Argument Quality Research Articles

Brand posts and brand co-creation in higher education communities: a social communication process theory

ABSTRACT Creating brand posts that stimulate customer interaction in online communities is both vital and challenging to marketing managers. Using social communication process theoretical framework (i.e. SMCR), the current study examines the impact of brand posts in online brand communities on students’ responses in ways that potentially co-create value for universities and illustrate the moderating role of community types. Results show that source credibility and argument quality of online posts are positively associated with both cognitive and affective response, thus motivating brand co-creation activities, while information quantity has insignificant effect on affective response. Additionally, members of communities managed by different parties (student-created vs university-created communities) exhibit a different tendency to develop community and contribute to brand value. Thus, different digital strategies depending on the type of community host are suggested to capture the highest possible co-creation value from these communities.

Teachers’ support in developing year 7 students’ argumentation skills about water-based socioscientific issues

ABSTRACT Internationally, there are calls for students to be able to use their scientific understandings to make informed decisions about the world in which they live. Using a mixed methods case study design, this study investigated the impact of behaviours and strategies used by two early career science teachers who taught argumentation about a water-based socioscientific issues (SSI) to their Year 7 students. Students’ argument quality, measured using Toulmin’s argument structure, improved significantly from pre- to post-instruction (p = .0033). There was also a significant increase (p = .0037) in the number of types of categories. Qualitative data comprising classroom audio-transcripts, field notes, student work samples, teacher interviews and student reflections were analysed using inductive analysis to identify four themes related to teacher behaviours and teaching strategies: (1) developing and maintaining a safe classroom environment; (2) providing clear instructions about the features of quality arguments; (3) providing opportunities for all students to think and work individually and collaboratively; and (4) practising oral and written argument construction with gradual removal of scaffolds. While the findings are not generalisable teacher educators can use their expertise to decide the extent to which the teacher strategies and behaviours would support the development of argumentation skills in their particular context.

Written Arguments About Vaccination: Experimental Studies in the United States and China

Guided by argumentation schema theory, we conducted five psychological studies in the United States and China on arguments about vaccination. Study 1 replicated research about arguments on several topics, finding that agreement judgments are weighted toward claims, whereas quality judgments are weighted toward reasons. However, consistent with recent research, when this paradigm was extended to arguments about vaccination (Study 2), claims received more weight than reasons in judgments about agreement and quality. Studies 3 and 4 were conducted in the United States and China on how people process counterarguments against anti-vaccination assertions. Rebuttals did not influence agreement but played a role in argument quality judgments. Both political position (in the United States) and medical education (in China) predicted differences in argument evaluation. Bad reasons lowered agreement (Study 5), especially among participants studying health care. Political polarization apparently heightens the impact of claim side in the argumentation schema, likely to the detriment of public discourse.

How to Make Decisions of Gen Z Travelers? Exploring The Influence of Perceived Risk, Online Review, and Price on Travel in Bali

This study aims to examine how to make decisions of Gen Z influence of the current COVID-19 public health crisis on consumer risk perceptions, and what is more significant is how risk perceptions have the potential to influence tourist post-crisis recovery travel behavior. The research sample had 250 respondents. Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, and Millennials value input from their Gen Z kids. Gen Z is an individual from the most recent generation born between 1995 and early 2012. Multiple linear regression analysis was employed in this quantitative study. The result was: (1) Perceived Risk has no effect on Gen Z Travel Decision which a coefficient value is 0.061 (2) e-WOM Argument Quality (Online Review) has significantly influenced Gen Z Travel Decision which a coefficient value of 0.394 (3) Price has no effect on Gen Z Travel decision which the coefficient value is 0.375. The goal of the growth strategy is to increase sales, assets, earnings, or a combination of the three. This can be done through reducing costs, creating new items, improving the quality of existing products or services, or gaining access to a larger market. That approach may be used in other places that could become popular tourist destinations.

Artificial Intelligence at the Service of Society to Analyse Human Arguments

Argument(ation) mining (AM) is an area of research in Artificial Intelligence (AI) that aims to identify, analyse and automatically generate arguments in natural language. In a pipeline, the identification and analysis of the arguments and their components (i.e. premises and claims) in texts and the prediction of their relations (i.e. attack and support) are then handled by argument-based reasoning frameworks so that, for example, fallacies and inconsistencies can be automatically identified. Recently, the field of argument mining has tackled new challenges, namely the evaluation of argument quality (e.g. strength, persuasiveness), natural language argument summarisation and retrieval, and natural language argument generation. In this paper, I discuss my main contributions in this area as well as some lines of future research. This paper is part of the AAAI-23 New Faculty Highlights.

