Online participatory platforms are introduced to boost citizen involvement in political decision-making. However, the design features of these platforms vary considerably, and these are likely to affect how prospective users evaluate the usefulness of these platforms. Previous studies explored how prevalent different design features are and how they affect the success of platforms in terms of impact, but the attitudes of prospective users remain unclear. Since these evaluations affect the prospects for launching successful participatory platforms, it is imperative to assess what citizens want from such digital possibilities for participation. This study uses a conjoint experiment (n = 1048) conducted in Finland that explore the impact of seven design features: Discussion possibilities; Interaction with politicians and experts; Information availability, Aim of participation; Identity verification; Anonymous participation and Accessibility. Furthermore, it is examined whether the effects differ across use of ICTs measured by generation, time online and prior use of participatory platforms. The results suggest that most design features have clear effects on evaluations, and that deliberative features have the strongest effects. Furthermore, the effects are relatively stable across prior use although the less experienced put a stronger emphasis on verification.

引入了在线参与平台，以促进公民参与政治决策。但是，这些平台的设计功能差异很大，并且可能会影响潜在用户评估这些平台的实用性的方式。先前的研究探讨了不同设计特征的普遍程度以及它们如何在影响方面影响平台的成功，但是潜在用户的态度仍不清楚。由于这些评估会影响启动成功的参与性平台的前景，因此必须评估公民从这种数字化参与可能性中想要什么。本研究采用联合实验（n = 1048）在芬兰进行，探讨了七个设计特征的影响：讨论的可能性；与政治家和专家的互动；信息可用性，参与目的；身份验证；匿名参与和可访问性。此外，还研究了通过使用信息通信技术的年代，产生时间，上网时间和参与性平台的先前使用情况，对使用信息通信技术的效果是否有所不同。结果表明，大多数设计功能对评估都有明显的影响，而审议功能则具有最强的影响。此外，尽管经验较少，但效果在整个先前使用中相对稳定，尽管他们更加强调验证。