Step 10:
Evaluate impact and publicize output
Evaluation is essential if you want to know how your dialogue was perceived and if it did achieve a depolarization effect.
We recommend creating an online survey that participants fill out in the final minutes of the dialogue – this increases response rates. To track changes in personal affective polarization we are using the following measures: change in bias towards people representing opposing views, the level of understanding of opposing views, and willingness to cooperate with people representing them. You can decide to extend the list, but remember – the longer the survey, the larger the dropout.
It is good practice to also include a delayed survey (for example a month after the dialogue) to measure the spillover effect through spontaneous sharing of reflections on the experience. Suggested indicators include: sharing the experience of participating in a dialogue with someone, encouraging someone else to participate in a dialogue in the future, noticing a change in attitude while having a conversation with people representing opposing views, and conscious practical use of the skills gained during the dialogue.
How to increase impact
Dialogues are small-scale events – 12 is the maximum number of participants for each person to have some time to speak and for facilitators to be able to guide the conversation. But the impact of dialogues might reach far beyond its participants – if you take time to analyze the conversations and produce output that will be useful to other NGOs, local governments and individual citizens. This secondary impact is not only wider, it also lasts longer as your dialogue results can be reviewed several months after the event.
We are structuring our dialogues so that they produce knowledge about how people approach divisive issues, how they explain their positions, and, more importantly, which narratives are conducive to community and which drive polarization. To systematically analyze dialogues it is good to have a researcher present or at least work on the recorded or transcribed material. We are recording all dialogues for research purposes, with consent from participants. Partial transcription is also being done.
What to publish?
To publicize the output we have come up with two formats:
Concise and easy-to-read presentations showcasing the main positions held by participants on the dialogue topic, specific dividing lines within the group, and common ground between participants. They serve as a visual tool to understand the dynamics of the dialogue, offering a quick overview of positions, lines of division, and areas of agreement. Their target audience are institutions: other CSOs and local governments.
How-to-talk guides for regular citizens
Handy one-pagers featuring tips and suggestions on how to start a private conversation on a particular topic which was already covered in a dialogue. The guides include starter questions, ideas on how to dive into specific sub-topics, how to handle anger and how to close the conversation. The target audience here are individual citizens willing to experiment with depolarization in their social vicinity.