Online incivility, argument quality and public expression in China: Exploring the moderating role of education level and opinion congruency

Uncivil comments are prevalent in Chinese cyberspace. Many studies have explored the impacts of online incivility and argument quality on public expression, but very few studies have been conducted in authoritarian societies. We conducted two online experiments with different topics in China. The results showed that after being exposed to uncivil content, people's intentions to make comments online changed depending on their education level and opinion congruency. The less-educated people are more likely to express whereas the well-educated tend to remain silent. Besides, incivility and argument quality can work together to influence public expression. A strong argument with a civil tone can promote people's enthusiasm for expression. But a strong argument with an uncivil tone can decrease people's expression willingness. However, uncivil comments with weak arguments increase less-educated people's willingness to express themselves publicly. Besides, opinion congruency moderates the relationship between argument strength and online expression. But the pattern was contingent upon the nature of the discussion topics.

Facilitating justification, disconfirmation, and transparency in diagnostic argumentation

Abstract: Teachers need to learn complex skills in higher education, such as diagnostic argumentation. We suggest that relations between the argumentation facets justification, disconfirmation, and transparency are a relevant indicator for the quality of diagnostic argumentation. In an experimental study, we investigated whether automatic adaptive feedback – based on natural language processing – compared to static feedback facilitates relations between the argumentation facets in preservice teachers' diagnostic argumentation when learning with case-based simulations. A sample of N = 60 preservice teachers received adaptive or static feedback on their written explanations concerning simulated cases of pupils having behavioral or reading and writing problems. Using Epistemic Network Analysis, we analyzed learners' written explanations and found that adaptive feedback compared to static feedback facilitates relations between justification, disconfirmation, and transparency in preservice teachers' diagnostic argumentation. The results confirm that adaptivity is an important feature of effective feedback, which can be automated by methods of natural language processing.

Effects of chatbot-assisted in-class debates on students’ argumentation skills and task motivation

Recent advancements in artificial intelligence have led to the development of chatbots capable of engaging in argumentative dialogues and debates with human users. Although some studies have investigated the use of such chatbots to facilitate argumentation learning outside of the classroom, their integration into in-class learning activities remains largely unexplored. In this study, we developed a novel task design, chatbot-assisted in-class debates (CaIcD), for argumentation learning. In the task design, the students interacted with an argumentative chatbot named Argumate before engaging in debates with their classmates. During their interaction, the chatbot helped the students to generate ideas for supporting their position and predict opposing viewpoints. This study investigated the effects of CaIcD on students' argumentation skills and task motivation. Forty-four Chinese undergraduate students from two classes participated in this study. To examine the effects on argumentation skills in terms of structural complexity and argument quality, we used a pretest–posttest quasi-experimental design. Quade's test results revealed that participation in CaIcD enabled the students to use more claims, data, and warrants to generate arguments and participation in CaIcD led to more organised, sufficient, and elaborated arguments. However, no significant effects on overall structural complexity were found. Moreover, to understand the students' task motivation towards CaIcD, a within-subjects comparison design was employed. The results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated that the students had a higher level of enjoyment and exerted more effort when engaging in CaIcD than when performing conventional learning tasks. Moreover, the students perceived their performance in CaIcD to be as successful as that in conventional learning tasks, although the CaIcD task presented more challenges to them. However, no significant difference was observed in the students' perceived relevance of the two types of tasks to their argumentation learning. This study provides empirical evidence that integrating argumentative chatbots into classroom debates can lead to improved argumentation skills and higher task motivation among undergraduate students.

Preservice Science Teachers' Opinions and Argument Quality regarding COVID-19 Vaccines

Preservice Science Teachers' Opinions and Argument Quality regarding COVID-19 Vaccines

Cognitive ability and ideology join forces in the culture war: A model of opinion formation.

