ePart 2011 talk

Argument Visualization for eParticipation: Research Agenda and Prototype tool Neil Benn , Ann Macintosh Centre for Digital Citizenship , Institute of Communications Studies, University of Leeds,

The IMPACT Project: Overview
I ntegrated M ethod for P olicy-making using A rgument modelling and C omputer-assisted T ext analysis
http://www.policy-impact.eu
EU FP7 Theme: ICT for Governance and Policy-modelling
Six-member consortium

The IMPACT Project: Four tools
Argument reconstruction
Will aggregate and reconstruct arguments in information sources distributed on the Internet
Policy modelling
Will enable users to simulate the legal effects of alternative policies
Structured consultation
Will use argumentation schemes to generate focused surveys
Argument analysis and visualisation
Will enable users to navigate through arguments contained in relevant consultation and policy documents.

AVT Objectives
Will be based on state-of-the-art Computer-Supported Argument Visualization (CSAV) research
Will allow users to navigate through arguments and persistent linkages to relevant documents
Will provide interactive argument maps, at different levels of abstraction and detail
Will allow users to get overview of policy debate and to zoom in on issues which are of interest

CSAV State-of-the-Art
Araucaria with Ova & Arvina University of Dundee, UK
Argunet Germany
Cohere OU,UK
CoPe_it! University of Patras, Greece
Compendium OU,UK
Debategraph Debategraph, UK
Deliberatorium MIT, USA
LASAD Germany
Rationale & bCisive online Austhink consulting, Australia

CSAV State-of-the-art: Cohere
Open Source
Web 2.0
Supports document-centric argument visualisation
Already supports many features required by AVT
Users can save and publish argument maps on the Web
Users can tag nodes and links in an argument map
Users can add their own node and link types
Users can click hyperlinks embedded in nodes to access further information (e.g. original source text)

Walkthrough: A document-centric approach to mapping arguments about policies

Green Paper in Cohere (Document-centric view)

Responses to Green Paper (Aston University)

Visualising Aston response in Cohere (Document-centric view)

Visualising Aston LKIF in Cohere (Node-Connection view)

Linking Aston responses to Green Paper questions

Visualising Entire Debate (Argument Network view)

Extending Cohere for IMPACT
Add mechanism for handling formal models of argument
Improve layout of argument maps, using more sophisticated layout algorithms
Improve the browsing of argument maps at different levels of granularity, particularly the overview level
Improve the capability to move from nodes in argument map back to original source document
“ Forked” to a new tool: PolicyCommons

http://policycommons.leeds.ac.uk

PolicyCommons: New visualisations (sketches)

Advancing CSAV
Techniques for improving readability of large argument maps
Techniques for using visual cues to support understanding argument maps
Extending the design of current basic graphical elements used to express argument relations

Advancing eParticipation: the Public perspective
The public will make more sense of the issues through being able to:
see the arguments, both for and against different policies;
navigate a consultation as a map of interconnected issues, ideas and arguments;
find and link directly to relevant documents.
Any failure to address open questions or provide supporting evidence will be more visible in a map than in a prose document, making issues more transparent to the public

Advancing eParticipation: Policy-analysts’ perspective
Analysts will identify where more deliberation is required through being able to:
see where specific issues are not being debated sufficiently;
see how a given contribution influences the debate;
Analysts will have a new kind of reporting tool for presenting a consultation debate on a policy-consultation document back to policy makers.

Advancing eParticipation: Policy-makers’ perspective
Policy makers will have a new support tool to interrogate the policy consultation, aware that their decisions will be more evidence-based through being able to:
see where the arguments are greatest for and against policies;
find and link directly to arguments related to specific issues in the policy-consultation;
find and link directly to original source documents.

Conclusion
IMPACT Project: Tools for supporting policy-deliberation
PolicyCommons: Tool for visualising the debate about policies
Planned research outputs:
Methodology for designing interactive web-based CSAV tools
Method and associated application to interpret formal models of arguments so they are meaningful to ordinary users
Evidence of the advantages of argument visualisation tools for representing the policy-deliberation process
Set of visual principles for depicting argument to support sense-making

Questions? Email: {N.J.L.Benn, A.Macintosh}@leeds.ac.uk

ePart 2011 talk

by Neil Benn on Sep 01, 2011

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 1

Statistics

ePart 2011 talk — Presentation Transcript