Argument Components Research Articles

Measuring the strength of threats, rewards, and appeals in persuasive negotiation dialogues

AbstractThe aim of this article is to propose a model for the measurement of the strength of rhetorical arguments (i.e., threats, rewards, and appeals), which are used in persuasive negotiation dialogues when a proponent agent tries to convince his opponent to accept a proposal. Related articles propose a calculation based on the components of the rhetorical arguments, that is, the importance of the goal of the opponent and the certainty level of the beliefs that make up the argument. Our proposed model is based on the pre-conditions of credibility and preferability stated by Guerini and Castelfranchi. Thus, we suggest the use of two new criteria for the strength calculation: the credibility of the proponent and the status of the goal of the opponent in the goal processing cycle. We use three scenarios in order to illustrate our proposal. Besides, the model is empirically evaluated and the results demonstrate that the proposed model is more efficient than previous works of the state of the art in terms of numbers of negotiation cycles, number of exchanged arguments, and number of reached agreements.

Аргументативная функция языка как высшая лингвистическая характеристика языковой личности

The article deals with the issues related to the content of one of the higher linguistic functions of a linguistic personality — the argumentative function of language, without which it is impossible for a cognizing person to find an adequate information picture of the world. Besides, the argumentative function of language serves the purposes of forming a number of meta-disciplinary competences of a personality from the block of cognitive universal educational actions: the ability to argue own opinion, to establish cause-and-effect relations, to build logical chains of reasoning, to find contradictions, to draw conclusions of different degree of generalization, etc., directly connected with the development of a person’s ability to critical perception of the surrounding reality — an important component of the personal information security system. As a result of an updated view of the concept of a language personality, as well as an analysis of the content and place assigned to the argumentative function of language in the hierarchy of language functions, the conclusion was made about its increasing role in the life of modern man and about the need to restructure the learning process in order to increase the authority and role of the native language in the education of modern language personality. Practical recommendations have been proposed to create conditions to intellectualize the native and foreign languages in school education by strengthening the argumentative component while developing students’ language competence.

Художньо-аксіологічна культура вчителя мистецтва як предмет дослідження

У статті розглянуто проблему художньо-аксіологічної культури вчителя музичного мистецтва, визначено її сутність, зміст, структурні компоненти. Доведено, що художньо-аксіологічна культура вчителя мистецтва є особистісним інтегративним утворенням, що характеризується високим рівнем професійної майстерності на основі глибоко вмотивованого ціннісного ставлення до мистецтва та педагогічної діяльності. Для художньо-аксіологічної культури вчителя мистецтва притаманним є наявність активної позиції щодо критичного осмислення, відбору художніх цінностей та їх трансляції в середовищі учнівської молоді. Структура художньо-аксіологічної культури вчителя музичного мистецтва включає мотиваційно-пізнавальний, аналітико-аргументувальний, інтерпретаційно-творчий, комунікативно-трансляційний, рефлексивно-результативний компоненти.

Exploring Validity Evidence Associated With Questionnaire-Based Tools for Assessing the Professional Performance of Physicians: A Systematic Review.

To collect and examine-using an argument-based validity approach-validity evidence of questionnaire-based tools used to assess physicians' clinical, teaching, and research performance. In October 2016, the authors conducted a systematic search of the literature seeking articles about questionnaire-based tools for assessing physicians' professional performance published from inception to October 2016. They included studies reporting on the validity evidence of tools used to assess physicians' clinical, teaching, and research performance. Using Kane's validity framework, they conducted data extraction based on four inferences in the validity argument: scoring, generalization, extrapolation, and implications. They included 46 articles on 15 tools assessing clinical performance and 72 articles on 38 tools assessing teaching performance. They found no studies on research performance tools. Only 12 of the tools (23%) gathered evidence on all four components of Kane's validity argument. Validity evidence focused mostly on generalization and extrapolation inferences. Scoring evidence showed mixed results. Evidence on implications was generally missing. Based on the argument-based approach to validity, not all questionnaire-based tools seem to support their intended use. Evidence concerning implications of questionnaire-based tools is mostly lacking, thus weakening the argument to use these tools for formative and, especially, for summative assessments of physicians' clinical and teaching performance. More research on implications is needed to strengthen the argument and to provide support for decisions based on these tools, particularly for high-stakes, summative decisions. To meaningfully assess academic physicians in their tripartite role as doctor, teacher, and researcher, additional assessment tools are needed.

