Abstract
Online interactions increasingly involve complex processes of persuasion and influence. Compared to the long history and richness of persuasion studies in traditional communication settings, we have limited understanding of how people are influenced by others in online communications and how persuasion works in online environments. While it is common in online discussions that some comments are threaded under a specific thread, it is un-known whether and how the thread level affects its perceived persuasiveness. To explore this research inquiry, we collected and analyzed threaded discussions in Reddit’s r/changemyview context. We found that the perceived persuasiveness of a comment fluctuates systematically from the top thread level to the most nested level. We conducted a semantic similarity analysis among adjacent comments in the threads examining how similar the comments are with respect to their content. Our results suggest that the first thread comment brings up a new idea or perspective, and the next comment matures it by adding new information to elaborate it, therefore, this comment is more likely to receive a delta point than the first comment. Additionally, this pattern continues onto the next comments. Implying that there is a common reasoning pattern in engaging in the threaded discussions in Reddit r/changemyview, our study sheds light on a comprehensive understanding of online participants’ reasoning behavior in threaded discussions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bail, C.A.: Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 115(37), 9216–9221 (2018)
Xiao, L.: A message's persuasive features in Wikipedia's article for deletion discussions. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Social Media and Society, pp. 345–349 (2018)
Hidey, C., McKeown K.R.: Persuasive influence detection: the role of argument sequencing. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2018), pp. 5173–5180 (2018)
Jo, Y., Poddar, S., Jeon, B., Shen, Q., Rosé, C.P., Neubig G.: Attentive interaction model: modeling changes in view in argumentation. In: Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL), vol. 1, pp. 103–116 (2018)
Tan, C., Niculae, V., Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., Lee, L.: Winning arguments: interaction dynamics and persuasion strategies in good-faith online discussions. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), pp. 613–624 (2016)
Xiao, L., Khazaei, T.: Change others’ beliefs online: online comments’ persuasiveness. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Social Media and Society (2019)
Anand, P., et al.: Believe me—we can do this! Annotating persuasive acts in blog text. In: Proceedings of the 10th AAAI Conference on Computational Models of Natural Argument (AAAIWS 2011-10), pp. 11–15 (2011)
Cialdini, R.B.: Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, pp. 173–174. Collins, New York (2007)
Marwell, G., Schmitt, D.R.: Dimensions of compliance-gaining behavior: an empirical analysis. Sociometry 350–364 (1967)
Walton, D., Reed, C., Macagno, F.: Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)
Habernal, I., Gurevych, I.: Argumentation mining in user-generated web discourse. Comput. Linguist. 43(1), 125–179 (2017)
Hsieh, H.-P., Yan, R., Li, C.-T.: Will i win your favor? Predicting the success of altruistic requests. In: Bailey, J., Khan, L., Washio, T., Dobbie, G., Huang, J.Z., Wang, R. (eds.) PAKDD 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9651, pp. 177–188. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31753-3_15
Mitra, T., Gilbert, E.: The language that gets people to give: phrases that predict success on kickstarter. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW), pp. 49–61 (2014)
Tausczik, Y.R., Pennebaker, J.W.: The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 29(1), 24–54 (2010)
Iyer, R.R., Sycara, K.P., Li, Y.: Detecting type of persuasion: is there structure in persuasion tactics? In: Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA) at International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL), pp. 54–64 (2017)
Guadagno, R.E., Cialdini, R.B.: Online persuasion: an examination of gender differences in computer-mediated interpersonal influence. Group Dyn. Theory Res. Pract. 6(1), 38 (2002)
Price, V., Nir, L., Cappella, J.N.: Normative and informational influences in online political discussions. Commun. Theory 16(1), 47–74 (2006)
Khazaei, T., Xiao, L., Mercer, R.: Writing to persuade: analysis and detection of persuasive discourse. In: Proceedings of iConference (2017). http://hdl.handle.net/2142/96673
Hecking, T., Chounta, I.A., Hoppe, H.U.: Investigating social and semantic user roles in MOOC discussion forums. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (LAK), pp. 198–207 (2016)
Fan, Y.C., Wang, T.H., Wang, K.H.: Studying the effectiveness of an online argumentation model for improving undergraduate students’ argumentation ability. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 36(4), 526–539 (2020)
Cole, M.T., Swartz, L.B., Shelley, D.J.: Threaded discussion: the role it plays in e-learning. Int. J. Inf. Communicat. Technol. Educat. (IJICTE) 16(1), 16–29 (2020)
Peterson, M.: Teaching the online marketing research course for MBA students. J. Market. Educat. 43, 371–385 (2021). 02734753211001422
Himelboim, I., Gleave, E., Smith, M.: Discussion catalysts in online political discussions: content importers and conversation starters. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 14(4), 771–789 (2009)
Kang, J.H., Kim, J.: Analyzing answers in threaded discussions using a role-based information network. In: 2011 IEEE Third International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2011 IEEE Third International Conference on Social Computing, pp. 111–117 (2011)
Zhu, C., Rodríguez-Hidalgo, R.C.R.H., Questier, F., Torres-Alfonso, A.M.: Using social network analysis for analysing online threaded discussions. Int. J. Learn. Teach. Educat. Res. 10(3) (2015)
Samory, M., Cappelleri, V.M., Peserico, E.: Quotes reveal community structure and interaction dynamics. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), pp. 322–335 (2017)
Ishii, H.: TeamWorkStation: towards a seamless shared workspace. In: Proceedings of the 1990 ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), pp. 13–26 (1990)
Pinelle, D., Gutwin, C., Greenberg, S.: Task analysis for groupware usability evaluation: modeling shared workspace tasks with the mechanics of collaboration. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 10(4), 281–311 (2003)
Carroll, J.M., Rosson, M.B., Farooq, U., Xiao, L.: Beyond being aware. Inf. Organ. 19(3), 162–185 (2009)
Scott, C.P., Wildman, J.L.: Culture, communication, and conflict: a review of the global virtual team literature. Lead. Global Teams 13–32 (2015)
Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T.: The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In: Communication and Persuasion, pp. 1–24. Springer, New York (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Xiao, L., Mensah, H. (2022). How Does the Thread Level of a Comment Affect its Perceived Persuasiveness? A Reddit Study. In: Arai, K. (eds) Intelligent Computing. SAI 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 507. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10464-0_55
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10464-0_55
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-10463-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-10464-0
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)