Why argue? Towards a cost-benefit analysis of argumentation

Argument and Computation

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 71-91

  Paglieri, Fabio ^a   Castelfranchi, Cristiano ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGIES   (Italy)

Author keywords

argumentation; bounded rationality; cognitive models; cost benefit; dangers; efficiency

Indexed keywords

ARGUMENTATION; BOUNDED RATIONALITY; COGNITIVE MODELS; COST-BENEFIT; DANGERS;

COST EFFECTIVENESS; COSTS; DECISION MAKING;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

EID: 78049269868     PISSN: 19462166     EISSN: 19462174     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19462160903494584     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Ainslie, G. (2001), Breakdown of Will, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Amgoud, L., and Maudet, N. (2002), 'Strategical Considerations for Argumentative Agents', in Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR), eds. S. Benferhat and E. Giunchiglia, Toulouse: IRIT, 399-407.
3. Andriessen, J., Baker, M., and Suthers, D. (eds.), (2003), Arguing to Learn. Confronting Cognitions in Computer-supported Collaborative Learning Environments, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
4. Arkes, H., and Blumer, C. (1985), 'The Psychology of Sunk Cost', Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 35, 124-140.
5. Bench-Capon, T., and Dunne, P. (2007), 'Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence', Artificial Intelligence, 171, 619-641. (Pubitemid 47285079)
6. Berns, G., Laibson, D., and Loewenstein, G. (2007), 'Intertemporal Choice - Toward an Integrative Framework', Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 482-488. (Pubitemid 350102313)
7. Besnard, P., and Hunter, A. (2008), Elements of Argumentation, Cambridge: MIT Press.
8. Castelfranchi, C. (1998), 'Modelling Social Action for AI Agents', Artificial Intelligence, 103, 157-182. (Pubitemid 128399877)
9. Castelfranchi, C., and Paglieri, F. (2007), 'The Role of Beliefs in Goal Dynamics: Prolegomena to a Constructive Theory of Intentions', Synthese, 155, 237-263.
10. Castelfranchi, C., and Falcone, R. (2010), Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Approach, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
11. Cayrol, C., Doutre, S., and Mengin, J. (2003), 'On Decision Problems Related to the Preferred Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks', Journal of Logic and Computation, 13, 377-403.
12. Cohen, D. (2005), 'Arguments that Backfire', in The Uses of Argument, ed. D. Hitchcock, Hamilton: OSSA, pp. 58-65.
13. Conte, R., and Castelfranchi, C. (1995), Cognitive Social Action, London: UCL Press.
14. Conte, R., and Paolucci, M. (2002), Reputation in Artificial Societies. Social Beliefs for Social Order, Boston: Kluwer.
15. Dimopoulos, Y., Nebel, B., and Toni, F. (2002), 'On the Computational Complexity of Assumption-based Argumentation by Default Reasoning', Artificial Intelligence, 141, 57-78.
16. Dung, P. (1995), 'On the Acceptability of Arguments and Its Fundamental Role in Non-monotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming, and N-Person Games', Artificial Intelligence, 77, 321-357.
17. Dung, P., Mancarella, P., and Toni, F. (2007), 'Computing Ideal Sceptical Argumentation', Artificial Intelligence, 171, 642-674. (Pubitemid 47285080)
18. Dunne, P. (2007), 'Computational Properties of Argument Systems Satisfying Graph-theoretic Constraints', Artificial Intelligence, 171, 701-729. (Pubitemid 47285069)
19. Dunne, P., and Bench-Capon, T. (2002), 'Coherence in Finite Argument Systems', Artificial Intelligence, 141, 187-203.
20. Gabbay, D., and Woods, J. (2003), Agenda Relevance: A Study in Formal Pragmatics, Amsterdam: North- Holland.
21. Gigerenzer, G., and Selten, R. (eds.), (2001), Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox, Cambridge: MIT Press.
22. Gilbert, M. (1997), Coalescent Argumentation, Mahwah: LEA.
23. Gilbert, M. (1999). 'Agreement/Disagreement', in Argumentation at the Century's Turn: Proceedings of OSSA 1999 eds. H. Hansen, C. Tindale, and E. Sveda, Windsor: OSSA, CD-ROM, pp. 1-9.
24. Goldman, A. (1999), Knowledge in a Social World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Govier, T. (1997), Social Trust and Human Communities, Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
26. Govier, T. (1998), Dilemmas of Trust, Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
27. Grice, P. (1989), Studies in the Way of Words, Harvard: Harvard University Press.
28. Guerini, M., Stock, O., and Zancanaro, M. (2007), 'A Taxonomy of Strategies for Multimodal Persuasive Message Generation', Applied Artificial Intelligence Journal, 21(2), 99-136. (Pubitemid 46325444)
29. Hample, D. (2005), Arguing: Exchanging Reasons Face to Face, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. Hample, D., and Dallinger, J. (1990), 'Arguers as Editors', Argumentation, 4, 153-169.
31. Hample, D., and Dallinger, J. (1992), 'The Use of Multiple Goals in Cognitive Editing of Arguments', Argumentation and Advocacy, 28, 109-122.
32. Hample, D., Paglieri, F., and Na, L. (in press), 'The Costs and Benefits of Arguing: Predicting the Decision Whether to Engage or Not', in Proceedings of ISSA 2010, eds. F. van Eemeren, B. Garssen, A. Blair, and G. Mitchell, Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
33. Hample, D., Werber, B., and Young, D. (2009), 'Framing and Editing Interpersonal Arguments', Argumentation, 23, 21-37.
