Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Panel discussion

A panel discussion is a structured conversational format employed at meetings, conferences, or conventions, featuring a moderator who facilitates dialogue among 3 to 5 panelists—typically experts or stakeholders on a designated topic—before a live, recorded, or virtual audience, often including periods for audience questions to encourage exchange of viewpoints and debate.^[1]^[2]^[3] This method distinguishes itself from lectures or debates by emphasizing interactive, moderated discourse rather than unilateral presentations or adversarial confrontations, aiming to provide multifaceted insights through panelist interactions.^[1]^[4] The format traces its origins to the late 1920s, when efforts were made to scale small-group discussions for larger audiences, with American educator Harry A. Overstreet formalizing the term "panel discussion" in a 1934 article.^[5] By the mid-20th century, panel discussions had become staples in educational settings, broadcasting, and public forums, evolving to include hybrid and virtual variants in response to technological advancements and events like the COVID-19 pandemic.^[5]^[3] Key to their effectiveness are characteristics such as a neutral moderator who ensures balanced participation, time-managed exchanges to prevent dominance by any single voice, and a focus on substantive, evidence-based contributions over performative rhetoric, though outcomes can vary based on panelist selection and moderation quality.^[6]^[2]^[7] Panel discussions serve diverse purposes, from informing policy through expert testimony to entertaining via media appearances, but their value hinges on genuine diversity of thought among participants to mitigate echo chambers prevalent in ideologically aligned groups.^[8]^[9]

Definition and Core Characteristics

Fundamental Definition

A panel discussion consists of a moderated conversation among a small group of individuals, typically selected for their expertise or diverse viewpoints on a given topic, conducted before an audience to explore ideas, share insights, and foster understanding.^[10]^[11] The format emphasizes collaborative exchange rather than scripted presentations or direct confrontation, allowing panelists to respond to one another under the guidance of a facilitator. This structure distinguishes it as a tool for public enlightenment, originating in contexts like conferences and broadcasts where informed dialogue can illuminate complex issues without predetermined outcomes.^[11] At its core, the panel relies on three essential elements: knowledgeable participants, a neutral moderator to pose questions and manage flow, and an engaged audience that may contribute via questions or observations.^[11] Panelists are not adversaries but contributors whose interactions aim to reveal nuances, challenge assumptions through evidence-based reasoning, and avoid superficial consensus.^[12] The moderator's role is pivotal in maintaining focus, ensuring equitable participation, and preventing dominance by any single voice, thereby promoting a realistic assessment of the topic's causal dynamics and empirical underpinnings.^[11] Unlike informal chats, this format demands preparation, with panelists drawing on verifiable data or firsthand experience to substantiate claims, rendering it suitable for academic, professional, or policy-oriented settings.^[8] Historically rooted in early 20th-century group communication practices, the panel discussion prioritizes depth over breadth, often lasting 45 to 90 minutes to allow substantive engagement without diluting key points.^[13] Its effectiveness hinges on the panel's composition—ideally 3 to 5 members to balance diversity and manageability—and adherence to time constraints that prevent anecdotal drift in favor of fact-grounded discourse.^[5] When executed well, it serves as a mechanism for truth-seeking by juxtaposing perspectives against evidence, though outcomes depend on participants' commitment to rigor over performative rhetoric.^[9]

Key Components and Distinctions from Other Discussion Formats

A panel discussion fundamentally comprises a moderator and a small group of 3 to 5 panelists selected for their expertise on a given topic, with the moderator serving a neutral role in facilitating dialogue, introducing participants, posing targeted questions, and enforcing time limits to promote balanced input.^[3] The core structure typically unfolds through sequential elements: an opening welcome and panelist introductions, initial remarks or presentations from panelists outlining their perspectives, a moderated question-and-answer segment where the facilitator directs inquiries to elicit responses, an interactive phase for audience-submitted questions, a summary of key takeaways, and closing thanks.^[14] This format usually spans 45 minutes to one hour, allowing sufficient depth without diluting focus, and emphasizes diverse viewpoints to foster informed exploration rather than consensus.^[15] Distinguishing panel discussions from other formats highlights their moderated, expert-driven interactivity. Unlike a debate, which structures participants into opposing sides for argumentative clashes aimed at persuasion or victory, a panel prioritizes cooperative information-sharing and perspective diversification among aligned or complementary experts, often to stimulate audience reflection without requiring resolution.^[3] In comparison to a roundtable, where participants engage in egalitarian, unstructured conversation without a formal leader—potentially leading to dominance by vocal individuals—panels impose a hierarchical facilitation to ensure expert contributions remain prominent and orderly.^[3] Further contrasts include symposia, which center on sequential, standalone presentations by speakers with minimal or post-presentation dialogue, lacking the real-time moderated exchange that defines panels; and forums or colloquia, which may open participation more broadly to non-experts or emphasize academic informality over curated expertise.^[16] These elements collectively position panel discussions as a hybrid mechanism for authoritative discourse, bridging presentation and debate while centering facilitation to mitigate chaos and amplify substantive insights.^[1]

Historical Development

Origins and Early Uses

The modern panel discussion format emerged in the United States during the late 1920s as an adaptation of small-group deliberation techniques to accommodate larger audiences in educational and professional settings. Educators sought to replicate the interactive benefits of intimate discussions—such as idea exchange and collective reasoning—while addressing the passivity of traditional lectures or speeches. This approach emphasized a small group of prepared participants conversing on a predefined topic, often with audience input, to foster practical problem-solving rather than adversarial debate.^[17]^[18] American philosopher and educator Harry A. Overstreet formalized the terminology in his October 1934 article "On the Panel," published in The Trained Nurse and Hospital Review, where he described the method as involving 4 to 10 informed individuals seated at a table to discuss a subject informally before observers. Overstreet's innovation highlighted the panel's structure: participants prepare individually but engage spontaneously, avoiding scripted presentations to prioritize genuine dialogue and audience enlightenment. This contrasted with earlier formats like symposia, which were more monologue-driven, by prioritizing causal analysis through group interplay. The term "panel discussion" entered common usage shortly thereafter, with dictionary records noting its first appearances around 1935–1936.^[5] Early applications focused on vocational training and public education, particularly in fields like nursing, public health, and adult extension courses, where panels enabled efficient dissemination of expert insights to non-specialist crowds. By the early 1930s, universities and professional associations, such as those in teacher training, incorporated panels to explore contemporary issues like social policy or scientific advancements, valuing their role in modeling evidence-based reasoning over opinionating. In broadcasting, nascent radio programs in the mid-1930s began experimenting with panel elements, such as expert roundtables on current events, which extended the format's reach beyond live audiences and influenced its evolution in media. These initial uses underscored the panel's utility in democratizing access to specialized knowledge while maintaining rigor through participant expertise.^[17]^[13]

20th-Century Evolution and Institutionalization

The panel discussion format originated in educational contexts during the late 1920s as a means to replicate the dynamics of small-group deliberations for broader audiences. Educator Harry A. Overstreet initiated these structured discussions in 1929, adapting intimate debate styles to accommodate larger groups while preserving interactive elements such as expert input and audience observation.^[18] Overstreet formalized the terminology in his 1934 article "On the Panel," published in the October issue of The Trained Nurse and Hospital Review, where he described the method as involving a moderator guiding 4 to 10 panelists in open exchange on a predefined topic, followed by audience questions.^[5] By the 1930s and 1940s, the format evolved beyond classrooms into mass media, particularly radio, where it supported public discourse on current events and trivia through expert panels responding to listener queries. Programs like Information Please, debuting in 1938 on NBC Radio, exemplified this shift, featuring panels of intellectuals debating questions in real-time, which drew millions of listeners weekly and demonstrated the format's scalability for entertainment and information dissemination. This media adoption institutionalized panels as a tool for accessible expertise, influencing educational practices by integrating broadcast techniques—such as timed responses and moderated interruptions—into in-person academic symposia.^[19] Post-World War II, television accelerated institutionalization, transforming panels into visual spectacles with shows like What's My Line? (premiering 1950 on CBS) that combined deduction games with celebrity panelists, reaching peak viewership of over 25 million per episode by the mid-1950s. In professional and academic conferences, the format became standardized by the 1950s, embedded in organizations' event structures for policy debates and research reviews, as evidenced by its routine inclusion in proceedings of bodies like the American Educational Research Association, where panels facilitated peer critique amid expanding postwar knowledge production.^[19] This era marked causal convergence: rising conference attendance (e.g., from specialized wartime forums to annual multidisciplinary gatherings exceeding 1,000 participants by 1960 in fields like psychology) and media precedents enforced procedural norms, including pre-event briefings and balanced representation, to mitigate dominance by verbose participants.^[20]