Students’ Construct and Critique of Claims and Evidence Through Online Asynchronous Discussion Combined with In-Class Discussion

This study examines how grade 5 students engage with the aspects (construct and critique) of argument in an online asynchronous discussion combined with in-class wrap-up discussion. Grade 5 students in a rural public school engaged in a “human health investigation” unit using an argument-based inquiry approach followed by online asynchronous discussions using a Moodle forum. The online discussion was wrapped up by a 1-h in-class discussion and student writing of claims, evidence, and reflection. Data sources included online notes posted by 111 students in the Moodle forum, a video record of in-class discussion, and writing samples of claims, evidence, and reflections produced by 54 students after online and in-class discussions. Results of this study indicate that students engaged with the construct and critique components of argument in the online asynchronous discussion and in the in-class wrap-up discussion. The results show that in terms of the argument components they (a) used evidence resources to challenge and supplement arguments, (b) critiqued and reinforced evidence, and (c) strongly negotiated and confirmed/revised claims.

Mission to Planet Markle: Problem-Based Learning for Teaching Elementary Students Difficult Content and Practices

Young children can struggle to learn difficult disciplinary content and important skills for practicing science. Problem-based learning (PBL) may be useful for addressing such difficulties, yet evidence to support its usefulness in elementary school-aged children is limited. We considered the role of a PBL unit in improving students’ genetics content understanding and their skills specific to creating arguments with coordinated claims, evidence, and reasoning. First- through fifth-grade students participated in a 6-week PBL unit about evolution and genetics. Students worked in mixed-age groups and were charged with illustrating a fictitious alien species, called markles, based on a series of facts they collected about factors expected to impact markle adaptation. This work was particularly unique in its assessment of student groups’ illustrated design solutions as arguments. Although students demonstrated weaknesses in coordinating claims and evidence overall, they were able to demonstrate success in gaining difficult genetics content knowledge and in preparing arguments with, at minimum, two components of well-constructed arguments, in most cases, providing a claim supported by reasoning. This work is informative for understanding student abilities, the potential of PBL, and considerations for its use.

Changing views: Persuasion modeling and argument extraction from online discussions

Persuasion and argumentation are possibly among the most complex examples of the interplay between multiple human subjects. With the advent of the Internet, online forums provide wide platforms for people to share their opinions and reasonings around various diverse topics. In this work, we attempt to model persuasive interaction between users on Reddit, a popular online discussion forum. We propose a deep LSTM model to classify whether a conversation leads to a successful persuasion or not, and use this model to predict whether a certain chain of arguments can lead to persuasion. While learning persuasion dynamics, our model tends to identify argument facets implicitly, using an attention mechanism. We also propose a semi-supervised approach to extract argumentative components from discussion threads. Both these models provide useful insight into how people engage in argumentation on online discussion forums.

On the Role of Syntactic Graph Convolutions for Identifying and Classifying Argument Components

This paper focuses on fundamental research that combines syntactic knowledge with neural studies, which utilize syntactic information in argument component identification and classification (AC-I/C) tasks in argument mining (AM). The following are our paper’s contributions: 1) We propose a way of incorporating a syntactic GCN into multi-task learning models for AC-I/C tasks. 2) We demonstrate the valid effectiveness of our proposed syntactic GCN in fair experiments in some datasets. We also found that syntactic GCNs are promising for lexically independent scenarios. Our code in the experiments is available for reproducibility.1

