Measuring the Counter/Assumption Model's Effect On
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
MEASURING THE COUNTER/ASSUMPTION MODEL'S EFFECT ON ARGUMENTATION QUALITY A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Computer Science by Evan Ovadia December 2013 c 2013 Evan Ovadia ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP TITLE: Measuring the Counter/Assumption Model's Effect on Argumentation Quality AUTHOR: Evan Ovadia DATE SUBMITTED: December 2013 COMMITTEE CHAIR: Franz Kurfess, Ph.D. Professor of Computer Science COMMITTEE MEMBER: Aaron Keen, Ph.D. Professor of Computer Science COMMITTEE MEMBER: John Patrick, Ed.D. Professor of Communication Studies iii ABSTRACT Measuring the Counter/Assumption Model's Effect on Argumentation Quality Evan Ovadia This thesis presents a new platform called See the Reason, built upon a tree- structured argumentation model called the Counter/Assumption model. In the Counter/Assumption model, a topic is posted first, then under that topic, reasons for and against, and for each reason, counterarguments, and for any counterargu- ment, more counterarguments. The model enables us to systematically determine whether a claim is \tentatively true" or \tentatively false," in an effort to motivate people to make their side's claims tentatively true and the opposing side's claims tentatively false, thus encouraging conflict. Research suggests that debates with more conflict are better, so this thesis investigates whether Counter/Assumption model encourages better debates. In this thesis, we have students debate on See the Reason and the closest existing platform, CreateDebate. We measure the number of uncaught bad ar- guments, the user satisfaction, and how far into the Interaction Analysis Model the debates progress. We find promising evidence that See the Reason progresses further into the IAM and encourages more logical debates, but sacrifices usability at the same time. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables xii List of Figures xiii 1 Introduction1 1.1 Indices of Claims...........................1 1.2 The Counter/Assumption Model..................4 1.3 Question...............................4 2 Previous Work5 2.1 Analyzing Discussion.........................5 2.2 Threaded Discussion.........................7 2.2.1 Drawbacks.........................9 2.3 Staged Threaded Discussion..................... 10 2.4 Scaffolded Threaded Discussion................... 11 2.4.1 Scaffolding Reduces Overall Discussion.......... 12 2.4.2 Remaining Weakness in Threaded Discussion...... 13 2.5 Wikis................................. 14 2.6 Trees................................. 15 2.7 Scaffolded Trees........................... 17 2.8 Graphs................................ 19 2.8.1 Complexity......................... 20 2.9 Conflict................................ 22 3 The Counter/Assumption Model 24 3.1 Objective Claims, Counters, Claim Status............. 24 3.2 Assumptions............................. 28 3.3 Subjective Claims.......................... 30 3.4 In Toulmin's Terms......................... 32 3.5 Potential Benefits and Drawbacks.................. 33 4 See the Reason Features 35 4.1 Changes to the Counter/Assumption Model............ 35 4.2 Guide Mode............................. 35 v 4.2.1 Sidebar........................... 38 4.2.2 Helpables.......................... 38 4.2.3 Participate Hints...................... 39 4.2.4 Address Counter Wizard................. 41 4.3 Ordering............................... 43 4.4 Citations and Formatting...................... 44 4.5 Subscriptions............................. 44 4.6 Next Unread Link.......................... 46 4.7 View Modes............................. 46 4.8 Compact Mode............................ 46 4.9 Collapsing Subtrees......................... 48 4.10 Real-time Updating......................... 48 5 Experiment 51 5.1 Choice to compare to CreateDebate................ 51 5.2 Experiment Questions and Hypotheses............... 51 5.2.1 Does See the Reason motivate users to participate more than CreateDebate?.................... 52 5.2.2 Are there fewer uncaught \bad arguments" in See the Reason?........................... 52 5.2.3 Does See the Reason Progress Further into the IAM than CreateDebate?....................... 52 5.2.4 Is See the Reason as Easy to Use as CreateDebate?... 53 5.3 Method................................ 53 5.4 Weaknesses.............................. 56 5.4.1 Scale of Experiment.................... 56 5.4.2 Judges........................... 56 5.4.3 Difference from Online Behaviors............. 57 5.4.4 Difference in Platforms Besides Underlying Models... 58 5.4.5 Bias towards See the Reason............... 58 5.5 Results................................ 58 5.5.1 Summary of Results.................... 