Formats and Operational Mechanics

Traditional In-Person Structure

The traditional in-person panel discussion typically occurs on a stage in a conference hall or auditorium, with panelists seated at a table equipped with microphones and nameplates, facing an audience seated in rows.^[21] This setup facilitates direct interaction and visibility, often lasting 45 to 60 minutes to maintain engagement without fatigue.^[15] The moderator, positioned centrally, opens the session by welcoming the audience, outlining the topic, and introducing each panelist with brief credentials relevant to the discussion.^[2] Following introductions, panelists deliver short opening statements, usually 3-5 minutes each, presenting their perspectives on the core topic to set the stage for dialogue.^[22] The moderator then directs the conversation through prepared questions, encouraging panelists to respond sequentially or interactively, fostering debate while managing time to ensure balanced participation among 3 to 5 panelists.^[15] This moderated exchange, comprising the bulk of the session, aims to explore nuances, agreements, and disagreements, with the moderator intervening to clarify points or redirect off-topic remarks.^[23] A dedicated question-and-answer segment follows, typically 10-15 minutes, where the moderator fields audience-submitted queries via raised hands, microphones passed through aisles, or pre-collected cards to ensure orderly input.^[3] Responses are routed back to panelists for concise replies, prioritizing breadth over depth to accommodate multiple questions. The session concludes with final thoughts from panelists, moderator summation of key insights, and announcements for further engagement, such as networking or related events.^[2] This structure, rooted in mid-20th-century academic and professional conferences, emphasizes expert exchange illuminated by live audience dynamics.^[24]

Modern Adaptations Including Virtual and Hybrid Models

The transition to virtual panel discussions accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, when global restrictions on in-person assemblies prompted academic, professional, and media organizations to adopt videoconferencing tools for maintaining structured debates among experts. Platforms such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Webex enabled remote participation, with early precedents tracing back to congressional videoconferences in the U.S. House of Representatives as far as 1991, though widespread institutional use lagged until necessity drove scalability.^[25] ^[26] By mid-2020, surveys of conference organizers indicated that over 90% of planned events shifted online, preserving panel formats through moderated video feeds, live Q&A via chat functions, and recorded sessions for asynchronous access.^[27] Operational adaptations in virtual panels emphasized technological reliability and engagement mitigation strategies to counter drawbacks like "Zoom fatigue," characterized by reduced attention spans after 30-40 minutes of screen-based interaction, as documented in post-pandemic analyses of online meetings. Moderators increasingly incorporated polls, breakout rooms for subgroup deliberations, and pre-recorded segments to sustain dynamism, while panelists relied on shared screens for visual aids, compensating for the absence of physical cues such as body language that traditionally facilitate real-time rebuttals in face-to-face settings. Empirical assessments from virtual conferences, including those in scientific fields, revealed attendance rates averaging 44-54% of registrants, attributed to lower barriers to entry but higher dropout risks from connectivity issues or competing distractions.^[28] ^[29] These formats also yielded environmental gains, with studies estimating reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by up to 94% per attendee compared to travel-intensive in-person events, due to eliminated flights and venue logistics.^[30] Hybrid panel models, integrating live in-person audiences with simultaneous virtual streams, proliferated from 2021 onward as vaccination campaigns and eased restrictions enabled blended approaches, with market data projecting the global virtual and hybrid events sector to expand from $98 billion in 2024 to $297 billion by 2030 at a 20% compound annual growth rate. In practice, hybrid setups deploy multi-camera rigs at physical venues linked to streaming software, allowing remote panelists to contribute via high-bandwidth feeds while on-site participants engage through microphones and audience microphones, though synchronization lags can disrupt flow. Benefits include amplified reach—potentially doubling participant diversity by including global experts unable to travel—and cost efficiencies, with organizers reporting 20-30% savings on logistics despite dual infrastructure needs.^[31] ^[32] Challenges in hybrid panels stem from divergent audience experiences, where in-person attendees benefit from spontaneous networking absent in virtual feeds, leading to reported engagement disparities; for instance, remote viewers often cite feelings of exclusion due to unaddressed chat questions or delayed audio integration. Technical demands, including robust internet for low-latency video and backup redundancies against outages, have prompted best practices like dedicated production teams and pre-event rehearsals, as evidenced in guidelines from post-2022 conference evaluations. Despite these hurdles, hybrid formats have persisted in sectors like academia and policy, with guideline development panels noting sustained productivity when virtual elements enhance rather than replace core interpersonal dynamics.^[33] ^[26] Overall, these adaptations reflect a causal shift toward resilient, scalable discussion mechanisms, prioritizing empirical accessibility over traditional immersion while exposing trade-offs in debate authenticity verifiable through participant feedback metrics.^[34]

Roles and Participant Dynamics

Selection and Responsibilities of Panelists

Panelists in a panel discussion are typically selected by event organizers, conference chairs, or producers based on criteria emphasizing domain expertise, representational diversity of viewpoints, and communicative ability to foster substantive exchange. Expertise is prioritized to ensure informed contributions grounded in verifiable knowledge rather than superficial opinions, with selectors often seeking individuals who can substantiate claims through evidence or professional experience.^[7]^[35] Diversity of perspectives is incorporated to avoid echo chambers and promote dialectical rigor, drawing from contrasting professional backgrounds, ideological stances, or empirical approaches, though selectors must guard against tokenism or bias in curation that skews toward institutional consensus.^[36]^[15] Communication skills, including conciseness and responsiveness, are evaluated to prevent monologues and enable dynamic interaction, with real-world practitioners preferred over purely academic figures when practical insights are needed.^[6]^[35] Responsibilities of panelists commence with pre-event preparation, including reviewing the discussion's objectives, anticipated questions, and fellow panelists' positions to enable targeted, evidence-based responses rather than unprepared improvisation.^[7]^[15] During the session, panelists must articulate their views succinctly—often within allocated time limits of 1-2 minutes per response—to respect the format's constraints and allow equitable participation, while actively listening and engaging with others' arguments through rebuttals or agreements supported by facts.^[6]^[23] They are expected to defer to the moderator's guidance on topic adherence and turn-taking, avoiding dominance or off-topic digressions that undermine the discussion's focus on causal analysis and empirical validity.^[37]^[15] Interaction with audience questions, when permitted, requires panelists to provide direct, non-evasive answers, prioritizing clarity and verifiability over performative rhetoric.^[36] Post-discussion, panelists may contribute to follow-up materials or networking, but their core duty remains advancing collective understanding through rigorous, non-partisan discourse.^[3]

