Authors

Discussion

Referendums and deliberative practices are two alternative models of decision-making that gained momentum in the last three decades. Their underlying logic is different: referendums can polarize society due to their binary choice between two options, while deliberative practices are intended to promote dialogue and understanding between the participants through the pursuit of a common good. as such, the referendums are more conflict-oriented than deliberative practices. So far, we do not know if there is a match between the risk-seeking or risk-averse profile of citizens and preferences for these two models of decision-making. This paper seeks to address that gap in the literature and analyses the effect of risk-seeking behavior on the support for referendum and deliberation in a transition country (Republic of Moldova). The analysis uses individual level data form an original survey conducted in November 2024 on a national representative sample of 1,000 respondents. The ordinal logistic regression will control for several alternative explanations such as ideological positioning, civic engagement, income, area of residence and education.