O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.
A Study of the Impact of
Persuasive Argumentation in
Political Debates
Dr. Amparo E. Cano-Basave and Dr.Yulan He
1
Objective
Study whether persuasive cues and persuasive argumentations can
be used as predictors of speakers’ influence ran...
Argumentation
Claim:
• Controversial statement to be judge true or false
• Not accepted by an audience without additional ...
Argumentation, Claim and Premise Example
“[People aren’t investing in America] [because this president has made
America a ...
Persuasive language
perceptions
Persuasion focuses on language cues aiming at: shaping, reinforcing and
changing a respons...
Persuasive Language, Example
“I’m convinced that part of the divide that we’re experiencing in the
United States, which is...
NLP in Political text
Rhetoric
• Detecting ideological positions (Sim et al., 2013)
• Predicting voting patterns (Thomas e...
Contributions
We propose to:
• Persuasive argumentationas a feature for ranking candidates’ influence in
political debates...
Datasets
Persuasive essays Corpus (Stab & Gurevych 2014)
• 90 essays comprising1,673 sentences
• Class-level argument comp...
Datasets
Presidential Political Debates Corpus
Manual transcripts of debates for the Republican party presidential primary...
Semantic Frames
Descriptionof context in which a word sense is used.
FrameNet (Baker et al., 1998)2:
- Over 1000 patterns ...
Semantic Frames as Pivoting Features
Persuasive
Essays(PE)
Claim
.
.
Attack
Relations
Semantic Frames
(SF)
Intentionality ...
Semantic Frames as Pivoting Features
Speaker u Entry in
a Debate d
Semantic Frames
(SF)
Intentionality act
Cause Change
.....
Semantic Frames an Argument Types
Table 2. Top semantic frames for each argumentationtype
Argument
Type
Top 5 Semantic Fra...
Semantic Frames as Pivoting Features
Arg.
Type
Sentence Semantic Frames
Claim If we can turn Syria and Lebanon
away from I...
Influence Ranking in Political Debates
Influence index (Prabhakaranet al., 2013) calculated based on a speaker’s
relative ...
Influence Ranking Approach
Let D denote a debate with a set of speakers UD={u1,..,un} and influence indexes
P(ui) for 1< i...
Features for each speaker
External EmotionCues
- Applause (APL)
- Booing (BOO)
- Laughs (LAU)
- Crosstalk(CRO)
Persuasiven...
Features for each speaker
Content Features Baselines for Influence Ranking (Prabhakaranet al., 2013)
- Unigrams (UG)
- Que...
Ranking Task Evaluation
For each debate, compare the generatedranked list of candidates using the
influence ranking approa...
Influence Ranking Results
Persuasive argumentationalone improves upon UG
• Premise and support relation(nDCG and nDCG-3)
•...
Summary
Good predictors of influence ranking:
• Relevance of “What they said”
• Relevance of “Persuasiveness style of thei...
Conclusions
• Studied the impact of argumentationin speaker’s discourse and their effect in
influencingan audience on supp...
Thank you!
@Pixarelli
a.cano-basave@aston.ac.uk
Próximos SlideShares
Carregando em…5
×

A Study of the Impact of Persuasive Argumentation in Political Debates

415 visualizações

Publicada em

Persuasive communication is the process of shaping, reinforcing and changing others’ responses. In political debates, speakers ex- press their views towards the debated topics by choosing both the content of their discourse and the argumentation process. In this work we study the use of semantic frames for modelling argumentation in speakers’ discourse. We investigate the impact of a speaker’s argumentation style and their effect in influencing an audience in supporting their candidature. We model the influence index of each candidate based on their relative standings in the polls released prior to the debate and present a system which ranks speakers in terms of their relative influence using a combination of content and persuasive argumentation features. Our results show that although con- tent alone is predictive of a speaker’s influence rank, persuasive argumentation also affects such indices.