Moderator's Function and Best Practices

The moderator in a panel discussion serves as a facilitator who structures the conversation to maximize clarity, balance, and audience value, preventing any single participant from dominating while guiding the discourse toward substantive insights on the designated topic.^[38] Core functions include introducing panelists with concise bios, posing initial and probing questions to stimulate dialogue, allocating speaking time equitably, and transitioning smoothly between speakers to highlight connections or contrasts in viewpoints.^[23]^[39] By maintaining oversight of the agenda, the moderator ensures relevance and progression, intervening as needed to redirect off-topic remarks or resolve disputes without endorsing positions.^[15] In audience-inclusive formats, the moderator manages question-and-answer segments by selecting queries, repeating them aloud for collective understanding, and enforcing brevity to accommodate multiple voices within time constraints.^[39] This role demands impartiality, as the moderator refrains from sharing personal opinions or advancing an agenda, instead prioritizing the panelists' expertise to deliver an informative exchange.^[38] Effective execution hinges on logistical awareness, such as monitoring session duration—typically 45 to 60 minutes—and signaling transitions to keep energy high and prevent fatigue.^[15] Best practices emphasize pre-event preparation: contacting panelists weeks ahead to outline expectations, share sample questions, and gather insights on their perspectives, thereby enabling targeted facilitation that avoids surprises or mismatched contributions.^[23]^[15] During the panel, moderators should direct inquiries to the most pertinent speaker rather than rotating rigidly, encourage panelists to respond to each other for dynamic interplay, and tactfully interject to curb lengthy responses, such as by prompting others with phrases like "How does that align with your view?"^[23]^[38] Maintaining neutrality involves modeling concise language, avoiding advocacy, and fostering inclusivity by amplifying underrepresented voices without forcing equality that stifles natural flow.^[38] For Q&A, practices include requesting questioners' names and affiliations, rephrasing convoluted queries, and politely interrupting ramblers to refocus on the core question, ensuring the segment enhances rather than disrupts the discussion.^[39] Overall, skilled moderation transforms a potential monologue into a coherent, engaging forum that respects time limits and audience interests.^[15]

Audience Engagement Mechanisms

In panel discussions, the predominant audience engagement mechanism is the structured question-and-answer (Q&A) session, which follows the core panelist exchange and allocates 15-30 minutes depending on event duration. Participants submit queries via hand-raising, roaming microphones, or designated submission stations in in-person formats, with the moderator screening for relevance, brevity, and avoidance of redundancy to ensure equitable distribution among panelists.^[40] Pre-submitted questions, collected via event apps or registration forms, supplement live input to mitigate dominant voices and incorporate diverse perspectives, particularly in audiences exceeding 100 attendees.^[8] This process fosters direct dialogue, allowing panelists to address specific concerns or challenge assumptions raised by attendees.^[41] Modern adaptations leverage digital tools to broaden participation, especially in hybrid or virtual panels where physical cues are absent. Audience response systems such as Slido, Mentimeter, or event-specific apps enable anonymous Q&A submissions, upvoting of popular questions, and live polls to gauge sentiments on debated topics, integrating results into real-time panel responses.^[42] ^[43] For instance, polling on binary or multiple-choice queries—e.g., agreement levels with a panelist's claim—can redirect discourse toward majority interests, with data visualized via on-screen graphs for transparency.^[44] In virtual settings on platforms like Zoom or Microsoft Teams, chat functions and reaction emojis serve as low-barrier inputs, though moderators often prioritize escalated questions to prevent overload.^[45] Additional mechanisms include facilitated breakout interactions or audience-selected "hot seat" segments, where volunteers join panelists briefly for targeted exchanges, though these are less common due to logistical constraints.^[46] Gamification elements, such as quizzes tied to discussion themes, further encourage active involvement by rewarding participation with digital badges or priority questioning, particularly in professional conferences since the mid-2010s.^[44] These approaches aim to counter passive observation but require technical reliability and moderator skill to avoid derailing substantive debate.^[47]

Applications Across Contexts

Academic and Professional Conferences

Panel discussions in academic conferences facilitate expert exchanges on niche or evolving topics, often serving as a counterpart to formal paper presentations by promoting unscripted debate and idea synthesis. These sessions generally comprise 3 to 5 specialists alongside a moderator who guides the conversation through opening statements, targeted queries, and audience participation, with durations ranging from 45 to 90 minutes.^[48]^[15]^[3] Such formats appear in disciplinary meetings, including those of the Modern Language Association, where panels accommodate up to four contributors presenting titled insights on literary or linguistic issues.^[49] They enable synthesis of recent research, as seen in panels at library and information science conferences organized by ALISE, addressing institutional practices like diversity initiatives.^[50] In professional conferences, panel discussions emphasize practical implications, policy considerations, and sector-specific advancements, drawing participants from industry, policy, and research backgrounds. Organizations such as the IEEE solicit panel proposals for events like IECON, targeting "cutting-edge topics in industry" to foster insights from thought leaders.^[51] Similarly, the IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference incorporates panels within special sessions to encourage interaction on technology applications, requiring abstracts and timed presentations.^[52] These gatherings, exemplified by tech-focused events like TechCrunch Sessions, convene experts to deliberate on fields such as robotics, highlighting operational challenges and innovations.^[53] Panels in these contexts prioritize actionable outcomes, often integrating audience input to refine professional strategies.

Media and Public Broadcasting

Panel discussions in broadcast media serve as a format for aggregating expert opinions on current events, policy, and cultural issues, often structured as roundtable segments following news reports or in dedicated public affairs programs. These discussions typically involve 3-5 panelists, including journalists, academics, politicians, and analysts, moderated to elicit contrasting viewpoints and foster debate. In commercial television news, such as segments on CNN or Fox News, panels emphasize rapid-fire exchanges to analyze breaking stories like elections or international conflicts, with the goal of clarifying positions amid complexity.^[54] However, observations of these formats highlight frequent interruptions and adversarial posturing, which can prioritize entertainment value over substantive analysis, as evidenced by critiques of programs devolving into "ranting and raving" rather than constructive dialogue.^[55] Public broadcasting entities, such as PBS in the United States and the BBC in the United Kingdom, integrate panel discussions to promote informed civic discourse, often incorporating audience questions for broader engagement. For instance, BBC's Question Time, airing weekly since 1979, assembles panels of politicians, public figures, and experts to respond to live audience queries on topics ranging from domestic policy to global affairs, aiming for balance through mandated impartiality under public charters. Similarly, PBS programs like NewsHour feature panel segments dissecting legislative developments or economic data, with panelists drawn from think tanks and government roles to provide data-driven insights. These formats underscore public broadcasters' mandate for neutrality, yet empirical reviews of over 6,000 panel appearances across 26 U.S. programs from 2016-2020 reveal demographic skews: panels averaged nearly 70% male participants, with fewer than half including a person of color, potentially limiting representational diversity in discourse.^[56] Ideological imbalances further characterize media panels, with mainstream outlets exhibiting systemic left-leaning biases in panelist selection and framing, as documented in analyses of source reliance during coverage of partisan issues. A 2017 study of U.S. media outlets found disproportionate citation of Democratic-favored sources in panel-style reporting, correlating with underrepresentation of conservative perspectives despite their prevalence in public opinion polls. Gallup surveys indicate that by 2018, 62% of Americans perceived news media as biased, a figure rising amid perceptions of panel discussions reinforcing elite consensus over empirical contestation. Public broadcasters face analogous critiques; for example, BBC panels have been accused of favoring establishment views, though regulatory oversight requires proportionality. Such biases arise from institutional hiring and sourcing practices within journalism, which empirical data links to academia and urban media hubs' predominant left-of-center orientations, rather than deliberate conspiracy.^[57] Effectiveness studies on TV panels remain limited compared to candidate debates, but available research suggests mixed outcomes for public enlightenment. A quasi-experimental analysis of multiparty TV discussions found that viewer attitudes toward participants shifted based on perceived debate performance, influencing first-time voters' efficacy perceptions, though without clear gains in factual comprehension. Broader talk show research correlates panel viewing with heightened political awareness but also partisan reinforcement, as audiences selectively interpret exchanges through preexisting biases. In public broadcasting, formats like PBS panels correlate with higher viewer trust in informational content, yet chaotic commercial panels risk eroding credibility by modeling uncivil discourse, per moderator training analyses. Overall, while panels disseminate specialized knowledge efficiently to mass audiences, their causal impact on policy-informed opinion hinges on moderator enforcement of evidence-based rebuttals over emotive appeals, a practice inconsistently applied amid commercial pressures for viewership.^[58]^[59]

