Journal
ACM TRANSACTIONS ON INTERNET TECHNOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages -Publisher
ASSOC COMPUTING MACHINERY
DOI: 10.1145/3032989
Keywords
Argument; argumentation; corpus; dialogue; sensemaking; engagement; analytics
Funding
- EPSRC in the UK [EP/N014871/1]
- Innovate UK [101777]
- National Science Foundation in the USA [1314778]
- EPSRC [EP/N014871/1] Funding Source: UKRI
- Innovate UK [101777] Funding Source: UKRI
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/N014871/1] Funding Source: researchfish
- Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
- Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems [1314778] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Governments around the world are increasingly utilising online platforms and social media to engage with, and ascertain the opinions of, their citizens. Whilst policy makers could potentially benefit from such enormous feedback from society, they first face the challenge of making sense out of the large volumes of data produced. In this article, we show how the analysis of argumentative and dialogical structures allows for the principled identification of those issues that are central, controversial, or popular in an online corpus of debates. Although areas such as controversy mining work towards identifying issues that are a source of disagreement, by looking at the deeper argumentative structure, we show that a much richer understanding can be obtained. We provide results from using a pipeline of argument-mining techniques on the debate corpus, showing that the accuracy obtained is sufficient to automatically identify those issues that are key to the discussion, attracting proportionately more support than others, and those that are divisive, attracting proportionately more conflicting viewpoints.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available