Publicada em: Dados e análise
  • DOWNLOAD FULL BOOKS INTO AVAILABLE FORMAT ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL PDF EBOOK here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL EPUB Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL doc Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL PDF EBOOK here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL EPUB Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL doc Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... .............. Browse by Genre Available eBooks ......................................................................................................................... Art, Biography, Business, Chick Lit, Children's, Christian, Classics, Comics, Contemporary, Cookbooks, Crime, Ebooks, Fantasy, Fiction, Graphic Novels, Historical Fiction, History, Horror, Humor And Comedy, Manga, Memoir, Music, Mystery, Non Fiction, Paranormal, Philosophy, Poetry, Psychology, Religion, Romance, Science, Science Fiction, Self Help, Suspense, Spirituality, Sports, Thriller, Travel, Young Adult,
       Responder 
    Tem certeza que deseja  Sim  Não
    Insira sua mensagem aqui

A Study of the Impact of Persuasive Argumentation in Political Debates

  1. 1. A Study of the Impact of Persuasive Argumentation in Political Debates Dr. Amparo E. Cano-Basave and Dr.Yulan He 1
  2. 2. Objective Study whether persuasive cues and persuasive argumentations can be used as predictors of speakers’ influence ranking on a political debate.
  3. 3. Argumentation Claim: • Controversial statement to be judge true or false • Not accepted by an audience without additional support Premises • Support underpinning the validity of a claim Verbal and social activity of reason which aims to increase the acceptability of a controversial standpoint by putting forward a set of connected propositions intending to justify or refute a standpoint before a rational judge (van Eemeren et al., 1996)
  4. 4. Argumentation, Claim and Premise Example “[People aren’t investing in America] [because this president has made America a less attractive place for investing and hiring than other places in the world]” (Former Governor Mitt Romney) claim premise Argumentation focuses on the rational support to justify or refute a Standpoint.
  5. 5. Persuasive language perceptions Persuasion focuses on language cues aiming at: shaping, reinforcing and changing a response. beliefs attitudes behaviors Persuasive Language • Emotive lexicons (e.g., atrocious,dreadful, sensational,highly effective) • Use of alliteration(repetitionof first consonants in series of words)
  6. 6. Persuasive Language, Example “I’m convinced that part of the divide that we’re experiencing in the United States, which is unprecedented, it’s unnatural and it’s un-American, is because we’re divided economically, too few jobs, too few opportunities” (Former Governor Huntsman). alliteration Emotive language Persuasive Argumentation?
  7. 7. NLP in Political text Rhetoric • Detecting ideological positions (Sim et al., 2013) • Predicting voting patterns (Thomas et al., 2006; Gerrish and Blei 2011) • Characterizing Power based on linguistic features (Prabhakaranet al., 2013) Argumentation • Argumentation extraction (Cabrio and Villata,2012) • Recognizing arguments in online discussions (FilipBoltužić and Jan Šnajder, 2014) • Stance classification of ideological debates (Hasan and Ng, 2013)
  8. 8. Contributions We propose to: • Persuasive argumentationas a feature for ranking candidates’ influence in political debates • Port annotations by means of semantic frames
  9. 9. Datasets Persuasive essays Corpus (Stab & Gurevych 2014) • 90 essays comprising1,673 sentences • Class-level argument components and argument relations Table 1. Persuasive essay argument annotation scheme.
  10. 10. Datasets Presidential Political Debates Corpus Manual transcripts of debates for the Republican party presidential primary election(The American PresidencyProject)1 • 20 debates (May 2011- February 2012) • 10 candidates (Avg. participationof 6.7 candidates per debate) • 30-40 hours of interactiontime • On avg. 20,466 words per debate • Each transcript delimitsturns between speakers and moderators • Each transcript marks-upoccurrences of the audiences’ reactions (e.g., booing, laughter) 1 http:// www.presidency.ucsb.edu/debates.php
  11. 11. Semantic Frames Descriptionof context in which a word sense is used. FrameNet (Baker et al., 1998)2: - Over 1000 patterns used in English (e.g., Leadership, Causality, Aware ness, Hostile encounter). 2SEMAFOR (Das et al., 2010) for semantic frame extraction
