本文以代理孕母公民共識會議為例，說明專家統治與公共審議的關係。本文認為，專家與常民之間的權力不對等關係，是一種情境性的表現，行動者在不同的情境中，需要扮演與壓制某些身分與相對應的行為，以達成互動的平衡。在公共審議的情境中，專家與常民彼此建構出一種較為平等的溝通型態，專家在公共審議的情境中，壓制「專家」的身分，而嘗試以「公民」的身分參與討論。從本文的發現來看，專家與常民的身分與相應的行為模式並非連續不變的，行動者的多重身份、情境脈絡以及行動者所儲存的互動劇碼，使得行動者在不同的情境中，有著不同的溝通型態。也就是說，公共審議的情境與溝通型態，是由行動者共同製造的結果。

The author uses the Surrogate Motherhood Consensus Conference as a case study to illustrate the relationship between technocrats and public deliberation. The author argues that relationship between technocrats and ordinary people is a contextual phenomenon. Social actors need to adopt or suppress certain identities to adapt to different social settings. In public deliberation, experts and lay persons mutually construct a more equitable style of communication. Experts suppress their identity as “experts” and instead adopt a “citizen” identity in public deliberation. From the findings in this study, the identities of experts and lay persons, as well as the patterns of behavior corresponding to these identities, are not static. The multiple identities of social actors, different social settings, and the variety of social interaction that social actors experience determine the nature of what an adequate style of communication in a given social setting is. In other words, the setting and style of communication of public deliberation are constructed by social actors.