwouldhavetodrivetotheneareststoretobuyanything.Therearetradeoffs.…Puttingmyselfintheseniorcate- gory, here.… LOL. Iwant the amenities of rurallivingwiththeamenitiesofanurbanenvironment.It'sjustnotgoingtohappen.…Iusedtolovewalkingandstillwouldifitwasn'tsopainful.…Ican'tmovefromonecityorpartof a city to another easily. This makesme more de- pendentonmycar.…I supposeI couldlivein aruralretirementcommunitywithall theamenities. If I couldaffordit.…
experience.…Hum. I'm not exactly sureof this, but I do know thatpeople havebreak-evenpoints that varywith the per- son. I'vealways felt thatthebuseswerea gooddeal.Thattakingthetraininsteadofdrivingmademuchmoresensedueto thecosts, butif transportationcostshadgoneuptoomuch,Imighthavechangedmymindanddriven. … Course, this is my personal feeling abouttransportation.Ihavefriendswhodislikethesmellofthebuses(Itneverbotheredme),andwaiting(IreadwhenIwait, or knit). …Well, if I were marketing to people, Iwouldemphasizehowmuchmoneytheycouldsavebytakingthebus-anddoitinrealdollars($4.00roundtripvs.costofcar,gas,insurance,maintenance,etc).Alsoemphasizewhatyoucandowhilecommutingviabus(I
use bus for any transportation mode except cars). Iwould also put wirelessaccess on the buses so thatpassengerscoulddotheiremailandgetaquickstartontheday.ForthatIwouldpayextra.…
405 isalwaysbusy.Toomanycars.Not enough roadfor the numberof cars.The two bridges are like that,too.Verybusy,hardlyatimewhentherearen'tmassesoftraffic. … I assume that the traffic lights need tobechangedtoreflectchangingtrafficflows.Ifthelightsaresetuptoletfewerpeoplethroughoneway,thelineoftrafficwill buildand causefrustration. I assume somekind of notification system might alleviate the "roadrage"thatsomepeoplefeelwhentheycan'tmovecouldbe lessened. … Wow. I never thought of the carpoollanesbeing jugged up. What a dreadful thought! … I
BaselineInthepastIcouldjumpoutofthewayfasterthanIcannow. …. It seems as if driverswere more concernedaboutpedestrians in the past.Now theyarepreoccu- piedwithgettingplacesasfastastheycan,withtalkingon the phone, and with eating and drinking as theydrive.Hastodowithfeelingthepressureoftime,Ithink.Itseemstobeworsenowthaninthepast.Muchworse.Also,stopandstarttrafficmeansthatmanypeoplereadwhiletheywaitforthenextforwardmovement.….Well,Ididn'thavearthritisinthepastandwalkingtwomileswasnothingformetodoregularly.One'sabilitytowalkeasilygetsconstrainedasyougetolder-well,atleastfor some of us. Now I need a smooth place to walk.Evenhikingisoutofthequestion.…Hikingisoutofthequestion unless the path is really smooth. Jarring mykneeshurtslikeaSOB.…
Withgatedcommunitiessuchaswehavenowbutlesssointhepast,studentstendtogetdriventoschoolortheygetbussed.Ialwayswalkedtoschoolbutthentheschoolswere not more than 1.5 milesaway.But that
was longer ago than10years.The problemofpoorlyplanned neighborhoods has been going on for longerthan10yearsandsohastheincreaseinobesity.Hu- mansaremeanttowalkandwesufferfromobesityandaccompanying chronic diseases when we don't. Theelderly tend to gain weight as they get older sincethey're less likely to exercise. I don't think that haschangedmuch although I know that seniors did walkmoreinthepastthantheydonowandweremoreac- tive. … I never thought about the availability of shopsbefore.
WhenIlivedinthecityIcouldalwaysbustoshoppingareas.NowlivinginthesuburbanenvironmentIhavetodrive.…Inthepastthereweren'tsomanymalls.LOL.Iknow that planning has always been a problem. Not
surehow toget around the issueofshort-timer politi- cianswithshortenedlong-views.IguessIhavegreaterexpectationsifthetransportationsystemnow.Iexpecttobeabletogetanywhereintheregioneasily.Ididnotexpectthatinthepast.…IexpectREGIONALplanning.Notlocal,now.AndthereisnoreasonfornotplanningregionallywhatwithGISandall.…
Inthepastnotasmanypeoplecouldaffordtwocars.Now itis not uncommonto have two ormore cars.Itseemstomethatpeople expectedto take the bus towork.Course,oncepeoplemovedtothesuburbs,thatideachanged.Ithinkmanymanagersareafraidtotrusttheiremployeestoworkathomesothatitdoesn'tseemthat usingteleworkto reduce traffic isan option.Thisshould be part of REGIONAL planning. Employerswhereverpossibleshouldbegivenminortaxbreakstoencourage teleworkat leastthree timesa week.Thatwould benefit all of uswith less pollution, less traffic,andlessgasused.….
