This paper is a report of a pilot study of how candidates argue when they are running for political office. The election studied was the provincial election in Ontario, Canada, in the fall of 2011. Having collected about 250 arguments given during the election from newspaper media, we sought answers to the following questions, among others: (i) which argumentation schemes have the greatest currency in political elections? (ii) Is a list of the best known argumentation schemes sufficient to classify the arguments given in elections? (iii) What schemes should be added to the familiar list to make it more adequate for studying elections? (iv) Is it useful to classify arguments as being used for positive, policy-critical, person-critical and defensive purposes? (v) Can political parties be usefully characterized by noting their preferred kinds of arguments and their most frequent uses of arguments? (vi) What lessons can be learned from this study to better design future studies of the same kind?
Lopes Cardoso, Henrique, Rui Sousa-Silva, Paula Carvalho & Bruno Martins
2023. Argumentation models and their use in corpus annotation: Practice, prospects, and challenges. Natural Language Engineering 29:4 ► pp. 1150 ff.
Macagno, Fabrizio
2022. Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset. Data in Brief 44 ► pp. 108501 ff.
Dumani, Lorik, Manuel Biertz, Alex Witry, Anna-Katharina Ludwig, Mirko Lenz, Stefan Ollinger, Ralph Bergmann & Ralf Schenkel
2021. 2021 IEEE 15th International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC), ► pp. 248 ff.
Visser, Jacky, John Lawrence, Chris Reed, Jean Wagemans & Douglas Walton
2021. Annotating Argument Schemes. Argumentation 35:1 ► pp. 101 ff.
Walton, Douglas & Fabrizio Macagno
2015. A classification system for argumentation schemes. Argument & Computation 6:3 ► pp. 219 ff.
Walton, Douglas
2014. Baseballs and arguments from fairness. Artificial Intelligence and Law 22:4 ► pp. 423 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
2013. Informal Logic. In Handbook of Argumentation Theory, ► pp. 1 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
2014. Informal Logic. In Handbook of Argumentation Theory, ► pp. 373 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.