E-Democracy, April 2008

The purpose of the study: to estimate how internet use promotes practical implementation of discursive (deliberative) democracy in Lithuania; what influence does Lithuanian residents political education and participation, motives of citizens participation in elections and criteria of choosing political representative have on electronic democracy.
Major investigated questions: when different informational sources were listed, respondents frequency of those sources usage (when learning about events in the country) was analysed. Respondents were asked if they use internet, where they use it and how often. When providing different possibilities of internet use, respondents were asked to indicate which of them they use. Respondents were asked if they have expressed their opinion about government activity or given suggestions and assessed solution projects through public authorities e-mail. Respondents who visit news portals were asked how often they engage in listed activities inherent to this field in those portals. Respondents who at least once a month writes a comment in news portals about public life and politics were asked in which Lithuanian news portals they usually write comments. Respondents who visit discussion forums were asked how often they engage in listed activities inherent to this field in those portals. Furthermore, respondents who were logged in to electronic conferences were also asked how often they engage in listen activities in those portals. Question blocks were given in order to find out importance of motives about respondents (non-) participation in virtual discussions. Respondents attitude towards participants of virtual discussions was analysed. Respondents were asked how often they talk, debate with listed people about political situation in Lithuania, governments decisions. Respondents were asked if ordinary people have enough knowledge to what is happening in politics and they were asked to indicate which part of politicians is interested in ordinary people's opinion in Lithuania. It was questioned if respondents knew who is the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chairman of the Seimas, Minister of Education and Science, President of the Supreme Court, Chairman of the Board of the Bank of Lithuania. A questioned was asked if the President of the Republic of Lithuania can indicate to judges based on Constitution of Lithuania what decisions they should accept in some cases. Respondents civil activity in the last two years was assessed when presenting group of questions about various forms of political participation. It was analysed if respondents were interested in politics. When provided with the list of Lithuanian political parties, respondents had an opportunity to indicate how much they (do not) like a specific party. Respondents were asked to reveal if they usually vote in elections. It was questioned if respondents would participate in the Seimas elections and for which party they would vote if elections would be held next Sunday. Causes for respondents (not)participation in elections were analysed when providing questions block. It was analysed how much different characteristics of a candidate and listed parties are important for respondents when deciding for who to vote in the Seimas elections. Respondents were asked who should participate in deciding upon important state and local questions, and if respondents would devote part of their free time to participate in discussion and solution of listed questions if they knew that their opinion will be heard. Respondents were questioned if they are happy with their current life, how much their well-being depends on the state and if they can trust in people or they need to be very careful. At the end, questions block about political discussion show "Spaudos Klubas" was given to respondents.
Socio-demographic characteristics: gender, age, education, occupation, nationality, income per family member per month, place of residence, region.