Abstract
Mining social media for opinions is important to governments and businesses. Current approaches focus on sentiment and opinion detection. Yet, people also justify their views, giving arguments. Understanding arguments in social media would yield richer knowledge about the views of individuals and collectives. Extracting arguments from social media is difficult. Messages appear to lack indicators for argument, document structure, or inter-document relationships. In social media, lexical variety, alternative spellings, multiple languages, and alternative punctuation are common. Social media also encompasses numerous genres. These aspects can confound the extraction of well-formed knowledge bases of argument. We chart out the various aspects in order to isolate them for further analysis and processing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3), 429–448 (2003)
Bondarenko, A., Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 93, 63–101 (1997)
Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artificial Intelligence 171(5-6), 286–310 (2007)
Chen, C., Ibekwe-Sanjuan, F., Juan, E.S., Weaver, C.: Visual analysis of conflicting opinions. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology, VAST (2006)
de Moor, A., Efimova, L.: An argumentation analysis of weblog conversations. In: The 9th International Working Conference on the Language-Action Perspective on Communication Modelling (LAP 2004), Rutgers University, pp. 2–3 (2004)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2), 321–357 (1995)
Lu, Y., Zhai, C., Sundaresan, N.: Rated aspect summarization of short comments. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2009 (2009)
Titov, I., McDonald, R.: Modeling online reviews with multi-grain topic models. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2008 (2008)
Walker, M.A., Anand, P., Abbott, R., Tree, J.E.F., Martell, C., King, J.: That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate. Decision Support Sciences (2011)
Walton, D.: Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Erlbaum, N.J. (1996)
Walton, D.N.: Commitment in dialogue. State University of New York Press, Albany (1995)
Wyner, A., Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T.: A functional perspective on argumentation schemes. In: Proceedings of Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, ArgMAS 2012 (2012)
Wyner, A., Schneider, J., Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T.: Semi-automated argumentative analysis of online product reviews. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2012 (2012)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Schneider, J., Davis, B., Wyner, A. (2012). Dimensions of Argumentation in Social Media. In: ten Teije, A., et al. Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. EKAW 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7603. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33876-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33876-2_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33875-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33876-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)