# Collective Intelligence in Polish-Ukrainian Internet Projects. Debate Models and Research Methods
## 3 Results  
### The Literature Review and Theoretical Framework for the Qualitative Research  
#### 3.1.1 Debate Models Present in the Public Sphere and Their Features  
Contemporary reflection of social sciences regarding the role of civic debate in policy-making was shaped by the opposition to the purely aggregative model of [PERSON] and [PERSON], who basically gave public opinion the role of aggregation of preferences and interests existing in society, rather than creating any new values in the debate [30]. In contrast to this approach, a deliberative model was proposed by [PERSON] and [PERSON], and it was further developed by [PERSON], [PERSON], [PERSON], and others. This model emphasizes the important role of debate in shaping civic attitudes, involvement in community life, and creating social bonds. According to the deliberative approach, the main features of the debate are: Communication focused on reaching consensus, expression of reasoned opinion, judicious argument, equal participation, independence of judgment, critical listening, and earnest decision making [27]. An important feature of deliberation is its rationalism: In a deliberation, no force except that of the better argument is exercised [31]. In this model conflict is seen as a threat resulting from mutual non-recognition of validity claim. Furthermore, an inner stability of the group and common identification with the result is frequently more important than outcome of the debate. Creating a single, common outcome, and obtaining the widest possible acceptance for it, is a general assumption of deliberative stance. Emotional statements are generally unacceptable. Contemporary theorists, however, redeveloped [PERSON], also allowing in communication, apart from purely rational statements, the emotions and interests of the participants [32], and emphasising the role of external experts in assessing and moderating the debate [33]. Although some researchers consider the deliberative model as an obvious way of conducting civic debate in internet projects in a compatible form for CI paradigm [34], we believe that it is not the only possible and necessary approach. The agonistic model (the term is based on the Greek word ago) has been proposed to describe the public debate in an alternative way to the deliberative model. Theoretical foundations of this model are described in the works of [PERSON] [28], and they draw on the achievements of [PERSON] [35], [PERSON] [36], and others. In this approach, debate is seen as a competitive space, characterised by a dynamic tension, as participants compete for recognition, precedence, and acclaim [35; 36]. Contestation is seen as an important incentive and a cure for apathy, engaging people in debate. Competition and conflicts are not abuses to eliminate, but the core processes. Individualistic and/or \"tribal\" attitude is valued, and some participants usually gain a dominant position in the group (based on prestige). Interdependence of different positions is observed, as the alternative solutions are fueled by confrontation and developed in opposition to each other. Perseverance in defending an individual position against the majority is valued. Emotional statements are acceptable. The opponents (both the competing groups and individuals) should be treated with respect, as esteemed adversaries, not the enemies [37]. Through collective contestation, participants develop autonomy and group identity relationally. The result of the debate is rather a preference ranking than consensus [38]. 1.2 Methods of Researching Collective Intelligence Suitable to Identify the Aspects of the Public Sphere Debate in Internet Projects  
The review of the literature allowed us to identify the most important research methods that have been used so far to study specific aspects of CI on the internet. A full overview of these methods, their strengths and weaknesses, as well as proposed changes and modifications, were described in our previous article on this topic [39].