Abstract

AbstractThis paper introduces moral argument analytics, a technology that provides insights into the use of moral arguments in discourse. We analyse five socio-political corpora of argument annotated data from offline and online discussions, totalling 240k words with 9k arguments, with an average annotation accuracy of 78%. Using a lexicon-based method, we automatically annotate these arguments with moral foundations, achieving an estimated accuracy of 83%. Quantitative analysis allows us to observe statistical patterns and trends in the use of moral arguments, whereas qualitative analysis enables us to understand and explain the communication strategies in the use of moral arguments in different settings. For instance, supporting arguments often rely on Loyalty and Authority, while attacking arguments use Care. We find that online discussions exhibit a greater diversity of moral foundations and a higher negative valence of moral arguments. Online arguers often rely more on Harm rather than Care, Degradation rather than Sanctity. These insights have significant implications for AI applications, particularly in understanding and predicting human and machine moral behaviours. This work contributes to the construction of more convincing messages and the detection of harmful or biased AI-generated synthetic content.

Journal
Argumentation
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-024-09636-x
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (2)

  1. Argumentation
  2. Argumentation
Also cites 58 works outside this index ↓
  1. Araque, O., L. Gatti, and K. Kalimeri. 2020. Moral strength: Exploiting a moral lexicon and embedding similar…
    Knowledge-Based Systems  
  2. Asprino, L., L. Bulla, S. De Giorgis, A. Gangemi, L. Marinucci, and M. Mongiovì. 2022. Uncovering values: det…
  3. Atari, M., M.R. Mehl, J. Graham, J. Doris, N. Schwarz, A.M. Davani, A. Omrani, B. Kennedy, E. Gonzalez, N. Ja…
    Scientific Reports  
  4. Bench-Capon, T.J.M. 2003. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journa…
    Journal of Logic and Computation  
  5. Bench-Capon, T., and K. Atkinson. 2009. Abstract argumentation and values. Argumentation in artificial intell…
  6. Brady, W.J., J.A. Wills, J.T. Jost, J.A. Tucker, and J.J. Van Bavel. 2017. Emotion shapes the diffusion of mo…
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America  
  7. Clifford, S., and J. Jerit. 2013. How words do the work of politics: Moral foundations theory and the debate …
    The Journal of Politics  
  8. Duthie, R., and K. Budzynska. 2018. A Deep Modular RNN Approach for Ethos Mining, Proceedings of the Twenty-S…
  9. Feinberg, M., and R. Willer. 2015. From gulf to bridge: When do moral arguments facilitate political influenc…
    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin  
  10. Frank, D.A. 2004. Argumentation studies in the wake of the new rhetoric. Argumentation and Advocacy 40: 267–2…
    Argumentation and Advocacy  
  11. Frimmer, J. 2019. Moral foundations dictionary 2.0. OSF. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EZN37.
  12. Garten, J., R. Boghrati, J. Hoover, K.M. Johnson, and M. Dehghani. 2016. Morality between the lines: Detectin…
  13. Garten, J., J. Hoover, K.M. Johnson, R. Boghrati, C. Iskiwitch, and M. Dehghani. 2018. Dictionaries and distr…
    Behavior Research Methods  
  14. González-Santos, C., M.A. Vega-Rodríguez, C.J. Pérez, J.M. López-Muñoz, and I. Martínez-Sarriegui. 2023. Auto…
    Knowledge-Based Systems  
  15. Graham, J., J. Haidt, and B.A. Nosek. 2009. Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral founda…
    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology  
  16. Graham, J., B.A. Nosek, J. Haidt, R. Iyer, S. Koleva, and P.H. Ditto. 2011. Mapping the moral domain. Journal…
    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology  
  17. Graham, J., B.A. Nosek, and J. Haidt. 2012. The moral stereotypes of liberals and conservatives: Exaggeration…
    PLoS ONE  
  18. Haidt, J. 2007. The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science 316 (5827): 998–1002. https://doi.org/10.1126/…
    Science  
  19. Haidt, J., and J. Graham. 2007. When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liber…
    Social Justice Research  
  20. Haidt, J., and C. Joseph. 2004. Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variab…
    Daedalus  
  21. Hansen, H.V., and D.N. Walton. 2013. Argument kinds and argument roles in the Ontario provincial election, 20…
    Journal of Argumentation Context  
  22. Moral thinking
  23. Hatemi, P., C. Crabtree, and K. Smith. 2019. Ideology justifies morality: Political beliefs predict moral fou…
    American Journal of Political Science  
