The structure of argument patterns on a social Q&A site

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 63, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 2536-2548

  Savolainen, Reijo ^a  

^a TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

computer mediated communications; credibility

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION; CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS; CREDIBILITY; EMPIRICAL DATA; MAJOR ELEMENTS; MIXED ARGUMENT; TOULMIN;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

GLOBAL WARMING;

EID: 84870519670     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.22722     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. th ACM Conference on the WorldWideWeb (ACMWWW'08) (pp. 665-674). New York, NY: ACM Press.
2. Agichtein, E., Liu, Y., &, Bian, J., (2009). Modeling information-seeker satisfaction in community question answering. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data, 3 (2), 1-27.
3. Bradley, R.S., (2011). Global warming and political intimidation: How politicians cracked down on scientists as the earth heated up. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
4. rd Communities and Technologies Conference (vol. 3, pp. 21-39). New York, NY: Springer.
5. Clark, D.B., &, Sampson, V., (2007). Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29 (3), 253-277.
6. Clark, D.B., Sampson, V., Weinberger, A., &, Erkens, G., (2007). Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19 (3), 343-374.
7. Crosswhite, J., (2008). Awakening the topoi: Sources of invention in the new rhetoric's argument model. Argumentation and Advocacy, 44 (4), 169-184.
8. Erduran, S., Osborne, J., &, Simon, S., (2005). The role of argumentation in developing scientific literacy. In, K. Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. de Jong, &, H. Eijkelhof, (Eds.), Research and the quality of science education (pp. 381-394). Dordrecht, Germany: Springer.
9. Erduran, S., Simon, S., &, Osborne, J., (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88 (6), 915-933.
10. Feinberg, M., (2010). Two kinds of evidence: How information systems form rhetorical arguments. Journal of Documentation, 66 (4), 491-512.
11. Fichman, P., (2011). A comparative assessment of answer quality on four question answering sites. Journal of Information Science, 37 (5), 476-486.
12. Fogelin, R.J., (1987). Understanding arguments: An introduction to informal logic. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
13. th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/meet.1450430171/full.
14. Gazan, R., (2007). Seekers, sloths and social reference: Homework questions submitted to a question-answering community. New Review of Hypermedia & Multimedia, 13 (2), 239-248.
15. Gazan, R., (2009). When online communities become self-aware. In Proceedings of the 42th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science (HICSS-42) (pp. 1-10). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
16. Gazan, R., (2011). Social Q&A. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61 (12), 2301-2312.
17. Harper, F.M., Moy, D., &, Konstan, J.A., (2009). Facts of friends? Distinguishing informational and conversational questions in social Q&A sites. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing (ACM CHI'09) (pp. 759-768). New York, NY: ACM Press.
18. Healy, P., (1987). Critical reasoning and dialectical argument: An extension of Toulmin's approach. Informal Logic, 9 (1), 1-12.
19. Hoggan, J., &, Littlemore, R., (2009). Climate cover-up: The crusade to deny global warming. Vancouver, BC, Canada: Greystone Books.
20. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M-P,., &, Pereiro-Munoz, C., (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24 (11), 1171-1190.
21. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M-P., Rodriguez, M., &, Duschl, R.A., (2000). "Doing the lesson" or "doing science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84 (6), 757-792.
22. Johnson, L., (2009). Environmental rhetorics of tempered apocalypticism in An Inconvenient Truth. Rhetoric Review, 28 (1), 29-46.
23. Johnson, R.H., (2000). Manifest rationality: A pragmatic theory of argument. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Kim, S., (2010). Questioners' credibility judgments of answers in a social question and answer site. Information Research, 15 (2). Retrieved from http://informationr.net/ir/15-2/paper432.html
25. Kim, S., &, Oh, S., (2009). Users' relevance criteria for evaluating answers in a social Q & A site. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60 (4), 716-727.
26. Lewinski, M., (2010). Collective argumentative criticism in informal online discussion forums. Argumentation and Advocacy, 47 (2), 86-105.
27. Lincoln, Y.S., &, Guba, E.G., (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
28. nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
29. Myerson, G., &, Rydin, Y., (1996). The language of environment: A new rhetoric. London, England: UCL Press.
30. Oh, S., (2012). The characteristics and motivations of health answerers for sharing information, knowledge, and experience in online environments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63 (3), 543-557.
31. Perelman, C., &, Olbrechts-Tyteca, L., (1969). The new rhetoric. A treatise on argumentation. London, England: University of Notre Dame Press.
32. Rosenbaum, H., &, Shachaf, P., (2010). A structuration approach to online communities of practice: The case of Q&A communities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61 (9), 1933-1944.
33. Savolainen, R., (2011a). Judging the quality and credibility of information in Internet discussion forums. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (7), 1243-1256.
34. Savolainen, R., (2011b). Requesting and providing information in blogs and internet discussion forums. Journal of Documentation, 67 (5), 863-886.
35. Shah, C., Oh, S., &, Oh, J.S., (2009). Research agenda for social Q&A. Library & Information Science Research, 31 (4), 205-209.
36. Spatariu, A., Hartley, K., &, Bendixen, L.D., (2004). Defining and measuring quality in online discussions. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 2 (4), 1-15.
37. Tindale, C.W., (2004). Rhetorical argumentation: Principles of theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38. Toulmin, S.E., (2003). The uses of argument (Updated ed.). Cambridge England: Cambridge University Press.
39. Van Eemeren, F., &, Houtlosser, P.H., (1999). Strategic manoeuvering in argumentative discourse. Discourse Studies, 1 (4), 479-497.
40. Zarefsky, D., (2008). Knowledge claims in rhetorical criticism. Journal of Communication, 58 (4), 629-640.