Costoftransportationhasbeensteadilyincreasingover
the years(myperception). It's hard tofindbus ticketsand sometimes folks forget to get change for theticket/money machine. Just a small inconvenience.Think there should bemoresupport of transportation.Therewillneedtobe.Thefolkswhocanleastaffordtotakebusaretheoneswhocan'taffordacar.Ialwayspurchasedayear-longbuspasssoIneverhadtoworryabout money. Maybe everyone should be issued aninexpensive bus pass and forget about getting cashfrompassengers.….I didn'tthinkmuchabouttranspor- tationinthepastbecauseitalwayswasthereforme.…ExceptwhenImovedtoRedmondandthebussesonlyranduringpeakhours.IfIgotsickIstayedatworktillthebusesranagain.
PredictionI expect that most roads will have sidewalks. Out inRedmonditseemsthatwhenanewsubdivisiongoesinsidewalksarebeingputinatthesametime.That'sgoodnews.Nowifwecouldonlyretrofitroadswithoutalltheexpense.Itlooksasifdangerouscrosswalksarebeingsetupwithflashinglightsintheroadandabove.ThatislikelywhatwillhavetohappenonadditionalXwalks.…Weneedamassivereeducationmediaeventtoreminddrivers and pedestrians about their responsibilities inusing crosswalks. Won't reach everyone, but will getmany.…Makesomeoneelsedrive?OrderviatheInter- net? Live closer to stores?Continue to drive? Pay aneighbor to shop for me? The arthritis will only get
Smaller schools (better for students anyway) or homeschoolingwithlotsofoutdoorexercise.Elderswilllikelyfigureoutwaysofexercising,perhapsonexercisema- chines. Doesn't solve the problem of inconvenientstores but thatwillhavetobe solved inotherways. …Limitationofactivitiesisgoingtobearealproblemfor
societyinanother10yearswhatwithalluspre-boomersandboomersretiring.…Iplantobuymynexthouseinareally ruralareaandjustdrivemy car untilI can'tanymoreandthenIwillgointoaretirementcommunityrightinsome largedowntownarea close toshops, restau- rants,etc.Seniorsmustberealisticabouttheirabilities.
Idon'texpectthesituationwithplannersandourpoliti- cianstochangeanytimeinthefuture.We'lljuststumblealonguntiltheinfrastructuregetsbuiltdespiteourworstefforts.Courseitwillcostalotmorethatway.…Ifullyexpect that teleworkwill be promoted by the govern- ment.Withpoliticianswithavestedinterestinkeepingthe oil flowing itwon't besoon. Alsowemayhave to
makesomehardchoicesinthefuture.Ifitmeanskeep- ingwarminthewinterordrivingacar,Ithinkmostpeo- plewouldvoteforheat.Teleworkwillsavegasthatcanbeusedto keepuswarm. Ialsothinkweneedto beinvesting heavily in sun-based / alternative fuel tech- nologies.We'regetting a good start with the new hy- brids.Butthisdoesn'tgetpeopleoutoftheircars.Tele- workmight.Expensivegasmight.But,Iamnothopefulforthelatter.Salarieswilljustrisetocoverthecostofgas(Ithink).
8/15/2019 Supporting Online Elicitation for Deliberation of Public Transportation Concerns
…IexpectthatbuspriceswillcontinuetoincreasebutIalsohopethattherewillbe supportforthosewithlowincomes.If youwantpeopleworkingyoumayhave tosupplement their transportation. No supplements forthosewhoarenotreceiving foodstamps! …Think I'vealreadygivena responseto this question.Badme. …Well,ifIweremarketingtopeople,Iwouldemphasize
howmuchmoney theycould savebytakingthebus-anddoitinrealdollars($4.00roundtripvs.costofcar,gas, insurance, maintenance, etc). Also emphasizewhatyoucandowhilecommutingviabus(Iusebusfor
anytransportationmodeexceptcars).Iwouldalsoputwirelessaccessonthebusessothatpassengerscoulddotheiremailandgetaquickstartontheday.ForthatIwould pay extra. Somehow those using public healthtransportation need to understand the cost-benefit/economicsof usingpublictransportation.Maybeitwillhavetocomedownto"patriotism"orsomethingsimilar.
Maybethepriceofgaswillrisesomuchthatitwillforcepeople into public transportation. I just don'tknow. …That should be "Somehow those NOT using publictransportation..."
GoalsWhat should happen?Too many cars: Figureoutwaysofencouragingpeopletocar-pool or ride public transportation. Plan subdivisions so thatpeoplecanwalk.There'sgoodworkbeingdonebysomeinno-vativearchitectswho arecreating idealizedcommunitieswithno street parking, walkable neighborhoods and integratedhomesandshops.
The Roads: Create walkable roads. Plan roads, neighbor-hoods,transportationsystemfor20,30,50yearsoutandworktowardsthatplan,makingchangeswhennecessary.
Not Enough Emphasis: Change the emphasis. People aredyingearlybecauseofpoorplanning.Figureoutwaysofwork-ingwithallstakeholders, thepublic,publichealth, transporta-tionplanners,architects,etc.
Telework: Changepublicopinion.Telework shouldbean op-tion for those suited to it.Newemployees should request it,employersshouldbeencouragedtopromoteitandofcourse,soshouldgovernment-evenmorethanitisdoingnow.Tele-workmaybeanissueiftheterroristscontinuetokillfolksdur-ingrushhour.Noonewantstobeblownupduringtheircom-mutetowork.
