1 / 10

Iyad Rahwan

Arguing in a Social Context. Iyad Rahwan. Introduction. Argument takes place in a social context Arguing with oneself vs. arguing with others New challenges: How does the audience evaluate arguments? How do arguers strategize? Opportunities for cross-disciplinary work:

perry
Télécharger la présentation

Iyad Rahwan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Arguing in a Social Context Iyad Rahwan

  2. Introduction Argument takes place in a social context • Arguing with oneself vs. arguing with others New challenges: • How does the audience evaluate arguments? • How do arguers strategize? Opportunities for cross-disciplinary work: • Experimental psychology • Game theory

  3. The Psychology of Argument Evaluation

  4. Simple Reinstatement I. Rahwan, M. I. Madakkatel, J. F. Bonnefon, R. N. Awan and S. Abdallah. Behavioural Experiments for Assessing the Abstract Argumentation Semantics of Reinstatement. Cognitive Science. (in press) H1: Defeat lowers confidence in A’s conclusion H2: Reinstatement increases confidence in A H3: Reinstatement fully restores confidence in A’s conclusion H4: Reinstatement is due to successfully defeating B (rather than supporting C)

  5. Floating Reinstatement I. Rahwan, M. I. Madakkatel, J. F. Bonnefon, R. N. Awan and S. Abdallah. Behavioural Experiments for Assessing the Abstract Argumentation Semantics of Reinstatement. Cognitive Science. (in press) Effect is identical to basic reinstatement! But no preference between C and D

  6. Argumentation and Strategic Behavior

  7. Strategic Argumentation I. Rahwan, K. Larson and F. Tohmé (2009). A Characterisation of Strategy-Proofness for Grounded Argumentation Semantics. In: Proceedings of IJCAI

  8. Aggregating Judgments Theorem: No aggregation operator satisfies: universal domain, anonymity, systematicity, unanimity, collective rationality I. Rahwan and F. Tohmé (2010). Collective Argument Evaluation as JudgementAggregation. In: Proceedings of AAMAS Not a legal labeling!

  9. Human Strategic Behavior Will people reveal their goals? Will people exploit knowledge of their opponent’s goal? Will revelation enable cooperation? Y. Gal, S. D'souza, P. Pasquier, I. Rahwan and S. Abdallah (2009). The Effects of Goal Revelation on Computer-Mediated Negotiation. In: Proceedings of CogSci

  10. Summary Message Must take seriously: • Psychological validity • Pragmatics (especially strategic behavior) • Game theory • Behavioral Heuristics

More Related