Entertainment and Fan Conventions

Panel discussions in entertainment and fan conventions, such as San Diego Comic-Con (SDCC) and New York Comic Con, primarily function as promotional events for upcoming films, television series, comics, and video games, featuring cast members, directors, writers, and producers.^[60] These sessions allow studios to unveil trailers, concept art, and plot details, generating media buzz and fan anticipation ahead of releases.^[61] Held in large venues like SDCC's Hall H, which accommodates over 6,500 attendees, panels often include moderated conversations followed by audience questions, though lines can extend for hours due to high demand.^[62] Fan-run panels complement official studio events by focusing on niche topics, such as analysis of specific genres or creator spotlights, fostering community-driven discourse rather than commercial pitches.^[63] At SDCC, which drew 135,000 attendees in 2024, these discussions contribute to the event's $160 million economic impact on San Diego through tourism and related spending.^[64] However, the absence of major celebrity panels, as seen in 2025 amid industry shifts, can reduce overall draw, shifting focus to independent creators and cosplay.^[65] Critics note that many panels prioritize scripted promotions over substantive debate, with pre-selected questions limiting spontaneity and genuine fan interaction.^[66] Audience Q&A sessions frequently feature inappropriate or off-topic queries, disrupting flow and highlighting uneven moderation.^[67] Despite this, panels enhance fan loyalty by providing direct access to talent, as evidenced by sustained attendance even during Hollywood strikes when promotional content waned.^[61] In anime conventions, fan-led discussions emphasize thematic deep dives, promoting engaged, peer-to-peer exchanges.

Benefits and Empirical Assessments

Advantages in Knowledge Dissemination and Debate

Panel discussions enable the presentation of multiple expert perspectives on a topic, fostering a dynamic exchange that reveals nuances and interconnections not evident in solitary lectures. This format allows panelists to challenge assumptions in real time, promoting rigorous debate that refines ideas through direct confrontation of evidence and reasoning.^[68]^[69] In educational contexts, panel discussions have demonstrated superior engagement compared to traditional presentations, with audience members reporting deeper understanding (95.7%) and increased motivation (91.3%) due to interactive elements like question-and-answer sessions. Panelists experience gains in confidence (91.3%) and concept retention (87%), attributing these to the need to articulate and defend positions amid diverse viewpoints. Such outcomes arise from the causal mechanism of reciprocal critique, which compels participants to substantiate claims empirically rather than rely on unchallenged assertions.^[68] For knowledge dissemination, the structure supports broader reach by distilling complex topics into accessible dialogues, often amplified through media recordings or live streams, as seen in professional conferences where panels clarify differing opinions and inform unengaged participants effectively. In peer review processes, like grant evaluations, panel deliberations enhance decision quality by integrating varied inputs, with reviewers favoring the format for its participatory nature and ability to resolve ambiguities collaboratively.^[70] Debate within panels cultivates critical thinking by exposing participants to counterarguments, mirroring first-principles evaluation where ideas are tested against alternatives, leading to more robust conclusions. Studies in language learning confirm this, showing panel discussions boost communication skills and proficiency through group dynamics that encourage evidence-based discourse over rote memorization.^[71]^[72]

Evidence on Effectiveness from Studies and Outcomes

Empirical studies on panel discussions, primarily in educational settings, indicate benefits for skill development and engagement, though evidence on long-term knowledge retention remains limited and context-specific. A 2024 qualitative study of 46 international medical students in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) classes found that panel discussions enhanced critical thinking, communication skills, and subject knowledge, with 93.5% of participants reporting value in knowledge sharing among panelists and 91.3% noting increased confidence in public speaking.^[73] Audience members similarly reported high satisfaction, with 93.5% appreciating diverse perspectives and 91.3% experiencing heightened interest in the topic, simulating professional conference environments effectively.^[73] However, challenges such as preparation workload (87.0% of respondents) and potential audience disengagement (73.9%) were noted, suggesting effectiveness depends on structured implementation.^[73] In high school contexts, panel discussions have demonstrated improvements in speaking proficiency. A 2024 experimental study on second-grade senior high school students showed significant gains in fluency, pronunciation, and vocabulary use post-intervention, attributing outcomes to interactive dialogue and peer feedback, though quantitative metrics like pre-post test scores were not detailed in available abstracts. Broader discussion-based formats, akin to panels, outperform traditional lectures in practical knowledge acquisition and retention; a study comparing discussion-based learning to lecture-based methods in medical education reported superior long-term retention rates, with discussion groups scoring higher on practical assessments six months post-exposure.^[74]^[75] Professional applications, such as grant review panels, yield mixed results. Reviewers in a 2020 survey perceived discussions as effective for fostering participation (high favorability ratings) and clarifying divergent opinions, aiding unassigned reviewers' understanding.^[70] Conversely, a study on peer review processes found panel discussions did not enhance score reliability compared to independent reviews, with inter-rater agreement remaining low.^[76] Practitioner surveys from conferences highlight implementation variability; the 2024 Panels Report, based on over 100 executives and organizers, concluded panels excel in disseminating diverse viewpoints when moderated well but often underperform, echoing a 2014 finding where 63% were rated mediocre or worse due to poor preparation.^[77] Overall, while panels promote debate and ethical reasoning—as evidenced by a 2022 exercise improving students' dilemma identification and framework application—robust meta-analyses are absent, limiting generalizability beyond niche domains.^[78]

Criticisms and Controversies

Diversity Debates Including Manels

The term "manel" refers to an all-male panel discussion, a portmanteau of "man" and "panel," coined in the early 2010s within feminist and academic circles to critique perceived gender imbalances in expert forums.^[79] Critics argue that manels perpetuate implicit gender bias by excluding women, potentially leading to narrower perspectives and reinforcing male dominance in professional discourse.^[80] Campaigns against manels, often led by advocacy groups and amplified on social media platforms like Twitter (now X), have pressured organizers of conferences, such as those in science and medicine, to prioritize female inclusion, with hashtags like #manel gaining traction around 2015.^[81] Proponents of diversity mandates contend that including women enhances panel outcomes by incorporating varied viewpoints, drawing on broader research indicating that demographically diverse teams can outperform homogeneous ones in problem-solving and innovation.^[82] For instance, a 2021 review of cultural diversity in teams found evidence of improved creativity in some contexts, though effects vary by task type and group dynamics, with conflicts sometimes arising from value differences.^[83] However, such studies focus primarily on general teams rather than expert panels, where selection criteria emphasize domain-specific knowledge; empirical data specific to panel discussions remains sparse, and no large-scale, peer-reviewed analyses conclusively demonstrate that gender-balanced panels yield superior knowledge dissemination or debate quality compared to merit-selected compositions.^[84] Opponents of anti-manels initiatives emphasize meritocracy, arguing that panelists should be chosen for expertise rather than demographic quotas, as forcing inclusion risks diluting competence. In fields like STEM or policy, where historical participation gaps exist—women comprising about 28% of the global STEM workforce as of 2023—top experts may disproportionately be male due to factors including career pipelines and productivity metrics, not inherent bias.^[85] Research on merit versus diversity highlights tensions, with some analyses suggesting that prioritizing identity over qualifications can undermine trust and performance, as seen in critiques of DEI frameworks that conflate representation with ability.^[86] Sources advocating against manels often stem from institutions with documented ideological leans, such as academia, where surveys indicate overrepresentation of progressive views that may inflate diversity's causal role in outcomes without rigorous controls for confounding variables like expertise.^[87] Controversies have arisen in specific domains, such as medical conferences, where pledges to avoid manels—adopted by groups like the European Association of Urology in 2019—aim to model equity but face pushback for potentially overlooking qualified male specialists in niche areas.^[88] A 2024 study on gender bias in scientific receptiveness found no significant assessor gender effects on evaluating evidence, challenging assumptions that male-only panels systematically undervalue female-relevant issues.^[89] Ultimately, while diversity debates underscore valid concerns about representation, causal evidence linking gender quotas to enhanced panel effectiveness is inconclusive, with first-principles selection favoring verifiable expertise to maximize informational value over symbolic inclusion.^[90] Panel discussions are often critiqued for their structural limitations, which hinder substantive exchange. The format typically allocates fixed speaking times to panelists, regardless of the complexity of topics, leading to truncated arguments and superficial coverage rather than in-depth analysis.^[91] This rigidity discourages organic debate, as panelists prioritize brevity over rigor, resulting in rehearsed statements over responsive dialogue.^[92] Additionally, the presence of multiple panelists—often three to five—fosters politeness norms that suppress confrontation, with moderators frequently failing to intervene effectively against dominant speakers or off-topic digressions.^[92] Such dynamics can allow verbose or charismatic individuals to monopolize airtime, marginalizing quieter experts and reducing overall informational value.^[93] These structural elements exacerbate bias-related issues, particularly through moderator influence and panelist selection. Moderators, by guiding questions and allocating turns, can inadvertently or deliberately favor certain viewpoints, introducing subconscious favoritism that skews the discourse.^[94] In media contexts, empirical analyses reveal compositional imbalances, such as late-night comedy programs featuring 99% left-leaning political guests in the first half of 2025, limiting exposure to diverse perspectives.^[95] Similarly, daytime talk shows like ABC's The View hosted 102 liberal guests and zero conservatives through July 2025, creating echo chamber effects where dissenting ideas receive minimal airing.^[96] These patterns reflect broader institutional tendencies in mainstream outlets, where panel invitations correlate with ideological alignment rather than balanced representation, often yielding homogenized outputs that reinforce prevailing narratives.^[97] In academic and professional settings, structural biases arise from organizing bodies' demographic skews, with surveys indicating over 80% left-leaning faculty in U.S. social sciences as of 2020, predisposing conference panels to viewpoint uniformity. This homogeneity, compounded by format constraints, stifles causal exploration of alternative hypotheses, as dissenting panelists face social penalties for challenging consensus. Critics argue such setups prioritize institutional comfort over empirical scrutiny, undermining panels' role in truth-seeking.^[91] While some counter that expertise trumps balance, the resultant outputs frequently exhibit measurable slant, as seen in media bias studies quantifying partisan guest disparities.^[97]