  24. Hoover, J., G. Portillo-Wightman, Y. Leigh, S. Havaldar, A.M. Davani, Y. Lin, Kennedy M. Brendanand, Kamel Z.…
    Social Psychological and Personality Science  
  25. Hopp, F.R., J.T. Fisher, D. Cornell, R. Huskey, and R. Weber. 2021. The extended moral foundations dictionary…
    Behavior Research Methods  
  26. Huang, X., A. Wormley, and A. Cohen. 2022. Learning to adapt domain shifts of moral values via instance weigh…
  27. Johnson, K., and D. Goldwasser. 2018. Classification of moral foundations in microblog political discourse. I…
  28. Johnson, K., and D. Goldwasser. 2019. Modeling behavioral aspects of social media discourse for moral classif…
  29. Kaur, R., and K. Sasahara. 2016. Quantifying moral foundations from various topics on twitter conversations. …
  30. Koszowy, M., and D. Walton. 2019. Epistemic and deontic authority in the argumentum ad verecundiam. Pragmatic…
    Pragmatics and Society  
  31. Lawrence, J., R. Duthie, K. Budzynska, and C. Reed. 2016. Argument analytics. In Computational models of argu…
  32. Lawrence, J., M. Snaith, B. Konat, K. Budzynska, and C. Reed. 2017. Debating technology for dialogical argume…
    ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT)  
  33. Leidner, B., P. Kardos, and E. Castano. 2018. The effects of moral and pragmatic arguments against torture on…
    Political Psychology  
  34. Lin, Y., J. Hoover, G. Portillo-Wightman, C. Park, M. Dehghani, and H. Ji. 2020. Acquiring background knowled…
  35. Liscio, E., A. Dondera, A. Geadau, C. Jonker, and P. Murukannaiah. 2022 Cross-domain classification of moral …
  36. Luttrell, A., A. Philipp-Muller, and R.E. Petty. 2019. Challenging moral attitudes with moral messages. Psych…
    Psychological Science  
  37. McAdams, D.P., M. Farber, E. Albaugh, J. Daniels, R.L. Logan, and B. Olson. 2008. Family metaphors and moral …
    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology  
  38. Pacheco, M.L., T. Islam, M. Mahajan, A. Shor, M. Yin, L. Ungar, and D. Goldwasser. 2022. A holistic framework…
  39. Pavan, M.C., V.G.D. Santos, A.G. Lan, J. Martins, W.R. Santos, C. Deutsch, P.B. Costa, F.C. Hsieh, and I. Par…
    IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing  
  40. Justice, law, and argument. Synthese library
  41. Rai, T., and A. Fiske. 2011. Moral psychology is relationship regulation: Moral motives for unity, hierarchy,…
    Psychological Review  
  42. Rezapour, R., S.H. Shah, J. Diesner. 2019. Enhancing the measurement of social effects by capturing morality.…
  43. Roy, S., M.L. Pacheco, and D. Goldwasser. 2021. Identifying morality frames in political tweets using relatio…
  44. Short, E., T. Stanley, M. Baldwin, and G.G. Scott. 2015. Behaving badly online: Establishing norms of unaccep…
    Studies in Media and Communication  
  45. Stewart, B.D., and D.S. Morris. 2021. Moving morality beyond the in-group: Liberals and conservatives show di…
    Frontiers in Psychology  
  46. Stranisci, M., M. De Leonardis, C. Bosco, and V. Patti. 2021. The expression of moral values in the twitter d…
    Italian Journal of Computational Linguistics  
  47. Strimling, P., I. Vartanova, F. Jansson, K. Eriksson, and K. Eriksson. 2019. The connection between moral pos…
    Nature Human Behaviour  
  48. Suler, J. 2005. Contemporary media forum: The online disinhibition effect. International Journal of Applied P…
    International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies  
  49. Sylwester, K., and M. Purver. 2015. Twitter language use reflects psychological differences between democrats…
    PLoS ONE  
  50. Täuber, S., and M. van Zomeren. 2013. Outrage towards whom? Threats to moral group status impede striving to …
    European Journal of Social Psychology  
  51. Teernstra, L., P. van der Putten, N.E. Noordegraaf-Eelens, and F. Verbeek. 2016. The morality machine: Tracki…
  52. Van Bavel, J.J., C.E. Robertson, K. del Rosario, J. Rasmussen, and S. Rathje. 2023. Social media and morality…
    Annual Review of Psychology  
  53. Visser, J., B. Konat, R. Duthie, M. Koszowy, K. Budzynska, and C. Reed. 2020. Argumentation in the 2016 US pr…
    Language Resources and Evaluation  
  54. Voelkel, J.G., and M. Feinberg. 2018. Morally reframed arguments can affect support for political candidates.…
    Social Psychological and Personality Science  
  55. Volkova, S., K. Shaffer, J.Y. Jang, N. Hodas. 2017. Separating facts from fiction: Linguistic models to class…
  56. Walton, D., and H. Hansen. 2013. Arguments from fairness and misplaced priorities in political argumentation.…
    Journal of Politics and Law  
  57. Walton, D., and F. Macagno. 2015. A classification system for argumentation schemes. Argument and Computation…
    Argument and Computation  
  58. Argumentation schemes