# The Use of Artificial Intelligence in eParticipation: Mapping Current Research
## 3 Research Questions and Methodology  
Based on the study objectives and the analysis presented in the previous section, we set the following three research questions:  
**RQ1** Which are the prominent eParticipation Actors and Activities? **RQ2** What is the focus of research concerning eParticipation Contextual Factors, Effects, and Evaluation Methods? **RQ3** Which are the prominent AI Areas, Algorithms, Methods, Techniques, and Evaluation Methods? The research approach we followed includes three main steps, as follows:  
Step 1. Select relevant studies in the academic literature  
Step 2. Present the profile of studies  
Step 3. Map studies in the analysis framework  
The research methodology we followed is based on the method proposed by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [39] and the PRISMA statement [40]. Further details about each step are presented below. **Step 1. Study selection. ** The selection process of the study includes four phases following the PRISMA statement [40]. **PRISMA Phase: \"Identification\". ** The search for the relevant scientific literature was carried out in the scientific databases of Scopus and Web of Science. In the authors' knowledge, these databases are considered reliable, inclusive, and suitable for the task at hand. The keyword used consisted of two parts, one part for the eParticipation field and  
Figure 1: eParticipation conceptual model (based on [4,36]). Figure 2: Analysis Framework. one for the AI field. For eParticipation, the keyword included the main activities described in [4]. For AI, the most common areas and techniques were used (as presented in Section 2). The final phrase we used as the keyword was \"TITLE-ABS-KEY((\"eParticipation\" OR \"e-participation\" OR \"electronic participation\" OR (\"eGovernment\" AND \"participation\") OR (\"e-government\" AND \"participation\") OR (\"eGovernance\" AND \"participation\") OR (\"e-governance\" AND \"participation\") OR (\"eConsult\" OR \"e-consult\" OR \"eDelibert\" OR \"e-delibert\" OR \"online delibert\" OR \"ePetition\" OR \"e-petition\") AND (\"Artificial Intelligence\" OR \"AI\" OR \"machine learning\" OR \"ML\" OR \"deep learning\" OR \"generative adversarial network\" OR \"GAN\" OR \"GANs\" OR \"reinforcement learning\" OR \"RL\" OR \"Natural language process\" OR \"NLP\"))'. The search took place in June 2023 and resulted in 196 results in Scopus and 39 results in Web of Science, producing a total of 235 studies. **PRISMA Phase: \"Screening\". ** Two authors independently screened the studies derived from the previous step. Screening included reading the title and abstract of each paper. In cases where there were doubts regarding retaining an article, a discussion between the authors produced the proposed solution. At the outset, 30 studies were excluded as duplicates. After reading the titles and abstracts, 120 studies were also excluded because (a) they were irrelevant to our goal, (b) they were not fully available, or (c) they were not in English. In total, 85 articles proceeded to the eligibility phase. **PRISMA Phase: \"Eligibility\". ** We studied the articles retrieved from the previous step and filtered them based on the following inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria:  
* Studies should be published in journals or conferences. * Studies should directly refer to the implementation of AI in the eParticipation field. * Studies could include an empirical analysis and a case study or refer to AI applications in a theoretical manner. Exclusion criteria:
* Studies do not specifically focus on the use of AI in eParticipation; instead, they concern the use of AI in public sector procedures. * Studies make a brief reference to the area of AI but do not delve into the applications, impacts, and challenges of AI use in eParticipation. In total, 40 articles were excluded in this phase. **PRISMA Phase: \"Included\". ** The papers were studied further, and one more highly relevant study was found in their citations and added to the selected studies. Therefore, the final number of the studies was 46 (Figure 3).