Formalizing Cognitive Acceptance of Arguments: Durum Wheat Selection Interdisciplinary Study

Abstract

International audienceIn this paper we present an interdisciplinary approach that concerns the problem of argument acceptance in an agronomy setting. We propose a computational cognitive model for argument acceptance based on the dual model system in cognitive psychology. We apply it in an agronomy setting within a french national project on durum wheat

Good practices and ethical issues in food safety related research

“…Addressing societal issues such as public health management through food safety control, involves several stakeholders with different visions of the system, different expectations from the research carried out, and possibly conflicts of interest [15]. Supporting decision-making in such a multi-actor context implies some ethics of decision and relies on the principle of justice in decision-making, since different points of view have to be reconciled [16]. In the case of food safety related research, experts from different disciplines are involved (e.g.…”

Assessing Arguments with Schemes and Fallacies

“…directly referring to another argument (as a premise or counterargument) with the long term view to handle dialogues. Our aim is not to help users build convincing tricky fallacies, our aim is to help people build efficiently sound arguments and to allow them to fight fallacies: the closer a fallacy is from a sound argument the more the agent can be inclined to use it especially in case of low cognitive availability [6].…”

“…There could be any number of items in the series of projected consequences 6. This fallacy occurs when the circle is enlarged to include more than one step: The conclusion p is supported by premise q, which in turn is supported by p (though there could be any number of intervening steps).7 One application is the legal principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty.…”

Defining Argumentation Attacks in Practice: An Experiment in Food Packaging Consumer Expectations

“…This is justified by the fact that multi criteria design encounters a limitation which is particularly hard to address corresponding author within mathematical frameworks: striking the right balance between problem simplification and real-world complexity [21]. Furthermore, in the context of socio-economic systems decision making [9] the strength of argumentation lies in reasoning traceability, discussion fostering and decision explanation, all leading to a better acceptance of the final decision by all parties [6,20].…”