Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength
- Autores
- Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian; Freidin, Esteban
- Año de publicación
- 2023
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- We reported a series of experiments carried out to confront the underlying intuitions of value-based argumentation frameworks (VAFs) with the intuitions of ordinary people. Our goal was twofold. On the one hand, we intended to test VAF as a descriptive theory of human argument evaluations. On the other, we aimed to gain new insights from empirical data that could serve to improve VAF as a normative model. The experiments showed that people's acceptance of arguments deviates from VAF's semantics and is rather correlated with the importance given to the promoted values, independently of the perceptions of argument interactions through attacks and defeats. Furthermore, arguments were often perceived as promoting more than one value with different relative strengths. Individuals' analyses of scenarios were also affected by external factors such as biases and arguments not explicit in the framework. Finally, we confirmed that objective acceptance, that is, the acceptance of arguments under any order of the values, was not a frequent behavior. Instead, participants tended to accept only the arguments that promoted the values they subscribe.
Fil: Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; Argentina
Fil: Freidin, Esteban. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; Argentina - Materia
-
ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS
ARGUMENTATION SEMANTICS
EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY
HUMAN ARGUMENTATION
VALUE-BASED ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/220776
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_78994d8086150f08c613edb3c130ce75 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/220776 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strengthBodanza, Gustavo AdrianFreidin, EstebanARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKSARGUMENTATION SEMANTICSEXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGYHUMAN ARGUMENTATIONVALUE-BASED ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKShttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6We reported a series of experiments carried out to confront the underlying intuitions of value-based argumentation frameworks (VAFs) with the intuitions of ordinary people. Our goal was twofold. On the one hand, we intended to test VAF as a descriptive theory of human argument evaluations. On the other, we aimed to gain new insights from empirical data that could serve to improve VAF as a normative model. The experiments showed that people's acceptance of arguments deviates from VAF's semantics and is rather correlated with the importance given to the promoted values, independently of the perceptions of argument interactions through attacks and defeats. Furthermore, arguments were often perceived as promoting more than one value with different relative strengths. Individuals' analyses of scenarios were also affected by external factors such as biases and arguments not explicit in the framework. Finally, we confirmed that objective acceptance, that is, the acceptance of arguments under any order of the values, was not a frequent behavior. Instead, participants tended to accept only the arguments that promoted the values they subscribe.Fil: Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; ArgentinaFil: Freidin, Esteban. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; ArgentinaIOS Press2023-05info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/220776Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian; Freidin, Esteban; Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength; IOS Press; Argument & Computation; 14; 3; 5-2023; 247-2731946-21661946-2174CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.medra.org/servlet/aliasResolver?alias=iospress&doi=10.3233/AAC-220008info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.3233/AAC-220008info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-10-15T15:14:03Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/220776instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-10-15 15:14:04.052CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength |
title |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength |
spellingShingle |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS ARGUMENTATION SEMANTICS EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY HUMAN ARGUMENTATION VALUE-BASED ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS |
title_short |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength |
title_full |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength |
title_fullStr |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength |
title_full_unstemmed |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength |
title_sort |
Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian Freidin, Esteban |
author |
Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian |
author_facet |
Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian Freidin, Esteban |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Freidin, Esteban |
author2_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS ARGUMENTATION SEMANTICS EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY HUMAN ARGUMENTATION VALUE-BASED ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS |
topic |
ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS ARGUMENTATION SEMANTICS EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY HUMAN ARGUMENTATION VALUE-BASED ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
We reported a series of experiments carried out to confront the underlying intuitions of value-based argumentation frameworks (VAFs) with the intuitions of ordinary people. Our goal was twofold. On the one hand, we intended to test VAF as a descriptive theory of human argument evaluations. On the other, we aimed to gain new insights from empirical data that could serve to improve VAF as a normative model. The experiments showed that people's acceptance of arguments deviates from VAF's semantics and is rather correlated with the importance given to the promoted values, independently of the perceptions of argument interactions through attacks and defeats. Furthermore, arguments were often perceived as promoting more than one value with different relative strengths. Individuals' analyses of scenarios were also affected by external factors such as biases and arguments not explicit in the framework. Finally, we confirmed that objective acceptance, that is, the acceptance of arguments under any order of the values, was not a frequent behavior. Instead, participants tended to accept only the arguments that promoted the values they subscribe. Fil: Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; Argentina Fil: Freidin, Esteban. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; Argentina |
description |
We reported a series of experiments carried out to confront the underlying intuitions of value-based argumentation frameworks (VAFs) with the intuitions of ordinary people. Our goal was twofold. On the one hand, we intended to test VAF as a descriptive theory of human argument evaluations. On the other, we aimed to gain new insights from empirical data that could serve to improve VAF as a normative model. The experiments showed that people's acceptance of arguments deviates from VAF's semantics and is rather correlated with the importance given to the promoted values, independently of the perceptions of argument interactions through attacks and defeats. Furthermore, arguments were often perceived as promoting more than one value with different relative strengths. Individuals' analyses of scenarios were also affected by external factors such as biases and arguments not explicit in the framework. Finally, we confirmed that objective acceptance, that is, the acceptance of arguments under any order of the values, was not a frequent behavior. Instead, participants tended to accept only the arguments that promoted the values they subscribe. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-05 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/220776 Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian; Freidin, Esteban; Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength; IOS Press; Argument & Computation; 14; 3; 5-2023; 247-273 1946-2166 1946-2174 CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/220776 |
identifier_str_mv |
Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian; Freidin, Esteban; Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength; IOS Press; Argument & Computation; 14; 3; 5-2023; 247-273 1946-2166 1946-2174 CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.medra.org/servlet/aliasResolver?alias=iospress&doi=10.3233/AAC-220008 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.3233/AAC-220008 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
IOS Press |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
IOS Press |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1846083287712268288 |
score |
13.22299 |