60 vi 5.6 Discussion............................... 60 5.6.1 Does See the Reason motivate users to participate more than CreateDebate?.................... 62 5.6.2 Are there fewer uncaught \bad arguments" in See the Reason?........................... 62 5.6.3 Does See the Reason Progress Further into the IAM than CreateDebate?....................... 62 5.6.4 Is See the Reason as Easy to Use as CreateDebate?... 63 6 Conclusion 64 6.1 Future Work............................. 64 6.1.1 Future Experiments.................... 64 6.1.2 Comparison with Calculemus and TruthMapping.... 65 Bibliography 66 Appendix A Other Systems 72 Appendix B Helpables' Contents 75 B.1 Certainty............................... 75 B.2 \post a reason for" link....................... 76 B.3 \post a reason against" link..................... 76 B.4 Upvote................................ 77 B.5 Objective Claim........................... 78 B.6 Subjective Claim........................... 79 B.7 Assumption.............................. 79 B.8 Claim Judgments........................... 80 B.8.1 \tentatively true" icon................... 80 B.8.2 \tentatively false" icon................... 80 B.8.3 \no judgment" icon.................... 80 B.9 New Claim Form........................... 81 B.9.1 assumption......................... 81 B.9.2 \personal opinion"..................... 81 B.9.3 \based on unknown fact"................. 82 B.9.4 \not true beyond a reasonable doubt".......... 83 vii B.9.5 \not a claim"........................ 83 B.9.6 \factually incorrect".................... 84 B.9.7 \bad logic / fallacy".................... 84 B.9.8 \not a reason for the root"................ 85 B.9.9 \not a reason against the root".............. 85 B.9.10 \doesn't counter parent"................. 85 B.9.11 \contradicts assumption"................. 86 B.9.12 \defends assumption"................... 86 B.9.13 \citation needed"...................... 86 B.9.14 \bad citation"....................... 86 B.9.15 \cherrypicking"....................... 86 B.9.16 “flying dutchman"..................... 87 B.9.17 \other"........................... 87 B.10 Claim Menu............................. 88 B.10.1 \hide" link......................... 88 B.10.2 \subscribe" link...................... 88 B.10.3 \unsubscribe" link..................... 88 B.10.4 permalink.......................... 88 B.10.5 \forward" link....................... 89 B.10.6 “flag inappropriate" link.................. 89 B.10.7 “flag duplicate" link.................... 90 Appendix C Sidebar 91 Appendix D Certainty Measure 94 D.0.8 Defining Certainty Recursively.............. 96 D.0.9 Avoiding Reddit Hivemind Syndrome.......... 97 Appendix E Common Questions 100 E.1 How do you know if something is true beyond a reasonable doubt? 100 E.2 How will you enforce that edits do not change the core meaning of claims?............................... 100 Appendix F Evolution of a Tree 102 viii Appendix G The Bias Measure 105 Appendix H Reddit Hivemind Syndrome 106 Appendix I Making See the Reason 109 I.1 Assumptions............................. 109 I.2 Standard of Truth.......................... 109 I.3 Supports for Objective Claims................... 109 I.4 Editing................................ 112 I.5 Experiment A: the 508 experiment................. 113 I.6 Choosing Languages and Systems.................. 116 I.6.1 Database.......................... 116 I.6.2 PHP vs Java........................ 118 I.6.3 Model............................ 119 I.6.4 Server............................ 124 I.6.5 Communication...................... 126 I.6.6 Front-end.......................... 130 I.7 Users were Lost and Confused.................... 136 I.8 Single Branch vs Multi Branch................... 137 I.9 Choosing a New Name........................ 139 I.10 Ordering Algorithm......................... 140 I.11 Experiment B............................. 142 I.11.1 The Site was Confusing.................. 142 I.11.2 Single-Branch Tree View was Hard to Navigate..... 144 I.11.3 Users Liked the For and Against Columns........ 145 I.11.4 Users Liked the Helpables................. 146 I.11.5 Users Didn't Like Having to Expand to See Claims... 146 I.11.6 The Page was too Compact................ 148 I.11.7 Users Wanted to Support Objective Claims....... 148 I.11.8 Users Wanted to Edit and Delete Claims......... 149 I.11.9 Users were Nervous of Posting Duplicates........ 149 I.11.10 Topics were too Broad................... 150 ix I.11.11 Explanations were Verbose................ 151 I.11.12 Users Didn't Understand \Countered".......... 151 I.11.13 Users Didn't Understand Assumptions.......... 151 I.11.14 The COW was Confusing................. 152 I.11.15 Users Didn't Understand Objective vs Subjective.... 152 I.11.16 Other Good Suggestions.................