The Feds: Employees and thepublicneed topressurelargeagenciestomovefasteronimplementingtelework.
Gas Prices Wow.Wehavetousemuch lessofit.Moreem-phasison alternativefuelsources includingsolarenergy,bio-
gas/methane,hydrogen,etc.
Buses: Make buses more comfortable, more technologyfriendlysothatpeoplecanworkastheygointowork,iftheywantto.
Alternative Kinds ... Transportation: IlikewhatthoseinDCaredoing.TherearepickupspotswherethosetravelinginaSOVcanstopandpickuppassengers.Notalkingtothedriverbutyou can knit, read, etc. No pay also. The advantage to thedriveristhats/hegetstousetheHOVlanes.So,setuppickupspotsandpromotetheidea.Hum,runningoutofideas.
The Nearest Store: Dunnowhat to do about that.Sort of acatch-22.Noonewalkssoneighborhoodstoresareaproblemand few walk to stores because there aren't any in theneighborhood.
Anyone ... Arthritis ... A Horrible Time ... That Distance ... HugeAmounts ... Pain: Closer stores, neighborhoods withgood/smoothsidewalks,safeplacestowalkandplacestorestafterawalk-benches.Frontporchessothatpeoplecanseeeachotherandvisit.
Students: Easieraccessto schools.Schoolsshouldbe closerto neighborhoodswhere there area lotof school-aged kids.Movethedamnschoolifnecessary.Theydon'thavetobesolarge.Backtotheone-roomschoolhouse,LOL.
Their Schools: Schools should be closer to neighborhoodswhere there are a lot of school-aged kids. Move the damn
schooldifnecessary.An Epidemic ... Obesity: Better education.We have a hugenumberoffolkswithdiabetes.Weneedtoencouragefolkstoridethebusandtowalkplaces.
Streets:Walkable.Sidewalks.Safe.
Shops: Walkable. Safe. Appropriate for neighborhoods.Plannedinadvance.
A Totally Urban Environment: Wouldn'tliveinoneuntilIgetsooldIhavetobereallyclosetoamenities.
The City Planners: Change the curriculum. Look at what ishappening/hashappenedinEuropeandadaptsomeoftheirmethods.
The Planning: Doesn'thavecontext.
A Unified Transportation System: BetterREGIONALplanning.Toomanyturfwarsandfolkswithvestedinterests.
The Land: Ah,vivethe land!Keepasmany openspacesaspossible for agriculture, forests, places for folks to visit andenjoy, and keep the transportation systems away from themiddleofvalleys.
A Good Transportation System: Better REGIONAL planning.Toomany turf warsand folkswith vestedinterests.keep thetransportation systemsaway from themiddleof valleys. Planaheadoutto50years.
Very Expensive Houses: LOL.Soontobeacorrectioninex-pensivehomes.
The Growth: Well,ifSARS/birdfludoesn'tdecimatethepopu-lation wehaveto figure out waysofcontrolling it. Ofmixingpeopleand thelandandgettingthemwheretheyneed togoeasily.
One Large City: Nothing.Don't thinkanything can bedone.
(Yourself, children, relatives, parents, neighbors, citizens of the city, citizens of the area, citi-zens of the Puget Sound region, citizens of Washington State, citizens of the United States ofAmerica, global population.) public opinion, telework, an option, new employees, employers, course, government, telework, an issue, the terrorists,folks, hour, their commute, telework, implications, other people, my brother, a nurse, work, my husband, home, mymom lives downtown, shops, my brother, a nurse, work, patients, most, my close neighbors, telecommute, offices, onephysician commutes, ghc downtown, a better quality, life, a healthier life, a better environment, less traffic, more people,a healthier life, less traffic, more people, a better environment, access, previously inaccessible towns, life, rural people ,those east, the mountains, the distances, a positive impact, western washington, a better quality, life, a healthier life, abetter environment, less traffic, rural people, an example, washington state, the rest, the country, a matter, time,changes, my lifetime, the internet, the usa, the world, resources, china, more gas and oil, the costs, fuel, home, the usa,the leader, energy reduction
Home, neighborhood, Seattle-Tacoma-Everett metropolitan area, Western slope of the Cas-cades (Vancouver B.C. to Portland) area, planetary biosphere
the foreseeable future, minimal impact, humans, some initial environmental damage, those kinks, the environment,cleaner air, water, humans, some initial environmental damage, those kinks, the environment, cleaner air, water
(Yourself, neighborhood residents, Seattle-Tacoma-Everett metropolitan area residents, Stateof Washington economy, GNP of the United States, world economy)
,more green space, forests , wildlife, places, people, their neighborhoods, a regional basis, less expensive living, higher real estate prices, a better job market, more folks, home, less money, new roads, the infrastructure and transportation
options, initial increase, taxes, the future, folks, services / goods, more taxes, rich, considerable savings, employers, so-ciety, a better quality, life, folks, efficiently, the poor countries, the wealthy countries, literate societies, it, infrastructureand food