Four Ways to Evaluate Arguments According to Agent Engagement
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper we are interested in the computational and formal analysis of the persuasive impact that an argument can have on a human. We present a preliminary account of the listener mental process (representation and reasoning mechanisms of the dual process cognitive model) as well as her engagement based on the ELM model. This engagement determines the reasoning process that the agent will adopt in order to evaluate and incorporate the uttered argument.
منابع مشابه
Investigation of the Relationship between Self-determined Motivation and Work Engagement of Faculty Members of Iran University of Medical Sciences
Background and Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between self-determined motivation and work engagement of faculty members of Iran University of Medical Sciences. Materials and Methods: This descriptive and correlational study was performed on faculty members of Iran University of Medical Sciences in four schools of health, medicine, paraclinical and behavioral sciences,...
متن کاملFunds of Knowledge: An Underrated Tool for School Literacy and Student Engagement
This chief aim of this paper is to explore the concept of Funds of Knowledge (FOK) in relation to Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT). This study unveils the basic tenets of FOK from the lens of activity theory and analyzes pertinent discoveries, key concepts, and scholars’ arguments relating to FOK and literacy development over time. The major purpose of this study is to expand the pers...
متن کاملCharacteristics of an Islamic View of Cyber-Ethics
The current Cyber-ethics in Western societies (and its followers in other societies) have been compiled based on secularist presupposition. This presupposition has different principles in comparison with the Islamic attitude which can lead one to take a different approach toward ethical problems. This paper is an attempt to propose principles of Islamic cyber-ethics upon which we can prepare an...
متن کاملEvaluating arguments from the reaction of the audience
In studying how lay people evaluate arguments, psychologists have typically focused on logical form and content. This emphasis has masked an important yet underappreciated aspect of everyday argument evaluation: social cues to argument strength. Here we focus on the ways in which observers evaluate arguments by the reaction they evoke in an audience. This type of evaluation is likely to occur e...
متن کاملTwo kinds of reasoning.
According to one view of reasoning, people can evaluate arguments in at least two qualitatively different ways: in terms of their deductive correctness and in terms of their inductive strength. According to a second view, assessments of both correctness and strength are a function of an argument's position on a single psychological continuum (e.g., subjective conditional probability). A deducti...
متن کامل