Responsibility, affective solidarity and transnational maternal feminism

Maternal health has become a top global priority. In contrast to the decline of the maternal subject (Stephens, 2011), and despite previous evidence that maternal health has struggled to find a place on the global policy agenda (Shiffman and Smith, 2007), it is now clear that the promotion of health for mothers and children is a staple of both government and private donor commitments. On humanitarian grounds, it makes sense to focus on maternal health and survival in the Global South. Death related to pregnancy or childbirth is a disheartening example of needless suffering. But beyond the initial impulse to reduce suffering, what motivates and/or requires action for addressing injustice in the form of distributional inequities for maternal and reproductive health? In this article, I make a case for the necessity and validity of transnational cooperation to address maternal mortality and morbidity in the Global South. The first component of my argument addresses the transnational elements of both global interconnectedness and responsibility to act. These elements are drawn from Iris Marion Young’s philosophical justification for North-South responsibility-taking. The second component of my argument adds the concept of affective solidarity to that of transnational responsibility. My argument in this section draws from Iris Marion Young’s earlier work on identity (Young, 1990) and embodiment (Young, 1984) and expands the analysis of affective solidarity as a form of both embodiment and political commitment in order to explain the mechanism for transnational connection and understanding. And the final component of my argument explains how both of these elements – transnational responsibility and affective solidarity – support a theory of transnational maternal feminism.

Syntax Phrase Models with a Modal Component in the Discursive Space of A.P. Chekhov

The article is dedicated to the research of syntax phrase models with a modal component in the context of Chekhov’s artistic and epistolary prose. Actuality of the undertaken research is attributable to the fact that sentences with idiomatic structure are insufficiently researched: in particular, the issue of their function in discursive space is not resolved. Due to this fact, phrase models with a modal component that possess syntactic bivalency, which are common for Chekhov’s idiomatic style, are considered in this article; they are analyzed by their variety by “intensity” and “confirmation/denial” scales, as well as a “many/few” opposition. The specificity and objectives of the studied material required the usage of complex of research methods: descriptive, component, structural-semantic and statistical methods; text and distributional analysis of phrase models that express modality. The author’s modality is a very important text category, the studying of which is the most productive in terms of text fragments of bigger and shorter extent. In the Chekhov’s discursive space, the paragraph often either starts with the studied phrase models, which are unraveled in the following sentences, or ends with them, creating a summarizing judgement. The studied phrase models are also followed by the explicative and argumentative component, and are established by emotional and expressive units and question marks. The mental space of Chekhov’s works is filled with both relevant vocabulary and grammar structures (e.g., phrase models with modal components), which are oriented to relational meanings in the field of semantic of dependency. Meanwhile, the conditionality category includes not only typical units with meanings of target, cause and effect, but also similar meanings that are followed by the modal and evaluative component.

Navigating Networks in the Victorian Age: Mary Philadelphia Merrifield’s Writing on the Arts

When Mary Philadelphia Merrifield (1804–1889) wrote her three major published works on the fine arts in the 1840s, she was simultaneously fulfilling several additional demanding roles. Married to a Brighton barrister with delicate health, and mother to five children between the ages of eight and eighteen living at home, Merrifield’s domestic management alone would have consumed the waking hours of most Victorian women. Her ageing mother also lived with the family, and the education of the younger children was undertaken at home. On the surface, this setting seems an unlikely one for a researcher whose investigation into the authentic materials and methods of the old masters would bring her to the attention of the Fine Arts Commission, convened in response to the challenge of rebuilding the Houses of Parliament after the fire of 1834. Close reading of Merrifield’s published works, together with her own correspondence and that of her broader family and associates, illuminates the complex networks that were fundamental to her ability to research, write, and publish. She was supported by strong and constant encouragement from her husband and collaboration from her family. At the same time, her non-official status seems to have allowed a degree of familiarity in her correspondence with some of the powerful figures in the art-political world, such as Sir Robert Peel or Sir Charles Eastlake, whose support was also key. The pursuit of her research missions on the Continent allowed her to develop her own network of specialist researchers. In the libraries, art academies, and galleries where her identity as a foreign woman seems to have mitigated the social censure normally expected for those of her sex who ventured into activities associated with the male sphere, she secured respect and even friendship. Merrifield’s publications on the materials of the old masters have stood the test of time extraordinarily well. Her writing is not only of note because the author was a woman. Merrifield is still an authoritative source often cited in the publications on technical art history, and her words retain scholarly value related closely to her original aims. Perhaps the informally collaborative nature of her research, writing, and publishing brought the components of opinion and rigorous argument into a just equilibrium.

