Argumentation Dec 2021 Open Access

Managing the Complexity of Dialogues in Context: A Data-Driven Discovery Method for Dialectical Reply Structures

Olena Yaskorska-Shah

Abstract

AbstractCurrent formal dialectical models postulate normative rules that enable discussants to conduct dialogical interactions without committing fallacies. Though the rules for conducting a dialogue are supposed to apply to interactions between actual arguers, they are without exception theoretically motivated. This creates a gap between model and reality, because dialogue participants typically leave important content-related elements implicit. Therefore, analysts cannot readily relate normative rules to actual debates in ways that will be empirically confirmable. This paper details a new, data-driven method for describing discussants’ actual reply structures, wherein corpus studies serve to acknowledge the complexity of natural argumentation (itself understood as a function of context). Rather than refer exclusively to propositional content as an indicator of arguing pro/contra a given claim, the proposed approach to dialogue structure tracks the sequence of dialogical moves itself. This arguably improves the applicability of theoretical dialectical models to empirical data, and thus advances the study of dialogue systems.

Journal
Argumentation
Published
2021-12-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-020-09543-x
CompPile
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
argument empirical research
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Araszkiewicz et al. (2024)
    The Structure of Arguments from Deontic Authority and How to Successfully Attack Them
    Argumentation

References (38) · 5 in this index

  1. Bench-Capon, T.J. 1998. Specification and implementation of Toulmin dialogue game. In Proceedings of JURIX 19…
  2. Black, E., and A. Hunter. 2012. Executable logic for dialogical argumentation. Proceedings of ECAI 15–20.
  3. Bowden, K.K., Oraby, S., Misra, A., Wu, J., Lukin, S., and Walker, M., 2019. Data-driven dialogue systems for…
     ↗
  4. Budzynska, K., and Reed, C., 2011. Whence inference? University of Dundee Technical Report.
  5. Budzynska, K., M. Janier, J. Kang, C Reed, P. Saint-Dizier, M. Stede, and O. Yaskorska, 2014. Towards argumen…
Show all 38 →
  1. Budzynska, K., M. Janier, S. Reed, and P. Dizier. 2013. Towards extraction of dialogical arguments. Proceedin…
  2. Condon, S.L., and C.G. Cech. 1996. Functional comparisons of face-to-face and computer-mediated decision maki…
     ↗
  3. Core, M.G., and J. Allen. 1997. Coding dialogues with the damsl annotation sheme. In Working notes: AAAI fall…
  4. BJ Grosz (1986)
    Grosz, B.J. 1986. Attentions, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics 12 (3): 1…
    Computational Linguistics
  5. C Hamblin (1970)
    Fallacies
  6. Janier, M., and O. Yaskorska. 2016. Applying Inference Anchoring Theory for the analysis of dialogue structur…
  7. Janier, M., J. Lawrence, and C. Reed. 2014. Ova+: an argument analysis interface. Proceedings of the fifth in…
  8. Kacprzak et al. (2014)
    Dialogue Protocols for Formal Fallacies
    Argumentation
  9. Krabbe et al. (2011)
    The Ways of Criticism
    Argumentation
  10. Lawrence, J., Bex, F., and Reed, C., 2012. Dialogues on the argument web: Mixed initiative argumentation with…
  11. Locher, M.A., and S.L. Graham. 2010. Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics. In Interpersonal pragmatics. B…
     ↗
  12. J Mackenzie (1979)
    Mackenzie, J. 1979. Question begging in non-cumulative systems. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8: 117–133.
    Journal of Philosophical Logic  ↗
  13. Parsons, S., and N.R. Jennings. 1996. Negotiation through argumentation—a preliminary report. Proceedings of …
  14. Parsons, S., P. McBurney, and M. Wooldridge. 2003. The mechanics of some formal inter-agent dialogues. Worksh…
     ↗
  15. H Prakken (2006)
    Prakken, H. 2006. Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21: 163–188.
    The Knowledge Engineering Review  ↗
  16. Reed, C., and Budzynska K., 2011. How dialogues create arguments. Proceedings of the 7th conference on argume…
  17. Reed, C., and D. Walton. 2007. Argumentation schemes in dialogue. Diessensus and the search of common ground …
  18. Reed, C., and S. Wells. 2007. Dialogical argument as an interface to complex debates. IEEE Intelligent System…
     ↗
  19. Reed et al. (2005)
    Translating Toulmin Diagrams: Theory Neutrality in Argument Representation
    Argumentation
  20. Schroeder, M., D.A. Plewe, and A. Raab. 1998. Ultima ratio: Should Hamlet kill Claudius? Agents 267–274.
  21. JR Searle (1979)
    Expression and meaning. Studies in the theory of speech acts
     ↗
  22. Sutton, S., B. Hansen, T. Lander, D.G. Novick, and R. Cole. 1995. Evaluating the effectiveness of dialogue fo…
  23. S Toulmin (1958)
    The uses of argument
  24. van Eemeren, F., and R. Grootendorst. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical appr…
     ↗
  25. Visser (2017)
    Speech Acts in a Dialogue Game Formalisation of Critical Discussion
    Argumentation
  26. Walton (1989)
    Dialogue theory for critical thinking
    Argumentation
  27. D Walton (2003)
    Walton, D. 2003. The interrogation as a type of dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1771–18024.
    Journal of Pragmatics  ↗
  28. Walton, D. 2007. Dialog theory for critical argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishers.
     ↗
  29. D Walton (1995)
    Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning
  30. S Wells (2012)
    Wells, S., and C. Reed. 2012. A domain specific language for describing diverse systems of dialogue. Journal …
    Journal of Applied Logic  ↗
  31. J Woods (1978)
    Woods, J., and D. Walton. 1978. Arresting circles in formal dialogues. Journal of Philosophical Logic 7: 73–90.
    Journal of Philosophical Logic  ↗
  32. Yaskorska, O. (2014) Recognising argumentation in dialogical context. In The eighth conference of the interna…
  33. O Yaskorska (2013)
    Yaskorska, O., K. Budzyńska, and M. Kacprzak. 2013. Proving propositional tautologies in a natural dialogue. …
    Fundamenta Informaticae  ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 2 View in citation network → Build reading path →

Related Articles

  1. Argumentation Aug 2025
    Informal Formative Assessment in Argumentation-Based Science Education: A Micro-Analytic Investigation of Teachers’ Pedagogical Practices ↗
    Metin Sardag; Gultekin Cakmakci
    discourse analysis writing pedagogy argument assessment professional writing empirical research qualitative research
  2. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication Jun 2025
    Charting the Course of Stance Construction in Container Shipping: An Empirical Study of COSCO Shipping and Maersk ↗
    Shijie Liu; Minggui Duan; Yan Zhang
    discourse analysis argument professional writing empirical research quantitative research
  3. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly May 2025
    Health Meets Influence: Customizing Social Media Messages for Effective Fitness Branding ↗
    Daneshwar Sharma; Manoj Kumar Mishra; Sunil Kumar
    argument empirical research social media
  4. Assessing Writing Apr 2025
    The influence of working memory and proficiency on phraseological growth: A longitudinal study of adjective-noun combinations in Chinese EFL learners’ argumentative writing ↗
    Lujie Zheng; Sheena Kaur; Azlin Zaiti Zainal
    argument empirical research
  5. Assessing Writing Apr 2025
    Designing a rating scale for an integrated reading-writing test: A needs-oriented approach ↗
    Aynur Ismayilli Karakoҫ; Peter Gu; Rachael Ruegg
    first-year composition argument assessment empirical research multimodality literacy studies