Counterarguments Emphasizing Merit and Expertise

Critics of mandatory diversity requirements in panel discussions assert that selections should prioritize verifiable expertise and substantive contributions to the topic at hand, as this ensures panels deliver high-quality, evidence-based discourse rather than performative representation. In fields with asymmetric distributions of achievement—such as certain STEM subdisciplines or policy areas where top performers skew toward one demographic due to factors like participation rates or rigorous qualification thresholds—insisting on demographic balance can exclude the most knowledgeable individuals, thereby reducing the panel's overall competence and credibility.^[98] For example, conference organizers have noted that all-male panels occasionally arise not from exclusionary bias but from a limited pool of equally qualified female experts in niche topics, where forcing inclusion risks diluting analytical depth.^[98] Empirical assessments of analogous meritocratic systems in organizations support this view, demonstrating that adherence to competence-based criteria correlates with superior performance outcomes, independent of diversity interventions. A study of U.S. federal agencies found that merit principles positively impact governmental performance, with diversity management providing additive but not substitutive benefits, suggesting that expertise-driven choices enhance effectiveness without needing quotas.^[99] Similarly, arguments against gender quotas emphasize that recruiting on merit avoids implying inferiority for underrepresented groups, which quotas can inadvertently reinforce by signaling that demographic status trumps ability.^[100] This perspective holds that true intellectual diversity—arising from varied expertise and viewpoints—emerges organically from merit selection, rather than engineered demographic mixes that may prioritize identity over intellectual rigor. Opponents of anti-"manel" campaigns further contend that such policies presume systemic incompetence in merit processes, overlooking evidence that qualified candidates are identifiable through objective metrics like publications, experience, or peer recognition. In practice, this can lead to tokenistic inclusions where participants are chosen to meet quotas, potentially stigmatizing their legitimacy and fostering perceptions of lowered standards.^[101] For instance, resistance to quotas in professional settings highlights how they undermine trust in selections by equating demographic underrepresentation with discrimination, rather than differential interest or aptitude in demanding fields.^[102] Ultimately, these counterarguments frame merit emphasis as essential for preserving panel discussions as forums for advancing knowledge, cautioning that demographic mandates risk prioritizing equity optics over causal efficacy in knowledge production.

Societal Impact and Future Trends

Influence on Public Discourse and Policy

Panel discussions, especially those broadcast on television or hosted by think tanks and academic institutions, have demonstrably shaped public discourse by amplifying expert and commentator viewpoints on pressing issues. For example, political talk shows featuring panel formats, such as those on major networks, expose audiences to framed arguments that influence evaluations of government efficacy and leadership trust, with research showing that conflict-oriented interactions among panelists can reduce overall public support for political institutions.^[103] This effect stems from television's broad reach, where repeated exposure to panel debates reinforces selective narratives, though the impact varies by viewer demographics and preexisting beliefs.^[104]^[56] In policy formulation, expert panels play a consultative role by synthesizing evidence and issuing recommendations that inform legislative and executive decisions. Citation analyses of EU expert groups reveal that panels with greater political representation and administrative resources exert more influence, as their outputs are frequently referenced in subsequent policy documents and debates.^[105] During the COVID-19 crisis, for instance, scientific advisory panels in countries like Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK directly contributed to policies on restrictions and resource allocation, with panel deliberations cited in official guidelines as of 2020-2021.^[106] However, surveys of U.S. local and state policymakers indicate that expert input is often filtered through directional bias, where advice aligning with officials' priors is more likely to be adopted, limiting the panels' transformative potential.^[107] The causal pathway from panel outputs to broader impact involves media dissemination and stakeholder uptake, but empirical assessments highlight constraints like selection effects—panels tend to draw from established networks, potentially entrenching dominant paradigms over dissenting evidence.^[108] In public discourse, this can perpetuate echo chambers, as panel compositions in mainstream outlets often underrepresent diverse ideological or demographic perspectives, skewing the information environment toward institutional consensus views.^[56] Despite these limitations, panels have facilitated evidence-based shifts, such as in environmental policy where deliberative expert groups have elevated data-driven arguments in international forums since the 1990s.^[105] Overall, while panels enhance discourse through structured expertise, their policy influence remains contingent on political will and rigorous vetting to mitigate biases.

Emerging Developments Post-2020

The COVID-19 pandemic, beginning in early 2020, prompted a rapid transition from in-person to virtual panel discussions across academic, professional, and public sectors, enabling continuity amid lockdowns and travel restrictions.^[26] This shift expanded participant accessibility, with virtual formats reducing geographic barriers and costs while minimizing carbon emissions from travel.^[30] By mid-2020, major conferences adapted to online platforms, preserving knowledge exchange but requiring new moderation techniques to maintain engagement, such as structured introductions and audience polls via tools like Zoom or Microsoft Teams.^[27] ^[109] Post-vaccination in 2021, hybrid formats—combining in-person and virtual elements—emerged as a dominant model, with surveys indicating 75% of attendees preferring to continue participating in such events even after pandemic restrictions lifted.^[110] These hybrids have demonstrated effectiveness in peer review and guideline development panels, where virtual components facilitate diverse input without compromising discussion quality, though in-person elements retain advantages for nuanced interpersonal dynamics.^[111] ^[26] Adoption rates grew, with the virtual and hybrid events market projected to expand at a 23.2% compound annual growth rate through 2027, driven by platforms offering scalable interactivity.^[112] Technological integrations have further evolved panel dynamics since 2022, including AI-driven real-time transcription, sentiment analysis, and automated highlight generation to distill key insights from discussions.^[113] Interactive features like live audience Q&A via apps and data visualization tools have boosted satisfaction by 45% in engaging formats, countering criticisms of passive virtual viewing.^[114] In fields like mathematics education, hybrid models have influenced long-term conference structures, prioritizing inclusivity for global experts while addressing equity in access to high-speed internet.^[115] These developments reflect a causal adaptation to digital infrastructure improvements, enhancing empirical outcomes in debate facilitation over pre-2020 baselines.^[116]