EMIL: Extracting Meaning from Inconsistent Language: Towards argumentation using a controlled natural language interface

There are well-developed formal and computational theories of argumentation to reason in the face of inconsistency, some with implementations; there are recent efforts to extract arguments from large textual corpora. Both developments are leading towards automated processing and reasoning with inconsistent, linguistically expressed knowledge in order to provide explanations and justifications in a form accessible to humans. However, there remains a gap between the knowledge-bases of computational theories of argumentation, which are generally coarse-grained and semi-structured (e.g. propositional logic), and inferences from knowledge-bases derived from natural language, which are fine-grained and highly structured (e.g. predicate logic). Arguments that occur in textual corpora are very rich, highly various, and incompletely understood. We identify several subproblems which must be addressed in order to bridge the gap, requiring the development of a computational foundation for argumentation coupled with natural language processing. For the computational foundation, we provide a direct semantics, a formal approach for argumentation, which is implemented and suitable to represent and reason with an associated natural language expression for defeasibility. It has attractive properties with respect to expressivity and complexity; we can reason by cases; we can structure higher level argumentation components such as cases and debates. With the implementation, we output experimental results which emphasise the importance of our efficient approach. To motivate our formal approach, we identify a range of issues found in other approaches. For the natural language processing, we adopt and adapt an existing controlled natural language (CNL) to interface with our computational theory of argumentation; the tool takes natural language input and automatically outputs expressions suitable for automated inference engines. A CNL, as a constrained fragment of natural language, helps to control variables, highlights key problems, and provides a framework to engineer solutions. The key adaptation incorporates the expression ‘it is usual that’, which is a plausibly ‘natural’ linguistic expression of defeasibility. This is an important, albeit incremental, step towards the incorporation of linguistic expressions of defeasibility; yet, by engineering such specific solutions, a range of other, relevant issues arise to be addressed. Overall, we can input arguments expressed in a controlled natural language, translate them to a formal knowledge base, represent the knowledge in a rule language, reason with the rules, generate argument extensions, and finally convert the arguments in the extensions into natural language. Our approach makes for fine-grained, highly structure, accessible, and linguistically represented argumentation evaluation. The overall novel contribution of the paper is an integrated, end-to-end argumentation system which bridges a gap between automated defeasible reasoning and a natural language interface. The component novel contributions are the computational theory of ‘direct semantics’, the motivation for our theory, the results with respect to the direct semantics, the implementation, the experimental results, the tie between the formalisation and the CNL, the adaptation of a CNL defeasibility, and an ‘engineering’ approach to fine-grained argument analysis.

КОНТЕКСТНЫЕ СТРАТЕГИИ АРГУМЕНТАЦИИ В ПОЛИТИЧЕСКОМ ДИСКУРСЕ РОССИЙСКИХ РУКОВОДИТЕЛЕЙ

The article is devoted to argumentation as intellectual practice in different spheres. The argumentative component of politicians’ speech is defined as a basis of speech influence and the main means of achieving the goal in the process of communication with the mass audience. The use of proverbs is a tactical tool in the process of implementing the contextual strategy. The linguistic analysis of argumentation is conducted by the example of well-known politicians’ speech from the point of view of the system approach. The role of proverbs in speech is determined as arguments expressing cultural-historical and value-based experience.

Argumentation mining: classifying argumentation components with Partial Tree Kernel and Support Vector Machine for constituent trees on imbalanced persuasive essay

Argumentation Mining is a method that automatically identified an argument structure in a text document. The structure of this argument consists of several components that become very important to evaluate itself. This study builds a classification system of 3 classes of argumentation components on persuasive essays so that the data is multi-class using Tree Kernel which is part of the pre-processing and Support Vector Machine as a tool for grouping this text. This research is an adaptation of research conducted by Lippi and Torroni where they used 2 classes to get 74.6% precision, recall 68.4% and F1- score 71.4%, while this study used 3 classes of argument class and managed to get a precision value of 79%, recall 78% and F1-score 74% by using the Sampling Method to overcome the problem of the amount of data imbalance.

