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
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/220776

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