References

[1]
Panel Discussion Definition - How it Differs from Other Formats
A panel discussion is a specific format used in a meeting, conference, or convention. It is a live (or recorded), in-person, virtual, or “hybrid” discussion.
[2]
Panel Discussions: Full Guide to Hosting A Successful One - Riverside
Mar 5, 2024 · A panel discussion is where a group of guest speakers, panelists, come together to speak on a particular topic or issue in front of an audience.Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
[3]
A Complete Guide to Panel Discussions - Oxford Abstracts
Jul 25, 2022 · When you think of a panel discussion, you envision a host and four or so people sitting in a row answering questions and deliberating what the ...What are the most common... · Virtual panel discussion · Tech Support
[4]
A Complete Guide to Panel Discussions - Hubilo
Nov 7, 2022 · A panel discussion is a format where a topic is discussed among panelists and audience, typically with 4-5 panelists, a moderator, and can be ...
[5]
What is a Panel Discussion and Is it Relevant for Today's Meetings?
Harry A. Overstreet, an American educator, first coined the term “panel discussion” in a short article “On the Panel” in October 1934, issue of The Trained ...
[6]
7 Golden Rules For Successful Panel Discussions - Forbes
Feb 22, 2023 · Each speaker should make their point quickly, respect their time allocation, and react to other panelists' comments. Interactions create the ...
[7]
A Guide to Being a Great Panelist - Harvard Business Review
Oct 4, 2024 · Serving on a professional panel is a big opportunity. It's a chance to showcase your expertise, network, and contribute to industry dialogue.<|control11|><|separator|>
[8]
What are Panel Discussions: Tips for Effective Conduct
Jan 17, 2023 · A panel discussion is a structured conversation that brings together multiple experts or stakeholders to explore a specific topic, share their perspectives, ...
[9]
https://www.livestorm.co/blog/panel-discussion
[10]
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/panel-discussion
[11]
Panel Presentations and Discussions - Sage Research Methods
In the panel discussion format, a moderator or chair manages a discussion among a small group of experts, the panelists, about a central topic ...
[12]
Difference between a Panel Presentation and a Panel Discussion
Nov 1, 2022 · Whereas a panel discussion includes time for the panelists to interact with each other – either from the onset or after the panelists' initial ...
[13]
PANEL DISCUSSION | PPT - Slideshare
They originated in 1929 as a way to have small group discussions with a larger audience. The objectives are to provide information on a topic from different ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
[14]
How to Structure a Panel Discussion including Tasks, Flow, and ...
Q&A Style. A 2-5 minute introduction of the topic and panelists, 25 minutes of curated questions from the moderator, 25 minutes of audience questions ending ...
[15]
13 Guidelines for Great Panel Discussions - Scott Kirsner
1. Length and panel size. The ideal length for a panel discussion is 45 minutes to one hour. · 2. Choosing a moderator. · 3. Panelist guidelines and advance ...
[16]
https://www.eventcombo.com/a/1181/symposium-vs-conference-which-event-format-is-right-for-you
[17]
Panel Discussion | PDF | Neuropsychology | Cognition - Scribd
They originated in the 1920s as a way to reproduce the features of small group discussions for larger crowds. A typical panel includes 4-10 panelists who sit ...
[18]
Panel discusion | PPTX - Slideshare
It begins by outlining the origins of panel discussions in 1929 when Henry A Ober Street organized small group discussions for audiences. It then defines a ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
[19]
Panel show - Wikipedia
The genre can be traced to 1938, when Information Please debuted on American radio. The earliest known television panel show is Play the Game, a charades show ...
[20]
Broadcasting - Radio, Podcasts, Audio | Britannica
Some radio panel programs also solicit queries from members of the listening ... broadcasting time to documentaries, discussions, and interviews. Some ...<|separator|>
[21]
Panel Discussion | PDF | Constructivism (Philosophy Of Education)
They originated in 1929 as a way to have small group discussions with a larger audience. The purpose is to provide information on a topic to more people and ...
[22]
What Is a Panel Discussion? And How to Run One Like a Pro
Rating 8.9/10 (1,663) · $0.00 to $499.00 · CommunicationJan 24, 2025 · A panel discussion is a type of event where a group of expert guest speakers (the panel) comes together to discuss a specific topic.<|separator|>
[23]
Panel Discussion Formats: 27 Ideas to Spark Your Creativity!
There are five main types of panel discussion formats: Traditional, TV/Movie, Event Theme/Location, Room Set, and Audience-Driven. Examples include Mainstage, ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[24]
How to Moderate a Panel Discussion - Harvard Business Review
Dec 19, 2018 · As you rise in your career and your visibility grows, you'll likely be called upon to participate in a panel discussion.Missing: history | Show results with:history
[25]
Panel Discussions: What Are They and How to Organize One
Jun 16, 2022 · It consists of a panel of experts who are given a topic to discuss, and that discussion is witnessed by an audience of conference attendees.
[26]
The Early History of Videoconferencing Technology in the House
Jun 26, 2023 · On the morning of October 9, 1991—long before the COVID-19 pandemic ushered in an era of Zoom calls and online meetings—George E. Brown of ...Missing: adaptations | Show results with:adaptations
[27]
Virtual versus in-person meetings for practice guideline panels
Sep 12, 2025 · During the COVID-19 pandemic, meetings transitioned to the virtual format. While guideline developers appreciated the increased flexibility ...
[28]
Lessons Learned from Running a Conference in the Time of COVID ...
Dec 17, 2020 · The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the cancellation or postponement of many conferences, reducing these crucial, career-enhancing experiences ...
[29]
In-person vs. virtual conferences: Lessons learned and how to take ...
Jul 30, 2022 · In this paper, we examine the changes seen with large virtual conferences along with recommendations for future meetings, including ways to enhance engagement ...
[30]
Virtual Events Statistics 2025 - 99Firms.com
Virtual event attendance rate hovers around half of all registered participants. Even though this is a high conversion rate, it's still down from 54% reported ...
[31]
Online conferencing in the midst of COVID-19: an “already existing ...
It has long been argued that academics can significantly reduce GHG emissions by simply avoiding flying to conferences and attending low-GHG conference formats.
[32]
Virtual Events Market Size & Share | Industry Report, 2030
The global virtual events market size was estimated at USD 98.07 billion in 2024 and is estimated to reach USD 297.16 billion by 2030, growing at a CAGR of 20.0 ...
[33]
Planning a Hybrid Event: Benefits, Challenges, and Best Practices
7 Benefits of Hosting a Hybrid Event · 1. Amplify your event's reach · 2. Improved engagement and interactivity · 3. Cost reduction · 4. More environmentally ...Missing: panel | Show results with:panel
[34]
Application of human factors at hybrid meetings - PubMed Central
This article discusses the benefits and pitfalls of the hybrid format, the human factors that impact productivity and inclusivity, and how to address them in ...Introduction · Pitfalls · Human FactorsMissing: panel | Show results with:panel<|separator|>
[35]
Moving conferences online: lessons learned from an international ...
Oct 20, 2021 · We consider the opportunities and challenges associated with organizing a conference online, using a case study of a medium-sized (approx.
[36]
A Guide To Picking Great Panellists | PepTalk
Dec 19, 2024 · 1. Get Clear on Your Panel Goals · 2. Look For Diverse Voices · 3. Search for Real-World Experts · 4. Find the Smooth Talkers · 5. Explore Your ...
[37]
Criteria for a Successful Panel Discussion - Powerful Panels
Have a scintillating, spontaneous conversation. The panelists should be engaged in an interesting discussion that is not otherwise available on the Internet – ...
[38]
A Panel Moderator's Guide to Success - Toastmasters International
A successful moderator should know the topic, prepare questions, know panelists, and ensure balanced speaking time, focusing on the audience.Tips For Facilitating Lively... · 3 Prepare Your Questions... · 4 Introduce Yourself And The...
[39]
Panel Moderator Role in Facilitating Lively & Informative Discussions
Mar 21, 2014 · The moderator's job is to help the audience get their needs met through a panel format. The moderator sets the tone, the pace, and control of the content.
[40]
