Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40026827›Full record

ArticleJournal of intervention and statebuilding2024

Grandstanding Instead of Deliberative Policy-Making: Transitional Justice, Publicness and Parliamentary Questions in the Croatian Parliament.

Denisa Kostovicova, Lanabi La Lova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intervention and statebuilding, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Social Media, Stereotypes, and the Acknowledgement of War Crimes.Journal of intervention and statebuilding · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Denisa KostovicovaEuropean Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6243-4379
Lanabi La LovaEuropean Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1918-5258

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Addressing the legacy of human rights violations in public can benefit victims, post-conflict societies and democracy building. But publicness of transitional justice (TJ) processes can also have opposite effects. We assess the relationship between publicness and TJ by leveraging the democratic deliberation theory concerned with the impact of publicness on the quality of policy-making. A comparative analysis of oral and written questions about TJ in the Croatian parliament (2004-20) shows that members of parliament use oral questions for nationalist grandstanding and written questions for substantive TJ policy deliberation. We demonstrate how publicness afforded by parliaments stymies TJ's normative goals.

Indexed as

Croatiadeliberationparliamentary questionspublicnessTransitional justice

Identifiers

PMID40026827
PMCPMC11869769

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.