We propose a model of moral policy opinion formation that integrates both ideology and cognitive ability. The link from people's ideology to their opinions is assumed to go via a semantic processing of moral arguments that relies on the individual's cognitive ability. An implication of this model is that the relative quality of arguments that justify supporting vs. opposing a moral policy-the policy's "argument advantage"-is key to how opinions will be distributed in the population and develop over time. To test this implication, we combine polling data with measures of the argument advantage for 35 moral policies. Consistent with the opinion formation model, the argument advantage of a moral policy accounts for how public opinion moves over time, and how support for the policy ideologies varies across different ideological groups and levels of cognitive ability, including a strong interaction between ideology and cognitive ability.

The Influence of Ewom on The Purchase Intention of Young Consumers at Online Travel Agents Through the Expansion on the Information Adoption Model (Case Study on Traveloka, Tiket.Com, Agoda, Pegipegi, Airbnb)

e-WOM has become very popular in recent years due to the increasing number of contributors and the proliferation of mobile platforms for applicatios on social media. In online travel agents, it is currently known that tourist is obtain information from online review websites rather than hotel websites to decide their hotel choices, therefore eWOM significantly influences consumers purchasing decisions. This research contributes to IAM and the extended model will be tested in eWOM research on five online travel egents (Traveloka, Tiket.com, Agoda, Pegipegi, Airbnb). This study aims to examine the effect of argument quality, source credibility, information quantity, and emotional word understanding on the percived usefulness of eWOM, to analyze the effect of perceived usefulness on information adoption and to investigate the effect of information adoption on young consumers purchase intentions. The type of research used in this study is descriptive analysis with quantitative approach with CB-SEM data analysis techniques using the Amos24 program with a minimum sample of 385 respondents.The results show that argument quality, source credibility, information quantity and emotive word comprehension have positive effect on the perceived usefulness of eWOM. Perceived usefulness has positive influence on the information adoption of eWOM, which in turn predicts the young consumers’ purchase intentions. This study makes several contributions to the literature on marketing communications, in particular to eWOM research and IAM theory. Practically, this research provides knowledge and insight to online travel agent site marketers in order to increase the usability and effectiveness of eWOM to attract more young consumers.

Trust antecedents in online reviews across national cultures

When reading an online review, consumers rely on implied trust-building factors within it. Trust antecedents have been extensively researched and categorized into argument quality and source credibility. However, there is still a need to investigate how their help for consumers differs across national cultures. Furthermore, while a profile photo has been found to enhance the helpfulness of a review by improving source credibility, little is known about how consumers perceive user appearance in a review picture and no research has compared these two types of visual information. To bridge these gaps, we examine how trust antecedents and visual information help consumers' decision making differently across national cultures, using reviews collected from Amazon in the US and Germany, respectively. Our results show that information quality is more helpful for consumers in an individualistic and low uncertainty avoidance culture, whereas source credibility is more valued in the opposite culture. Interestingly, the effects of the two types of visual information, user appearance in a profile photo versus in a review picture, also differ across cultures. This research contributes to the online review literature by introducing visual information and national culture with new perspectives of trust. Our findings suggest that multinational e-commerce businesses adopt culture-specific strategies in review systems to better help consumers make informed purchase decisions.

Text quality and changing perceptions of teacher feedback and affective-motivational variables: a study with secondary EFL students

IntroductionFeedback can support students’ writing and has the potential to enhance writing motivation and reduce writing anxiety. However, for feedback to fulfill its potential, it has to be accepted by students and perceived as motivating.MethodsIn this study, we investigate changes in less proficient English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ (N = 53) writing motivation and affect, as well as their perceptions of teacher feedback and how these relate to students’ argumentative text quality. Measurements were taken before EFL teachers attended a professional learning intervention on feedback (T1) and 8 months later (T2).ResultsFrom T1 to T2, students felt that general feedback quality improved, their writing self-efficacy increased, and their writing anxiety decreased. However, no significant changes in text quality could be observed between T1 and T2, and students continued to struggle with creating structure and coherence in their texts. Regression analyses revealed that feedback perceptions and affective-motivational variables did not predict students’ text quality at T1. Yet at T2, students’ perception of general feedback quality and the effect of feedback on writing motivation were significant predictors of text quality; self-efficacy and writing anxiety were not.DiscussionOur results suggest that more attention needs to be paid to feedback’s motivational impact, especially among less proficient EFL writers.