[PDF] Moderator and Discussant Guidance - AAAS Annual Meeting
The moderator provides a brief overview, introduces each speaker, and facilitates a general discussion by the audience and speakers through a Q&A session.
[41]
Powerful Panels Discussion Tip #82: How to Conduct a Q&A ...
How do you conduct your Q&A sessions with the audience during a panel discussion at meetings, conferences and conventions? Professional Panel Moderator ...Missing: effectiveness | Show results with:effectiveness
[42]
How to run a successful Q&A session - Mentimeter
Apr 27, 2023 · Hosting Q&A sessions allow audiences to find out more about certain topics or even ask a question to someone whom they would never normally ...
[43]
Top 7 Audience Engagement Tools for 2025 (Tried & Tested)
Slido offers a range of interactive tools, including live polls, word clouds, quizzes, ranking polls, and surveys. You can embed these interactive elements into ...
[44]
How to Use Event Technology During a Panel Discussion
Many conferences and conventions use a meeting app such as Lanyon, DoubleDutch, or Quickmobile, so check with your meeting planner to see if they are using an ...
[45]
How to boost audience engagement at panel discussions - Sched
May 15, 2024 · A moderator does more than ask questions. They conduct the discussion flow and focus. They achieve this by: Setting Clear Expectations: ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[46]
60 Panel Discussion Questions + Best Practices & Tools | Demio Blog
Apr 9, 2025 · These questions leverage audience engagement tools like live polls, Q&A sessions, and chat features to make the discussion more interactive.
[47]
Expert Guide: Mastering the Art of Hosting a Panel Discussion
Dec 23, 2023 · Include Time for Audience Interaction: Plan for Q&A sessions, allowing the audience to engage directly with panelists. Allow Flexibility ...
[48]
Connecting with Your Audience: 15 Tips for a Productive Q&A Session
Oct 5, 2023 · Engaging in positive Q&A sessions helps build connections, enhance learning, and leave a lasting impression. For the latest information about ...
[49]
Panel Discussions | Learn Science at Scitable - Nature
Panel discussions trigger viewpoint exchanges among experts, are more difficult to prepare for than presentations, and are more like conversations.Missing: history | Show results with:history
[50]
Innovative Session Formats | Modern Language Association
Session submission forms come in three formats: Panel (allows for up to four panelists with formal presentation titles); Roundtable (allows for up to eight ...<|separator|>
[51]
[PDF] Conference Panel Discussion Abstracts - ALISE
The panelists intend to examine innovative practices in increasing diversity in LIS schools, operationalize these practices at their respective institutions ...
[52]
Call for Panels - Iecon 2024
We invite experts and thought leaders to participate by proposing engaging and insightful panel discussions that address cutting-edge topics in industry and ...
[53]
Guidelines for Special Sessions - IEEE GHTC
Special sessions include panels, workshops, and demonstrations, require audience interaction, a 200-word abstract, and a 30-90 minute presentation. Submissions ...Missing: APA | Show results with:APA
[54]
3 Formats for the Next Generation of Panel Sessions - PCMA
Oct 24, 2022 · The talk show–like format provides better focus and intimacy for the audience. Panel diversity is even more critical when done in pairs.
[55]
What is the main purpose of a news report panel discussion? - Quora
Apr 10, 2022 · Panel discussions offer differing opinions on the topic being discussed. In fact, participants are often chosen who have divergent opinions and beliefs.
[56]
Do TV News "Panels" Have Constructive Discussions?
Talking over each other, ranting and raving, insisting that your opinion is right and just, is now considered to be the proper way to get your point across.
[57]
Political commentators on TV panels don't look like America and ...
Jun 18, 2025 · The typical panel discussion is nearly 70 percent male, and less than half include a person of color.
[58]
Media Bias (Real and Perceived) and the Rise of Partisan Media
Nov 6, 2017 · They found that most media outlets disproportionately cited sources favored by Democratic and more liberal members. Their measure of media bias ...
[59]
Do Television Debates in Multiparty Systems affect Viewers? A Quasi
Aug 6, 2025 · This article investigates whether winning or losing panel debates matters in that it influences important attitudes among the electorate. Based ...
[60]
Impact of TV Talk Shows on Viewers' Political Comprehension and ...
Aug 6, 2025 · A recent study found a positive correlation between news media consumption and talk show viewing, and perceived civic behavior positively and ...
[61]
Everything you need to know about putting on a great fan-run panel ...
Sep 19, 2022 · Panels are all about talking about your given subject in ways that are as entertaining as they are smart.
[62]
San Diego Comic-Con: Impact of Hollywood strikes - CNBC
Jul 19, 2023 · San Diego Comic-Con will return to is roots this weekend, as Hollywood A-listers skip out on promotional panels and walk picket lines in Los Angeles.Missing: figures | Show results with:figures
[63]
SDCC 2023: Was Hall H's loss everyone else's gain? | Popverse
Jul 27, 2023 · The uptick in panel attendance only makes sense; with Hall H and even Ballroom 20 essentially out of commission for the most part for the weekend.
[64]
How to: Present a Panel at Comic Con – Skywalking Network
Dec 12, 2021 · Prepare thoroughly, find panelists who are passionate about the topic, prep them with questions, and have a moderator who is enthusiastic but ...
[65]
Everything is bigger at San Diego Comic-Con this year. Except ...
Jul 18, 2025 · By the numbers. 135,000: The number of San Diego Comic-Con attendees. $160 million: Economic impact for San Diego in 2024. $3.2 million ...
[66]
Fans dive into San Diego Comic-Con despite drop in celebrity panels
Jul 28, 2025 · This year's festivities at the San Diego Convention Center will not have the usual Hall H major A-list celebrity panels, which typically discuss ...
[67]
Let this insufferable Q&A at a Westworld panel be a lesson to us all
Apr 21, 2018 · I've seen really cool fan interactions and really cringe ones. I don't mind either way. If I need to get somewhere else I just leave. But I am ...[No Spoilers] A message for all future convention panel attendeesA small rant about actor panels at conventions (not Buffy specific but ...More results from www.reddit.comMissing: criticisms scripted engagement
[68]
Why Do Fans Ask Inappropriate Things At Convention Panels?
Aug 4, 2017 · Fans ask weird, awkward and inappropriate things at anime convention Q&A panels all the time. Why does it happen so much?
[69]
Evaluating panel discussions in ESP classes: an exploration of ... - NIH
Aug 26, 2024 · This study investigates the effectiveness of panel discussions, a specific interactive teaching technique where a group of students leads a pre-planned, topic- ...Missing: "scholarly | Show results with:"scholarly
[70]
Encouraging Critical Thinking Through Expert Panel Discussions
Aug 6, 2025 · Panel discussions serve to allow students to hear the critical viewpoints and arguments of others, in contrast to the traditional classroom ...
[71]
Grant reviewer perceptions of the quality, effectiveness, and ...
Reviewers indicated that panel discussions were viewed favorably in terms of participation, clarifying differing opinions, informing unassigned reviewers, and ...Missing: symposia | Show results with:symposia<|control11|><|separator|>
[72]
(PDF) Panel Discussion as a Teaching Tool in the EFL Classroom
The panel discussion method is among the most effective strategies for boosting learners' engagement and developing critical communication skills in structured ...Missing: dissemination | Show results with:dissemination
[73]
(PDF) All for One: Using Panel Discussion to Improve Proficiency ...
Aug 8, 2025 · This research-based paper looks at students' perceptions of participating in a panel discussion in a tertiary setting.
[74]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S193172041500238X
[75]
Comparison of Lecture-Based Learning vs Discussion-Based ...
We have concluded that, when compared with traditional LBL, DBL yields superior practical knowledge and long-term knowledge retention.
[76]
(PDF) The Effectiveness of Panel Discussion on Senior High School ...
Dec 31, 2024 · PDF | This research aims to determine the effect of panel discussion on the speaking skills of 2nd-grade senior high school students.
[77]
Panel discussion does not improve reliability of peer review for ...
We compared scores by two expert panels reviewing the same grant proposals. Our main interest was to evaluate whether panel discussion improves reliability.Missing: empirical effectiveness
[78]
Panel Discussion Report: A Snapshot of the Effectiveness of Panels