Automatic Detection of Argument Components in Text Using Multinomial Nave Bayes Clasiffier

Arguments are often found in various text data, for example in news, essays and articles. Argumentation Mining is a method that automatically identifies argument structures in text documents. This argument structure consists of several components that are very useful for information retrieval and processing information. In this study, a model will be built to auto-matically detect the component of argument, by using naive bayes classifer multinomial, the model will classify argument components into two classes, namely claim and premise. The evaluation uses k-fold cross validation. The most optimal result of this study is the average accuracy of 70.39 % and the average f1-score of 80.42 % with feature extraction, preprocessing and weighting words.

SYNERGETIC EFFECTS MANIFESTATION BY FOUNDING COMPLEXES DEPLOYMENT OF MATHEMATICAL TASKS ON THE CHESSBOARD

The urgency of the problem is due to the insufficient development of theoretical, content-technological and methodological aspects of the integration of mathematical knowledge and chess skills. The manifestations of synergistic effects arising in the course of the integration of mathematical and game chess activity, while resolving uncertainties on the chessboard due to the activation of key components of creativity, have not been sufficiently studied. The synergistic effect of the integration of mathematical knowledge and chess skills is considered from the perspective of the components of theoretical thinking and is evaluated by the student’s creative choice in the search for alternative solutions. The purpose of the study is to describe and evaluate the manifestations of the structural components of the creative effect in the context of the introduction of funded complexes of mathematical problems on a chessboard. The hypothesis of the research: theoretical analysis of educational material, reflection and an internal plan of action as comparable processes for solving mathematical problems in terms of implementation substantiate complexes will lead to manifestations of arguments-heuristic, intellectual and logical and motivational components of creative activity. The research assumed the measurement of the manifestations of the structural components of creativity in the context of the introduction of funding complexes of mathematical problems on a chessboard. In the process of identifying the structural components of creativity, psychodiagnostic diagnostics tools were developed for intellectual-heuristic, intellectual-logical, motivational and reflexive aspects, comparative diagnostics were carried out for all structural components, the average level and integral indicators in the control and experimental groups were calculated. The formation of creativity was carried out by developing the ability to argue in the process of solving multi-stage mathematical problems on the chessboard. The choice of cause-and-effect relationships stimulated creative independence and reflexivity, enhancing the manifestations of the synergistic effect. On the basis of internal cognitive consonance, non-standard original ideas were identified; by overcoming emotional instability, the logical component of argumentation was strengthened. The results of the research revealed a positive trend in the key components of creativity in the context of the introduction of a chess game in the process of learning mathematics. In the future, it is possible to upgrade the methodological educational material for the system of inclusive mathematical education.

МОДЕЛИРОВАНИЕ АРГУМЕНТАЦИИ В НАУЧНО-ПОПУЛЯРНОМ ДИСКУРСЕ С ИСПОЛЬЗОВАНИЕМ ОНТОЛОГИЙ

Today, popular science discourse is becoming an integral and essential element of scientific activity, as it acts as a mediator, providing communication between the scientific community and a wide audience. In order for this interaction to be productive, it is necessary that the texts (popular science books and articles) offered to the uninitiated public contain high-quality argumentation. In this regard, the study of the argumentation presented in the popular science literature is an important and urgent problem. This paper presents an approach to modeling the arguments used in popular science literature. Such modeling is performed using the means of the ontology of argumentation, based on the AIF format (Argument Interchange Format). This format is accepted de facto by the international community as a standard notation for describing arguments and argumentative structures. We extended this ontology by the means necessary to model the argumentation used in popular science discourse. In particular, new means allow you to model the target audience and present the content of the statements included in the arguments. In terms of the extended ontology we can describe generally accepted and original argumentation schemes, their significance for various audiences, the structure and components of arguments. Concrete arguments extracted from the texts under study and their components can also be presented in the terms of this ontology. The ontology of argumentation with such properties is described for the first time. This ontology is used as an information model of a software system designed for modeling and analysis of argumentation used in popular science literature.

