Analysis of the Persuasiveness of Argumentation in Popular Science Texts

Zagorulko, Yury A.; Domanov, Oleg; Sery, Alexey; Sidorova, Elena A.; Borovikova, Olesya

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-59535-7_26

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the specific field of AI and law (Atkinson and Bench-Capon 2021), argumentation schemes have been integrated in formal systems (Verheij 2003) and software for diagramming and weighting the strength of arguments (Bex and Reed 2011;Gordon et al 2007;Gordon 2010;Sartor et al 2014;Walton and Gordon 2012;Zagorulko et al 2019Zagorulko et al , 2020, allowing the user to visualize and identify all the aspects and potential problems of complex argumentative networks.…”

Section: Extending the Boundaries Of Argumentation Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to the Special Issue

Macagno

Toniolo

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Douglas Walton’s work is extremely vast, multifaceted, and interdisciplinary. He developed theoretical proposals that have been used in disciplines that are not traditionally related to philosophy, such as law, education, discourse analysis, artificial intelligence, or medical communication. Through his papers and books, Walton redefined the boundaries not only of argumentation theory, but also logic and philosophy. He was a philosopher in the sense that his interest was developing theoretical models that can help explain reality, and more importantly interact with it. For this reason, he proposed methods that have been used for analyzing different types of dialogical interactions, and modeling procedures for regulating them.

show abstract

Section: Extending the Boundaries Of Argumentation Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to the Special Issue

Macagno

Toniolo

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The weighted assessment depends on the specified audience: general, scientific, or adolescent. After setting the initial weights, the weights for the entire graph (all arguments and theses) can be calculated to assess the degree of persuasiveness of the argumentation for a particular audience [26]. Obtained result may be compared with the opinion of the annotator to make sure that the graph is built correctly and to identify inaccuracies in the markup at the structural level.…”

Section: Argument Annotation Scenariomentioning

confidence: 99%

On Developing a Web Resource to Study Argumentation in Popular Science Discourse

Kononenko¹,

Sidorova²

2021

Computational Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the experience of developing a web resource intended to study argumentation in popular science discourse. Such type of argumentation is, on the one hand, the main mean of achieving a communicative goal and, on the other hand, often not expressed in explicit form. The web resource is built around a corpus of 2256 articles, distributed over 13 subcorpora. The annotation model, which is based on the ontology of argumentation and D. Walton's argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning, underlies the argument annotation of the corpus. The distinctive features of the argument annotation model are the introduction of weighting characteristics into text markup through assessing the persuasiveness of the argumentation, as well as highlighting argumentative indicators visually. The paper considers a scenario of argument annotation of texts, which allows constructing an argumentative graph based on the typical reasoning schemes. The scenario includes a number of procedures that enable the annotator to check the quality of the text markup and assess the persuasiveness of the argumentation. The authors have annotated 162 texts, using the developed web resource, and as a result, identified the most frequent schemes of argumentation (Example Inference, Cause to Effect Inference, Expert Opinion Inference), as well as described some specific indicators of frequent schemes. Based on the above-mentioned outcomes, the authors listed the indicators of the most frequent schemes of argumentation and made some recommendations for annotators about identifying the main thesis.

show abstract

“…The schemes and the relationships between arguments allow the calculation of the possible acceptability of a conclusion. Also other argument representation systems include strategies for evaluating arguments, based on their structure (argumentation scheme) and the relations with other arguments, attacks, and counterarguments [97,98]. Critical questions are used to assess the strength of individual arguments and the attack relationships between arguments can connect arguments in networks, distinguishing the conclusions based on the attacks received.…”

Section: Argument Analysis and Representationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation schemes in AI: A literature review. Introduction to the special issue

Macagno

2021

AAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Argumentation schemes [35,80,91] are a relatively recent notion that continues an extremely ancient debate on one of the foundations of human reasoning, human comprehension, and obviously human argumentation, i.e., the topics. To understand the revolutionary nature of Walton's work on this subject matter, it is necessary to place it in the debate that it continues and contributes to, namely a view of logic that is much broader than the formalistic perspective that has been adopted from the 20th century until nowadays. With his book Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning, Walton attempted to start a dialogue between three different fields or views on human reasoning -one (argumentation theory) very recent, one (dialectics) very ancient and with a very long tradition, and one (formal logic) relatively recent, but dominating in philosophy. Argumentation schemes were proposed as dialectical instruments, in the sense that they represented arguments not only as formal relations, but also as pragmatic inferences, as they at the same time depend on what the interlocutors share and accept in a given dialogical circumstance, and affect their dialogical relation.In this introduction, the notion of argumentation scheme will be analyzed in detail, showing its different dimensions and its defining features which make them an extremely useful instrument in Artificial Intelligence. This theoretical background will be followed by a literature review on the uses of the schemes in computing, aimed at identifying the most important areas and trends, the most promising proposals, and the directions of future research.

show abstract

Analysis of the Persuasiveness of Argumentation in Popular Science Texts

Cited by 8 publications

References 22 publications

Introduction to the Special Issue

Introduction to the Special Issue

On Developing a Web Resource to Study Argumentation in Popular Science Discourse

Argumentation schemes in AI: A literature review. Introduction to the special issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About