Argumentation and risk communication about genetic testing

Green, Nancy L.

doi:10.1075/jaic.1.1.09gre

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this project we analyzed written arguments and persuasive visual devices in a five-page patient brochure published by a genetic testing company [18]. The goal of the brochure was to motivate patients to seek genetic testing from that company.…”

Section: Analysis Of Genetics Testing Company Promotional Brochurementioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation schemes: From genetics to international relations to environmental science policy to AI ethics

Green

2021

AAC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Argumentation schemes have played a key role in our research projects on computational models of natural argument over the last decade. The catalogue of schemes in Walton, Reed and Macagno’s 2008 book, Argumentation Schemes, served as our starting point for analysis of the naturally occurring arguments in written text, i.e., text in different genres having different types of author, audience, and subject domain (genetics, international relations, environmental science policy, AI ethics), for different argument goals, and for different possible future applications. We would often first attempt to analyze the arguments in our corpora in terms of those schemes, then adapt schemes as needed for the goals of the project, and in some cases implement them for use in computational models. Among computational researchers, the main interest in argumentation schemes has been for use in argument mining by applying machine learning methods to existing argument corpora. In contrast, a primary goal of our research has been to learn more about written arguments themselves in various contemporary fields. Our approach has been to manually analyze semantics, discourse structure, argumentation, and rhetoric in texts. Another goal has been to create sharable digital corpora containing the results of our studies. Our approach has been to define argument schemes for use by human corpus annotators or for use in logic programs for argument mining. The third goal is to design useful computer applications based upon our studies, such as argument diagramming systems that provide argument schemes as building blocks. This paper describes each of the various projects: the methods, the argument schemes that were identified, and how they were used. Then a synthesis of the results is given with a discussion of open issues.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Of Genetics Testing Company Promotional Brochurementioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation schemes: From genetics to international relations to environmental science policy to AI ethics

Green

2021

AAC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Roosmaryn Pilgram (2015). A Doctor’s Argument by Authority

Green¹

2017

JAIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Argumentative meanings and their stylistic configurations in clinical research publications

Гладкова¹,

DiMarco²,

Harris³

2015

Argument & Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper reports on the results of an exploratory study into the topical organisation and stylistic features of argumentation in a corpus of ophthalmic clinical research papers. The study responds to the need for systematised and generalisable argumentation models in knowledgeintensive fields. We present here a schematised superstructure of the arguments from the corpus, charting the configurations of stylistic features, which signal the elements of this superstructure, epistemic topoi. We pay special attention to the role of lexical categories (or semantic fields) in the configurations, to the relations between the fields, and to their interactions with other elements of the configurations, including semantic, grammatical, syntagmatic, deictic, and coreferential features. Epistemic topoi are a promising discourse constituent in argumentation because, as we found, they are distinct from syntagmatic units, such as phrases, clauses, or argumentative zones, and because they are signalled with substantially distinctive stylistic features despite having no fixed order in the superstructure. They hold considerable promise for computational argumentation analysis and processing, perhaps especially in scientific and technical discourses, where the need for reliable detection and summarisation is particularly high. Our investigation shows that despite the complex and interpenetrating semantic and stylistic attributes of argumentation, there are significant, computationally tractable regularities.

show abstract

Argumentation and risk communication about genetic testing

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

Argumentation schemes: From genetics to international relations to environmental science policy to AI ethics

Argumentation schemes: From genetics to international relations to environmental science policy to AI ethics

Roosmaryn Pilgram (2015). A Doctor’s Argument by Authority

Argumentative meanings and their stylistic configurations in clinical research publications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About