Determinants of health information acceptance to COVID-19 avoidance: the lens of information acceptance model and elaboration likelihood model

PurposeThis study aims to analyze the motivations underlying information usefulness, attitude and acceptance of health information related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) avoidance based on the information acceptance model (IAM) and the elaboration likelihood model (ELM).Design/methodology/approachThis study conducted a quantitative approach using survey that generated 364 valid responses. Structural equation modeling was applied to analyze the data and evaluate the hypotheses.FindingsThe results of this study showed that the determinants of information usefulness are argument quality (comprising accuracy and timeliness) and peripheral route (comprising credibility and relevance), whereas no significant relationship was found between completeness and information quantity and information usefulness. Further analysis indicated that attitude and information usefulness significantly affect health information acceptance to COVID-19 avoidance.Research limitations/implicationsUsing ELM and IAM, an explanation of health information acceptance in the salient pandemic context was given. This study contributed to the current literature by offering insights into attitude and information usefulness for information acceptance. The validation of the model was strengthened by identifying the effects of argument quality and peripheral route attributes on information usefulness, which is stated to make contributions to the earlier literature.Practical implicationsPractitioners should strive to understand the facilitators regarding argument quality and peripheral routes to broaden information usefulness. The findings of this study are helpful for practitioners to implement communication campaigns that foster attitude and health information acceptance in the COVID-19 pandemic as well as in similar disease situations.Social implicationsThis study provides individuals and organizations with necessary information about the importance of mobile applications (m-applications) in distributing online information and about reliable guidelines for the implementation of disease avoidance to improve their health status.Originality/valueExisting studies investigated users’ health information acceptance in some contexts related to general disease, but less is known about this behavior among young individuals via m-applications at the moment of COVID-19 and in emerging economies. This study identifies the efforts made by the relationship between information and technological diffusion to help individuals surmount difficulties in times of crisis.

Connecting source use and argumentation in L2 integrated argumentative writing performance

Second language (L2) integrated argumentative writing is a complex process, where writers need to integrate sources to make effective arguments to demonstrate their writing proficiency. While abundant research has examined essay performance features in relation to proficiency scores, our understanding of the nature of L2 argumentation and the impact of source use on argumentation quality remains relatively limited. This short communication investigates how source use characteristics were manifested in 300 argumentative writing performances of an integrated writing test. The essays were coded and analyzed in terms of integration style, interpretation accuracy, and integration purpose along with their argumentation effectiveness, operationalized as argument structure and reasoning quality. The results showed that while source use characteristics did not show a direct relationship with score level, certain features displayed systematic differences across levels of argumentation effectiveness, which are significantly related to writing scores. The findings suggest a potential complex, indirect relationship between source use, argumentation, and writing proficiency that warrants a more thorough analysis in L2 writing research.

E–writing activity using Instant Messaging to ignite EFL students’ critical thinking in writing English argumentation on a conservation issue

The 21st-century skill has intrigued all stakeholders in the education context and educational practitioners have a great decision to ignite the implementation of critical thinking in the classroom. This brings the present study to be carried out with the aim of exploring 1) the argument analysis of critical thinking demonstrated by the EFL students in writing argumentative text using Instant Messaging; and 2) students' awareness of the relationship among argumentative text, critical thinking, conservation issue and some challenges in experiencing the activity Instant Messaging. The present study involved five EFL students enrolling in Academic writing in the fifth semester. The qualitative case study theory was utilized so that the primary data was obtained by employing screenshots of students' written argumentation and interview (Instants Messaging Interview). The present study came up with evidence that the quality of students' arguments was not contented. The obvious premises and conclusion are not offered to build a good argument. It is to say that a student's ability to write argumentative text as a tool facilitates students' critical thinking and needs more ignition. Consequently, students' ability in thinking critically also needs improvement. Another result reveals that the inclusion of technical support such as internet access and an E-writing device, namely, instant messaging, helped them a lot in making judgments fast. Searching from Google search in one click made them more aware of several issues in a concise time such as the term critical thinking, strategy in writing a good argumentative text, effects caused by plastic and its recommendation, and offering some alternatives for some challenges. Thus, students experienced technical support as a great assistance to attach accurate data for their writing of Argumentative text effectively and efficiently.

