Argument and Computation:1-21 (forthcoming)
AbstractOnline debates typically possess a large number of argumentative comments. Most readers who would like to see which comments are winning arguments often only read a part of the debate. Many platforms that host such debates allow for the comments to be sorted, say from the earliest to latest. How can argumentation theory be used to evaluate the effectiveness of such policies of sorting comments, in terms of the actually winning arguments displayed to a reader who may not have read the whole debate? We devise a pipeline that captures an online debate tree as a bipolar argumentation framework, which is sorted depending on the policy, giving a sequence of induced sub-BAFs representing how and how much of the debate has been read. Each sub-BAF has its own set of winning arguments, which can be quantitatively compared to the set of winning arguments of the whole BAF. We apply this pipeline to evaluate policies on Kialo debates, where it is shown that reading comments from most to least liked, on average, displays more winners than reading comments earliest first. Therefore, in Kialo, reading comments from most to least liked is on average more effective than reading from the earliest to the most recent.
Similar books and articles
Reader comments on mainstream online newspapers in Turkey: Perceptions of web editors and moderators.Tolga Çevikel & Dilruba Çatalbaş Ürper - 2014 - Communications 39 (4):483-503.
Ethical Implications of Anonymous Comments Posted to Online News Stories.William H. Freivogel & Laura Hlavach - 2011 - Journal of Mass Media Ethics 26 (1):21-37.
Comments on “Trust and New Communication Technologies: Vicious Circles, Virtuous Circles, Possible Futures”. [REVIEW]John Weckert - 2010 - Knowledge, Technology & Policy 23 (3):307-309.
The Analysis of Pragmatic Argumentation in British Lawmaking Debates: The second reading.Constanza Ihnen - unknown
Debating multiple positions in multi-party online deliberation: Sides, positions, and cases.Marcin Lewiński - 2013 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (1):151-177.
Background Nonverbal Disagreement during Televised Political Debates: A Strategic Maneuvering Approach. WegerHarry Jr, Hinck Edward & Seiter John - unknown
The Case for Cosmic Design.Robin Collins - 2008 - In God or Blind Nature?: Philosopher’s Debate the Evidence (2007-2008). Internet Infidels (Online Publisher).
Winning the Argument?Danny Frederick - 2020 - In Against the Philosophical Tide. Yeovil: Critias Publishing. pp. 195-197.
Argumentation without Arguments Proper.Gábor Forrai - 2014 - In Gizella Horváth, Rozália Klára Bakos & Éva Bíró-Kaszás (eds.), Ten Years of Facebook, The Third Argumentor Conference. Partium Press, Debrecen University Press. pp. 219-238..
Power to the People: Mythical Thought and Figural Language in Online Comments about the “Colectiv” Case.Roxana Patraș, Camelia Grădinaru & Sorina Postolea - 2017 - Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 16 (48):46-64.
Slippery Slope Arguments and Social Policy Debates.Eric Lode - 1996 - Dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder
Consumers' Concerns with How They Are Researched Online.Caroline Moraes - 2017 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 36 (1):79-101.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Argumentation frameworks with necessities and their relationship with logic programs.Farid Nouioua & Sara Boutouhami - forthcoming - Argument and Computation:1-42.
References found in this work
On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games.Phan Minh Dung - 1995 - Artificial Intelligence 77 (2):321-357.
A natural language bipolar argumentation approach to support users in online debate interactions†.Elena Cabrio & Serena Villata - 2013 - Argument and Computation 4 (3):209-230.