The 2024 Panels Report offers some of the most up-to-date information available on the effectiveness of panel discussions at meetings, conferences, and ...
[79]
Using Panel Discussions to Enhance Ethical Learning - Sage Journals
Apr 25, 2022 · This article describes an exercise that develops students' capacity to identify ethical dilemmas, apply ethical frameworks, and consider ethical issues from ...<|separator|>
[80]
Manel - New Discourses
Dec 22, 2020 · The reason that “manels” are problematic and “womanels” are never a thing is because the Critical Theories at hand believe that excluding men is ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical<|separator|>
[81]
The Emptiness of the All-Male Panel - Undark Magazine
Jun 6, 2017 · There is a word for on-stage discussions populated exclusively by men: They're called “manels,” and they're too common.
[82]
Unconscious Bias and the Manel Mindset
Sep 1, 2019 · It's one thing to complain about manels on social media, but as Dr. Collins pointed out, “It is not enough to give lip service to equality; ...
[83]
How Diverse Teams Produce Better Outcomes - Forbes
Apr 4, 2019 · From the classroom and the workplace, to the laboratory and the playing field, research shows that diverse groups of people often make better decisions.Missing: panel | Show results with:panel
[84]
Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams - PubMed Central
Jan 18, 2021 · In this Retrospective, we reflect on progress made in research on culturally diverse teams over the last decade, highlight remaining gaps and open questions.
[85]
Evaluating panel discussions in ESP classes: an exploration of ...
Aug 26, 2024 · The study concludes that panel discussions, when implemented effectively, can be a valuable tool for enhancing critical thinking, communication ...
[86]
(PDF) We need to talk about manels: The problem of implicit gender ...
Mar 17, 2018 · This review demonstrates that while this body of research is progressive in rejecting simple extrapolation from male-only data to female ...
[87]
Why DEI is Destroying Meritocracy and How MEI Can Save Us -
Jul 8, 2024 · DEI undermines meritocracy by prioritizing group identities and demographic characteristics, leading to preferential treatment and tokenism.
[88]
Feminist labour at the ISA: White manels, the politics of citation and ...
Jun 26, 2018 · Their very everydayness makes their effects all the more insidious. An examination of manels therefore necessitates the language of violence.
[89]
How to banish manels and manferences from scientific meetings
Aug 9, 2025 · Overall, we find considerable evidence—from both empirical studies and real-world examples—that microaggressions contribute to the maintenance ...
[90]
A re-evaluation of gender bias in receptiveness to scientific ... - NIH
Sep 4, 2024 · The results revealed no effect of the assessor's gender on receptiveness to scientific evidence of gender bias.
[91]
Why The Debate Between Merit And Diversity Is Counterproductive
Oct 24, 2024 · The rhetoric that pits diversity and merit as opposites is counterproductive because, in reality, both sides want the same thing: a fair chance to pursue ...
[92]
Why Panel Discussions Suck And How To Fix Them
Panel discussions fail because they are not real discussions, lack informal debate, and waste time with long introductions.
[93]
Why Panel Sessions Suck (And How To Fix Them) - Scott Berkun
Apr 11, 2009 · Panel sessions fail due to politeness, too many people, lack of microphones, dull panelists, and a passive moderator.
[94]
Planning & Organizing a Panel Discussion: Complete Guide - Demio
Mar 27, 2025 · Follow a clear but flexible structure (e.g. opening remarks, key themes, audience Q&A); Include the opportunity for organic conversation, don't ...
[95]
Favoritism during a panel discussion
The subtle signals that we prefer one panelist over another do happen and it takes a high level of situational awareness to guard against favoritism during a ...
[96]
99% of late-night political guests in early 2025 were left-leaning ...
Jul 1, 2025 · The study, published Tuesday, found that 99 percent of political guests on late-night comedy shows from January 6 through June 30 were left-leaning.
[97]
'The View' hosted 102 liberal guests, zero conservatives in 2025: study
Jul 30, 2025 · ABC News' "The View" continued to display an overwhelming lack of balance during the first seven months of 2025 with 102 left-leaning guests ...
[98]
(PDF) Empirical Studies of Media Bias - ResearchGate
In this chapter we survey the empirical literature on media bias, with a focus on partisan and ideological biases.
[99]
Time to give all-male panels the flick - Lowy Institute
Mar 8, 2017 · Usually when there are panels of all-male speakers at conferences, it is because there were no women qualified for the panel. Some 87% of the ...Missing: justified | Show results with:justified
[100]
Does Diversity Management Moderate the Effect of Merit Principles ...
Analyzing a combined data set on federal agencies, this study finds that merit-based practices and diversity management have independent positive impact on ...<|separator|>
[101]
Merit vs Equality? The argument that gender quotas violate ...
Dec 7, 2015 · The case against gender quotas often involves the argument of merit. The logic is that we should recruit on the basis of merit, not gender; ...
[102]
The Downsides of Diversity Quotas - Steve Glaveski
Diversity quotas perpetuate prejudice and unfair stereotypes by suggesting that people from certain groups can only get aspirational roles with a leg up.
[103]
Merit vs Quotas - WORK180
Jul 5, 2017 · The strongest resistance brought to bear against quotas is via the merit argument. This argument that quotas will lead to not having the best ...
[104]
High-Conflict Television News and Public Opinion - jstor
We find that conflict-laden television coverage decreases public evaluations of political institutions, trust in leadership, and overall support for political ...Missing: panel | Show results with:panel
[105]
7.3 The role of television in shaping public opinion and discourse
TV's power comes from its wide reach and visual impact. Repeated messages across shows can reinforce certain viewpoints, creating shared beliefs among viewers.
[106]
Full article: The influence of expert groups: a citation analysis
The results suggest that expert groups have greater influence when they include more politicians and have a bigger secretariat. The article contributes ...
[107]
The Role of Scientific Expertise in COVID-19 Policy-making
This paper explores the role of scientific advice in this policy field in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the UK.
[108]
Do Policy Makers Listen to Experts? Evidence from a National ...
Sep 28, 2021 · The majority of studies suggest that policy makers are directionally biased in their processing of information with respect to both expert ...
[109]
Expert involvement in policy development: A systematic review of ...
Sep 10, 2013 · The consideration of a broader range of expertise in assessing different policy options might lead to better outcomes as more evidence (lay ...
[110]
How to Moderate a Panel Discussion—Virtually
Here are my top 10 tips to moderating a lively and informative virtual panel discussion. 1. Prepare. Research the topic, the panelists, and the audience ...
[111]
Virtual Events Statistics and Facts (2025) - ElectroIQ
Jan 24, 2025 · Virtual Event Statistics stated that almost 28.4% opted for virtual events that include some in-person elements. According to Virtual Events ...
[112]
[PDF] Comparative Data on Face-to-face, Virtual, and Hybrid Format Peer ...
Dec 10, 2024 · This report examines the impact of hybrid meeting format on peer review processes. It compares hybrid meetings,.Missing: rise | Show results with:rise
[113]
6 Reasons Why Virtual and Hybrid Events will continue to exist
Feb 22, 2022 · From 2020 to 2027, this market is predicted to increase at a compound yearly growth rate of 23.2%. Virtual and hybrid events platforms have ...Missing: rise | Show results with:rise
[114]
From Insights to Impact: Leveraging Panel Discussion Highlights ...
Dec 17, 2024 · Panel discussions stand out as unique information sources because they combine multiple expert perspectives with real-time audience interaction.<|separator|>
[115]
What Audiences Really Want from Panel Discussions - Unbridled
Today's attendees crave interaction and engagement. In fact, panels that incorporated interactive elements saw a 45% increase in attendee satisfaction. Whether ...<|separator|>
[116]
The impact of COVID-19 on the format and nature of academic ...
Sep 20, 2022 · In this study we investigated the future impact that this change may have on the format and nature of mathematics education conferences.
[117]
Planning virtual and hybrid events: steps to improve inclusion ... - GC
Oct 2, 2024 · This article provides guidance on best practices for making online/virtual and hybrid events more accessible based on the combined experiences ...