Cited By
View all- Blount TMillard DWeal MHargood CMillard D(2015)On the Role of Avatars in ArgumentationProceedings of the 2015 Workshop on Narrative & Hypertext10.1145/2804565.2804569(17-19)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2015
An Investigation into the Use of Logical and Rhetorical Tactics within Eristic Argumentation on the Social Web
Pages 195 - 199
Abstract
Argumentation is a key aspect of communications and can broadly be broken down into problem solving (dialectic) and quarrelling (eristic). Techniques used within argumentation can likewise be classified as fact-based (logical), or emotion/audience-based (rhetorical). Modelling arguments on the social web is a challenge for those studying computational argumentation as formal models of argumentation tend to assume a logical argument, whereas argumentation on the social web is often largely rhetorical. To investigate the application of logical versus rhetorical techniques on the social web, we bring together two ontologies used for modelling argumentation and online communities respectively, the Argument Interchange Format and the Semantic Interlinked Online Communities project. We augment these with our own ontology for modelling rhetorical argument, the Argumentation on the Social Web Ontology, and trial our additions by examining three case studies following argumentation on different categories of social media. Finally, we present examples of how rhetorical argumentation is used in the context of the social web and show that there are clear markers present that can allow for a rudimentary estimate for the classification of a social media post with regards to its contribution to a discussion.
References
[1]
T. Blount, D. E. Millard, and M. J. Weal. Towards Modelling Dialectic and Eristic Argumentation on the Social Web. In 14th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, 2014.
[2]
J. G. Breslin, S. Decker, A. Harth, and U. Bojars. SIOC: an approach to connect web-based communities. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 2(2):133--142, 2006.
[3]
C. Chesñevar, J. McGinnis, S. Modgil, I. Rahwan, C. Reed, G. Simari, M. South, G. Vreeswijk, and S. Willmott. Towards an argument interchange format. Knowledge Engineering Review, 21(4):293--316, 2006.
[4]
E. Gilbert, T. Bergstrom, and K. Karahalios. Blogs are echo chambers: Blogs are echo chambers. In 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS'09, pages 1--10. IEEE, 2009.
[5]
U. Hahn, M. Oaksford, and A. Corner. Circular arguments, begging the question and the formalization of argument strength. In Proceedings of AMKLC'05, International Symposium on Adaptive Models of Knowledge, Language and Cognition, pages 34--40, 2005.
[6]
E. A. Jane. "Your a Ugly, Whorish, Slut" Understanding E-bile. Feminist Media Studies, 14(4):531--546, 2014.
[7]
C. Jørgensen. Public Debate -- An Act of Hostility? Argumentation, 12(4):431--443, 1998.
[8]
A. M. Kaplan and M. Haenlein. Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business horizons, 53(1):59--68, 2010.
[9]
W. Kunz and H. W. Rittel. Issues as elements of information systems, volume 131. Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California Berkeley, California, 1970.
[10]
C. Lange, U. Bojars, T. Groza, J. G. Breslin, and S. Handschuh. Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Social Data on the Web, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2008.
[11]
J. Leskovec and C. Faloutsos. Sampling from large graphs. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 631--636. ACM, 2006.
[12]
A. d. Moor and M. Aakhus. Argumentation support: From technologies to tools. Communications of the ACM, 49(3):93--98, Mar. 2006.
[13]
D. J. O'Keefe. Readings in argumentation, volume 11, chapter 5, pages 79--91. Walter de Gruyter, 1992.
[14]
Plato. Book V. The Republic. Basic Books, 380BC. (Bloom, A.D. Trans. 1991).
[15]
I. Rahwan, F. Zablith, and C. Reed. Laying the foundations for a world wide argument web. Artificial intelligence, 171(10):897--921, 2007.
[16]
C. Reed, S. Wells, J. Devereux, and G. Rowe. AIF
[17]
: Dialogue in the Argument Interchange Format. FRONTIERS IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND APPLICATIONS, 172:311, 2008.
[18]
J. Schneider, B. Davis, and A. Wyner. Dimensions of argumentation in social media. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7603:21--25, 2012.
[19]
J. Schneider, S. Villata, and E. Cabrio. Why did they post that argument? Communicative Intentions of Web 2.0 Arguments. In Arguing on the Web 2.0, Amsterdam, 2014. SINTELNET, European Network for Social Intelligence.
[20]
W. Sherchan, S. Nepal, and C. Paris. A survey of trust in social networks. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 45(4):47, 2013.
Index Terms
- An Investigation into the Use of Logical and Rhetorical Tactics within Eristic Argumentation on the Social Web
Recommendations
A review of argumentation for the Social Semantic Web
Argumentation represents the study of views and opinions that humans express with the goal of reaching a conclusion through logical reasoning. Since the 1950's, several models have been proposed to capture the essence of informal argumentation in ...
Incorporating rhetorical and plausible reasoning in a system for simulating argumentation
The article introduces argumentation theory, some examples of computational models of argumentation, some application examples, considers the significance and problems of argumentation systems, and outlines the significance and difficulties of the ...
Applying the Logic of Multiple-Valued Argumentation to Social Web: SNS and Wikipedia
PRIMA '08: Proceedings of the 11th Pacific Rim International Conference on Multi-Agents: Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent SystemsThe Logic of Multiple-Valued Argumentation (LMA) is an argumentation framework that allows for argument-based reasoning about uncertain issues under uncertain knowledge. In this paper, we describe its applications to Social Web: SNS and Wikipedia. They ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
August 2015
360 pages
ISBN:9781450333955
DOI:10.1145/2700171
- General Chair:
- Yeliz Yesilada,
- Program Chairs:
- Rosta Farzan,
- Geert-Jan Houben
Copyright © 2015 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
In-Cooperation
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 24 August 2015
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Short-paper
Funding Sources
Conference
HT '15
Sponsor:
HT '15: 26th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media
September 1 - 4, 2015
Guzelyurt, Northern Cyprus
Acceptance Rates
HT '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 24 of 60 submissions, 40%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 378 of 1,158 submissions, 33%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 115Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)10
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 26 Sep 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Blount TMillard DWeal MHargood CMillard D(2015)On the Role of Avatars in ArgumentationProceedings of the 2015 Workshop on Narrative & Hypertext10.1145/2804565.2804569(17-19)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2015
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in