Ethical Evaluation in Health Technology Assessment: A Challenge for Applied Philosophy

The integration of ethical analysis in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) has proven difficult to implement even though it is explicitly recognized as an important component of such assessments in HTA literature. When compared to the standardized scientific method for systematic reviews in HTA, the diversity of ethical analysis has been characterized as a fundamental barrier to the integration of ethics. The present paper aims to identify the theoretical and practical differences between the approaches underpinning ethical analysis in HTA and clarify the reasons for such diversity. Our systematic review of HTA literature pertaining to the barriers to the integration of ethics in HTA identified nine ethical approaches: Principlism, Casuistry, Coherence Analysis, Wide Reflective Equilibrium, Axiology, the Socratic approach, the Triangular model, Constructive Technology Assessment and Social Shaping of Technology. Citations pertaining to each approach were extracted and categorized according to three constitutive components of ethical argumentation established in a previous research evaluating nanotechnologies: i) the disciplinary foundation that grounds the validity of the ethical evaluation, ii) the characteristics of such evaluation, iii) the operational process involved in applying it to a particular case (i.e., its practical reasoning). This comparison shows that, 1) the difference between these approaches rests primarily on their disciplinary foundation (rooted in philosophy, philosophy/theology, or sociology), 2) their complexity can be observed in the distinct characteristics of ethical evaluation deriving from their differing disciplinary foundation, and 3) although four different types of operationalization procedure were identified, little information was available in regards to the practical reasoning associated with these approaches.

ФОРМИРОВАНИЕ ЗНАКА: ЛОГИЧЕСКИЙ АСПЕКТ

The article is described the principles of the formation of signs and their relationship with the arguments. The paper analyzed the main function of the sign and features of the types of reasoning. The study is illustrated an icon, an index and a symbol, as well as the argumentative component of the sign. Semiotic problems in the focus of the paper are 1) relations between a sign, an object and an interpreter; 2) classification of reasoning and their correspondence to the strength of arguments: deduction, induction, abduction; 3) features of the argument as a sign and the role of interpretation in the argumentative process; 4) functions of arguments as signs in the formation of a conclusion; 5) sign formation. A sign may be a sign, if only it turns into another sign. The purpose of the paper is to consider the process of forming a sign (sign system) in the context of the fundamental principles of Pierce's semiotic logic. Logical principles are habits of reasoning, and such habits are not signs. But reasoning is a sign, namely a sign that the premise is a sign of conclusion. Methods. The classic philosophical methods, viz. structural and comparative analysis, hermeneutics, were used to study the issue. Results : Sign formation must be considered in the context of the information field that is created during interpretation. Originality . Originality consists in examining the function of arguments as signs in the formation of a conclusion based on an analysis of Pierce's works (English edition). Conclusion. T he arguments are presented directly by the interpreters in accordance with the deductive, inductive and abductive principles and rules of conclusion. The logical component of the process of forming a sign includes us in the world of interpretation, bordering the language of the world, on the one hand, and on the other hand, with the person who created the world of language. An example would be abduction theory. The main position regarding abductive reasoning is the formation of the question field. The model proposed by Pierce includes sending and receiving a message, sending back to the sender and confirmation that understanding has been reached, as well as determining the conditions under which the meaning of the sign can be represented.

Attention-Based Argumentation Mining

This paper is intended to make a breakthrough in argumentation mining field. Current trends in argumentation mining research use handcrafted features and traditional machine learning (e.g., support vector machine). We worked on two tasks: identifying argument components and recognising insufficiently supported arguments. We utilise deep learning approach and implement attention mechanism on top of it to gain the best result. We do also implement Hierarchical Attention Network (HAN) in this task. HAN is a neural network that gives attention to two levels, which are word-level and sentence-level. Deep learning with attention mechanism models can achieve better result compared with other deep learning methods. This paper also proves that on research task with hierarchically-structured data, HAN will perform remarkably well. We do present our result on using XGBoost instead of a regular non-ensemble classifier as well.