Application of the Think Talk Write Learning Model to Improve Argumentation Skills on Ecosystem Materials

Biology learning at the high school level is still dominated by traditional learning which has not yet developed thinking/argumentation skills. This study aims to analyze the increase in students' argumentation skills after applying the Think Talk Write learning model to Ecosystem material. The researcher uses a research method that is pre-experimental design and uses a quantitative and qualitative approach, namely quantitative data obtained based on pretest and posttest analysis while qualitative data is obtained through observation and questionnaires. Analysis of the quality of student arguments was carried out using the N-Gain test, the average value during the pretest was 48.41 and the posttest was 75.34 with an average N-Gain value obtained 0.52. It can be concluded that the results of the analysis that has been carried out on the application of the TTW learning model in improving argumentation skills have a positive effect so that they can be used effectively in the classroom

Design and Development of Augmented Reality Advertisement Visual Production Through Multi-Method Approach

The emergence of immersive new media in advertising, such as augmented reality (AR), has accelerated since the Industrial Revolution 4.0. Companies use different tools to shape a brand by providing a higher level of interaction in AR for their new marketing. However, influencing consumer decisions despite consumers' lack of attention is also a critical task in measuring the effectiveness of advertising. Thus, this research aims to design and develop different approaches to advertisement prototypes as stimuli for experiments to measure AR ads' effectiveness on consumers. This research design consisted of a multi-method to produce three ideations of AR advertisement prototypes. The respondent selection is based on convenient sampling, and n=44 respondents participated. Firstly, the researcher conducted a visual analysis to extract the elements used in the ads based on ethos, pathos, and logos by Aristotle's concept. Secondly, the study adopted inter-rater reliability measurement to analyze the degree to which the judgments of the several judges were consistent. Lastly, a descriptive AR advertisement's design and development of the AR ads process framework are described. The results show that respondents' degree of agreement leads to a mutual understanding of the subject and appeals categorized as creative ads, endorsement ads, and argument quality ads. The process also helps to speed up the application development. The apps use marker-based AR to display 3D models or video commercials and provide information on product design that gives users control of the interface. Finally, a plan for future research in AR advertising is specified, beta testing for the usability of the apps is recommended for future research, and the implications are discussed.

Patterns of peer talk in consensus-oriented classrooms: Deliberative argumentation or rush toward consensus?

In this study, we investigate peer talk in consensus-oriented first-grade classrooms. Earlier research has shown that the quality of argumentation improves when students argue to agree, because it steers the students toward patterns of argumentation that support the exploration and elaboration of perspectives that is typical of deliberative argumentation. Using multi-modal argumentation analysis, we identify four patterns in the peer talk. First, the students invoked consensus when the conversation developed in a direction that was not in accordance with their understanding of the task instructions. Second, the students tended to delegate the authority to decide what the group will answer. Third, the students searched for the lowest common denominator, looking for a common element in their individual answers. Fourth, the students put the decision to a vote, going with the majority and ignoring the perspectives of the minority. We argue that these patterns illustrate a general tendency for the students to rush toward a conclusion. Accordingly, we argue that younger students need a more explicit instructional design by the teacher to support exploration and elaboration of different perspectives.

Design, implementation, and evaluation of an online supported peer feedback module to enhance students’ argumentative essay quality

We know little to what extent peer feedback strategies can be applied on a large scale in higher education for complex tasks. This study aimed to design, implement, and evaluate an online-supported peer feedback module for large-scale use to enhance higher education students’ argumentative essay writing performance. To do this, 330 students from five different courses at bachelor and master levels followed the online supported peer feedback module. In this module, students were asked to write an argumentative essay about a controversial issue, provide peer feedback for two peers, and revise their original essays based on the received feedback. Three types of data including original essay (pre-test) data, peer feedback data, and revised essay (post-test) data collected. Students also filled out the learning satisfaction questionnaire at the end of the module. The findings showed that the suggested online-supported peer feedback module was effective in improving students’ argumentative essay quality in all courses at the bachelor and master levels. The findings also showed there is a difference in the level of students’ satisfaction with the module among the courses and between the education levels. The findings of this study provide insights into and add value to the scalability of online peer feedback tools for argumentative essay writing in different contexts. Based on the findings, recommendations for future studies and educational practice are provided.