Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Americans spend about a third of their time online, with many participating in online conversations on social and political issues. We hypothesize that social media arguments on such issues may be more engaging and persuasive than traditional media summaries, and that particular types of people may be more or less convinced by particular styles of argument, e.g. emotional arguments may resonate with some personalities while factual arguments resonate with others. We report a set of experiments testing at large scale how audience variables interact with argument style to affect the persuasiveness of an argument, an under-researched topic within natural language processing. We show that belief change is affected by personality factors, with conscientious, open and agreeable people being more convinced by emotional arguments. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2017 | 10.18653/v1/e17-1070 | conference of the european chapter of the association for computational linguistics |
Field | DocType | Volume |
Social psychology,Belief change,Social media,Persuasion,Computer science,Natural language processing,Artificial intelligence,Multimedia,Politics,Personality psychology,Personality | Journal | abs/1708.09085 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
8 | 0.52 | 33 |
Authors | ||
4 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stephanie M. Lukin | 1 | 93 | 9.96 |
| Pranav Anand | 2 | 260 | 19.70 |
| Marilyn A Walker | 3 | 3893 | 418.91 |
| Steve Whittaker | 4 | 5285 | 665.26 |