Show me your opinion. Perceptual cues in creating and reading argument diagrams

Instructional Science, Jun 2016

In argument diagrams, perceptual cues are important to aid understanding. However, we do not know what perceptual cues are used and produced to aid understanding. We present two studies in which we investigate (1) which spatial, graphical and textual elements people spontaneously use in creating for-against argument diagrams, and (2) how people interpret these elements to find out one’s argumentative position. In the production study, participants were presented with arguments in favor and against a societally relevant topic and were asked to graphically represent the arguments such that their position (for or against) would become clear to a reader. For the perception study, we manipulated the argument diagrams created in study 1 into six different versions by deleting text, graphic cues and color. Participants saw one version of the diagrams; they were asked to judge the argumentative position, and to explain what they based their judgment on. We found that—in spite of individual differences—natural sources were used by all producers, for example by creating a well-formed structure, or by using spatial and graphical elements to separate or highlight arguments. Furthermore, although interpreting the argument diagrams was best done when the combination of text and graphic cues was present, graphic cues alone seemed to be very important for interpretation. We conclude with a cautionary hierarchy of perceptual cues in argument diagrams.

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11251-016-9378-9.pdf

Show me your opinion. Perceptual cues in creating and reading argument diagrams

Instr Sci Show me your opinion. Perceptual cues in creating and reading argument diagrams Marije van Amelsvoort 0 Alfons Maes 0 0 Tilburg Center of Cognition and Communication (TiCC), Tilburg University , Warandelaan 2, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg , The Netherlands In argument diagrams, perceptual cues are important to aid understanding. However, we do not know what perceptual cues are used and produced to aid understanding. We present two studies in which we investigate (1) which spatial, graphical and textual elements people spontaneously use in creating for-against argument diagrams, and (2) how people interpret these elements to find out one's argumentative position. In the production study, participants were presented with arguments in favor and against a societally relevant topic and were asked to graphically represent the arguments such that their position (for or against) would become clear to a reader. For the perception study, we manipulated the argument diagrams created in study 1 into six different versions by deleting text, graphic cues and color. Participants saw one version of the diagrams; they were asked to judge the argumentative position, and to explain what they based their judgment on. We found that-in spite of individual differences-natural sources were used by all producers, for example by creating a well-formed structure, or by using spatial and graphical elements to separate or highlight arguments. Furthermore, although interpreting the argument diagrams was best done when the combination of text and graphic cues was present, graphic cues alone seemed to be very important for interpretation. We conclude with a cautionary hierarchy of perceptual cues in argument diagrams. Perceptual cues - Good visualizations link perceptual cues to relevant information (Petre 1995). Consider the argument diagram in Fig. 1. The text in this diagram shows a standpoint on top, arguments in favor and against this standpoint, as well as supports and rebuttals of arguments in Fig. 1 Argument visualization, created with RationaleTM boxes. Color is used to differentiate between arguments in favor and against the statement, lines are used to show how arguments are related, and location is used to indicate order and importance of arguments. These perceptual cues likely contribute to the comprehensibility of the diagram (Petre 1995), at least when applied well. As Scheuer et al. 2014, p. 129) put it: ‘‘the quality and readability of argument diagrams depends on how skillfully users organize and spatially arrange information.’’ In other words, although the text is necessary in order to understand what the argument is about, the benefit of argument diagrams compared to an argumentative text may lie precisely in its perceptual cues. Although the theoretical benefits of argument diagrams mentioned by researchers do not specifically address perceptual cues, they seem to be important; argument diagrams may facilitate comprehension, because they ‘‘make relations explicit’’ (Suthers 2003, p. 39), ‘‘display[s] the structure of arguments (Schwarz et al. 2000, p. 223), ‘‘give overview’’ (Van Amelsvoort 2006, p. 30), and ‘‘make thinking visible’’ (Bell 2002, p. 449). The problem is that we do not know whether perceptual cues aid comprehension of argument diagrams. We do not know which features are important in argument diagrams, nor do we know how and when people use them to construct or interpret argument diagrams. There is a rich tradition of argument mapping and notation conventions in philosophy and argumentation theory (Toulmin 1958), informal logic (e.g., Whately 1836), law (e.g., Wigmore 1937) and political discourse (e.g., Walton and Hansen 2013). In these research areas, argument diagrams are primarily developed and used for analyzing argumentation (Reed et al. 2007). For example, Toulmin’s (1953) argumentation model and many other models have strict conventions both in content and in notation. Apart from these expert areas, however, argument diagrams are increasingly used in societal contexts by lay-people who are not formally trained or instructed to visualize argumentation: Newspapers present maps showing both sides of a societal issue to give an overview of a debate and help readers form their own opinion (see examples at www.argumentenfabriek.nl). People meet online to address complex societal issues by collaboratively creating argument diagrams, meant to assist decision-making and problem solving (see www.globalsensemaking.net). Companies use argument diagrams to inform clients of their position (see www.werk.nl, in Dutch). In addition, argument diagrams play a major role in teaching and understanding argumentation (Van Gelder 2007), by helping students to order arguments and give overview (see e.g., Janssen et al. 2010; Van Amelsvoort et al. 2007, 2008; Weinberger et al. 2010). Britt and Larson (2003, p. 794) stress the importance of teaching argumentation in general: ‘‘The ability to produce a (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11251-016-9378-9.pdf

Marije van Amelsvoort, Alfons Maes. Show me your opinion. Perceptual cues in creating and reading argument diagrams, Instructional Science, 2016, pp. 335-357, Volume 44, Issue 4, DOI: 10.1007/s11251-016-9378-9