34. Johnson, R. (2000), Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Joiner, J., Jones, S., and Doherty, J. (2008), 'Two Studies Examining Argumentation in Asynchronous Computer Mediated Communication', International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 31, 243-255.
36. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A. (1982), Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, New York: Cambridge University Press.
37. Karunatillake, N. (2006), 'Argumentation-Based Negotiation in a Social Context', unpublished Ph.D. thesis in Computer Science', University of Southampton, School of Electronics and Computer Science.
38. Karunatillake, N., and Jennings, N. (2004). 'Is it Worth Arguing?' in Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (Proc. of ArgMAS'04), eds. I. Rahwan, P. Moratïs, and C. Reed, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 234-250. (Pubitemid 41451487)
39. Karunatillake, N., Jennings, N., Rahwan, I., and McBurney, P. (2009), 'Dialogue Games that Agents Play within a Society', Artificial Intelligence, 173, 935-981.
40. Kirby, K., and Herrnstein, R. (1995), 'Preference Reversal Due to Myopic Discounting', Psychological Science, 6, 83-89.
41. Laibson, D. (1997), 'Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting', Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 443-477.
42. Lewis, D. (1969), Convention: A Philosophical Study, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
43. Mazzotta, I., de Rosis, F., and Carofiglio, V. (2007), 'Portia: A User-adapted Persuasion System in the Healthy Eating Domain', IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(6), 42-51. (Pubitemid 350231668)
44. Origgi, G. (2004), 'Is Trust an Epistemological Notion?' Episteme, 1, 61-72.
45. Paglieri, F. (2007), 'No More Charity, Please! Enthymematic Parsimony and the Pitfall of Benevolence', in Dissensus and the Search for Common Ground, eds. H. Hansen, C. Tindale, R. Johnson, and A. Blair Winder: OSSA, CD-ROM, pp. 1-27.
46. Paglieri, F. (2009), 'Ruinous Arguments: Escalation of Disagreement and the Dangers of Arguing', in Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 2009, eds. H. Hansen, C. Tindale, R. Johnson, and A. Blair. Windsor: OSSA, CD-ROM.
47. Paglieri, F., and Castelfranchi, C. (2006), 'The Toulmin Test: Framing Argumentation within Belief Revision Theories', in Arguing on the Toulmin Model, eds. D. Hitchcock and B. Verheij, Berlin: Springer, pp. 359-377.
48. Paglieri, F., and Castelfranchi, C. (in press), 'In Parsimony We Trust: Non-cooperative Roots of Linguistic Cooperation', in Perspectives on Language Use and Pragmatics, ed. A. Capone, München: Lincom Europa. Paglieri, F., and Woods, J. (in press), 'Enthymematic Parsimony', Synthese.
49. Parisi, D., and Castelfranchi, C. (1981), 'A Goal Analysis of Some Pragmatic Aspects of Language', in Possibilities and Limitations of Pragmatics, eds. H. Parret, M. Sbisà, and J. Verschueren, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 551-567.
50. Rahwan, I., and Simari, G. (eds.), (2009), Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Berlin: Springer.
51. Reed, C., and Norman, T. (2004), Argumentation Machines: New Frontiers in Argument and Computation, Berlin: Springer.
52. Reid, T. (1970), An Inquiry into the Human Mind, ed. by T. Duggan, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
53. Rubinstein, A. (1998), Modelling Bounded Rationality, Cambridge: MIT Press.
54. Sabater, J., and Sierra, C. (2005), 'Review on Computational Trust and Reputation Models', Artificial Intelligence Review, 24, 33-60. (Pubitemid 40536916)
55. Sillince, J., and Saeedi, M. (1999), 'Computer-mediated Communication: Problems and Potentials of Argumentation Support Systems', Decision Support Systems, 26, 287-306. (Pubitemid 32082165)
56. Simon, H. (1955), 'A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice', Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99-118.
57. Simon, H. (1956), 'Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment', Psychological Review, 63, 129-138.
58. Strotz, R. (1956), 'Myopia and Inconsistency in Dynamic Utility Maximization', Review of Economic Studies, 23(3), 165-180.
59. van Eemeren, F. (ed.) (2009), Examining Argumentation in Context: Fifteen Studies on Strategic Maneuvering, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
60. van Eemeren, F., and Grootendorst, R. (2004), A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragmadialectical Approach, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
61. van Eemeren, F., and Houtlosser, P. (2002), 'Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Maintaining a Delicate Balance', in Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis, eds. F. van Eemeren and P. Houtlosser, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, pp. 131-159.
62. Walton, D. (1998), The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Argument, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
63. Walton, D. (2005), Argumentation Methods for Artificial Intelligence in Law, Berlin: Springer.
64. Walton, D., and Krabbe, E. (1995), Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning, Albany: SUNY Press.
65. Walton, D., Reed, C., and Macagno, F. (2008), Argumentation Schemes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
66. Weinberger, A., and Fischer, F. (2006), 'A Framework to Analyze Argumentative Knowledge Construction in Computer-supported Collaborative Learning', Computers and Education, 46, 71-95. (Pubitemid 41562938)