  12. 12. Semantic Frames as Pivoting Features Persuasive Essays(PE) Claim . . Attack Relations Semantic Frames (SF) Intentionality act Cause Change .. Emotion Directed Extract most representative frames for each annotation a1 an SFa Claim Attack Relations . .
  13. 13. Semantic Frames as Pivoting Features Speaker u Entry in a Debate d Semantic Frames (SF) Intentionality act Cause Change .. Emotion Directed Speaker u’s Bag of SF SFa Claim Attack Relations . . fd,a u x1 xk . . . fu d,claim fu d,premise fu d,attack . . PD PE
  14. 14. Semantic Frames an Argument Types Table 2. Top semantic frames for each argumentationtype Argument Type Top 5 Semantic Frames Claim Reason, Stage of Progress, Evaluative Comparison, Competition, Cause to Change Premise Removing, Inclusion, Killing, Cognitive Connection, Causation For Stance Cause to Make Progress, Collaboration, Purpose, Kinship, Expensiveness Against Stance Intentionally Act, Importance, Capability, Leadership, Usefulness Support Relation Dead or Alive, Institutions, State Continue, Taking Sides, Reliance Attack Relation Usefulness, Likelihood, Desiring, Importance, Intentionally Act
  15. 15. Semantic Frames as Pivoting Features Arg. Type Sentence Semantic Frames Claim If we can turn Syria and Lebanon away from Iran, we finally have the capacity to get Iran to pull back. Cause Change, Manipulation, Capability For Stance And the reason is because that’s how our founding fathers saw this country set up. Reason, Kinship, Perception Experience Attack Rel. But you can’t stand and say you give me everything I want or I’ll vote no. Desiring, Posture, Capability
  16. 16. Influence Ranking in Political Debates Influence index (Prabhakaranet al., 2013) calculated based on a speaker’s relative standing on polls released prior to the debate. The influence index P of speaker u in UD is: Where pi is the poll percentage assign to speaker u in poll i in the reference polls.
  17. 17. Influence Ranking Approach Let D denote a debate with a set of speakers UD={u1,..,un} and influence indexes P(ui) for 1< i <n. Training set for ranking: R={(ui, γi),.., (un, γn) } where γi is the ranking of ui based on its P(ui) . We use the Ranking SVM (Joachims,2006) to estimate the ranking function F which outputs a score for each instance from which a global ordering of data is constructed.
  18. 18. Features for each speaker External EmotionCues - Applause (APL) - Booing (BOO) - Laughs (LAU) - Crosstalk(CRO) Persuasiveness - Persuasive argumentationfeatures (semantic frame feature vector represent ing each annotationscheme (fu d,a) for each speaker on each debate) - Alliteration - Emotive Language (based on emotionre lated semantic frames,e.g., emotion_dir ected, emotions_by_stimulus,emotions _by_posibility).
  19. 19. Features for each speaker Content Features Baselines for Influence Ranking (Prabhakaranet al., 2013) - Unigrams (UG) - Question Deviation (QD) - Word Deviations (WD) - Mention Percentage (MP)
  20. 20. Ranking Task Evaluation For each debate, compare the generatedranked list of candidates using the influence ranking approach, against a reference ranked list (gold standard) based on the poll scores for that debate. - 5-fold cross validation - Report nDCG, nDCG-3, Kendall’s Tau and Spearman correlations.
  21. 21. Influence Ranking Results Persuasive argumentationalone improves upon UG • Premise and support relation(nDCG and nDCG-3) • Attack Relation (Tau and Spearman) Results suggest • Tendency to use well supported arguments • Tendency to attack more other candidates by presentingpremises refutinga claim. Persuasive argumentation+ WD + MP significantlyoutperformsall baselines • Claim • Premise • For stance • Support relation
  22. 22. Summary Good predictors of influence ranking: • Relevance of “What they said” • Relevance of “Persuasiveness style of their arguments” • Relative importance given by others by means of mentions Candidates with higher influence ranking • Tend to present more premises while clearly stating their stance (i.e., supporting a claim) on a particular topic.
  23. 23. Conclusions • Studied the impact of argumentationin speaker’s discourse and their effect in influencingan audience on supportingtheir candidature • To start persuasive argumentationfeatures,proposeda method to port annotations by means of semantic frames • Premise and Support Relation types, better predictors of a speaker’s influence rank
  24. 24. Thank you! @Pixarelli a.cano-basave@aston.ac.uk

×