Journal Article

Enabling Large-Scale Deliberation Using Attention-Mediation Metrics

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Fulltext URI

Document type

Text/Journal Article

Additional Information

Date

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Springer

Abstract

Humanity now finds itself faced with a range of highly complex and controversial challenges—such as climate change, the spread of disease, international security, scientific collaborations, product development, and so on—that call upon us to bring together large numbers of experts and stakeholders to deliberate collectively on a global scale. Collocated meetings can however be impractically expensive, severely limit the concurrency and thus breadth of interaction, and are prone to serious dysfunctions such as polarization and hidden profiles. Social media such as email, blogs, wikis, chat rooms, and web forums provide unprecedented opportunities for interacting on a massive scale, but have yet to realize their potential for helping people deliberate effectively, typically generating poorly-organized, unsystematic and highly redundant contributions of widely varying quality. Large-scale argumentation systems represent a promising approach for addressing these challenges, by virtue of providing a simple systematic structure that radically reduces redundancy and encourages clarity. They do, however, raise an important challenge. How can we ensure that the attention of the deliberation participants is drawn, especially in large complex argument maps, to where it can best serve the goals of the deliberation? How can users, for example, find the issues they can best contribute to, assess whether some intervention is needed, or identify the results that are mature and ready to “harvest”? Can we enable, for large-scale distributed discussions, the ready understanding that participants typically have about the progress and needs of small-scale, collocated discussions?. This paper will address these important questions, discussing (1) the strengths and limitations of current deliberation technologies, (2) how argumentation technology can help address these limitations, and (3) how we can use attention-mediation metrics to enhance the effectiveness of large-scale argumentation-based deliberations.

Description

Klein, Mark (2012): Enabling Large-Scale Deliberation Using Attention-Mediation Metrics. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW): Vol. 21. DOI: 10.1007/s10606-012-9156-4. Springer. PISSN: 1573-7551. pp. 449-473

Keywords

Argumentation, Deliberation, Metrics

Citation

URI

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By


Number of citations to item: 69

  • Bryan Semaan, Heather Faucett, Scott P. Robertson, Misa Maruyama, Sara Douglas (2015): Designing Political Deliberation Environments to Support Interactions in the Public Sphere, In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, doi:10.1145/2702123.2702403
  • Jordi Ganzer-Ripoll, Natalia Criado, Maite Lopez-Sanchez, Simon Parsons, Juan A. Rodriguez-Aguilar (2018): Combining Social Choice Theory and Argumentation: Enabling Collective Decision Making, In: Group Decision and Negotiation 1(28), doi:10.1007/s10726-018-9594-6
  • Katsuhide FUJITA, Ryosuke WATANABE (2018): On Implementing an Automatic Headline Generation for Discussion BBS Systems —Cases of Citizens' Deliberations for Communities—, In: IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems 4(E101.D), doi:10.1587/transinf.2016iip0017
  • Takayuki Ito, Takanobu Otsuka, Satoshi Kawase, Akihisa Sengoku, Shun Shiramatsu, Takanori Ito, Eizo Hideshima, Tokuro Matsuo, Tetsuya Oishi, Rieko Fujita, Naoki Fukuta, Katsuhide Fujita (2017): Experimental results on large-scale cyber-physical hybrid discussion support, In: International Journal of Crowd Science 1(1), doi:10.1108/ijcs-01-2017-0003
  • Katsuhide Fujita, Takayuki Ito, Mark Klein (2017): Enabling Large Scale Deliberation Using Ideation and Negotiation-Support Agents, In: 2017 IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW), doi:10.1109/icdcsw.2017.75
  • Mark Klein, Ana Cristina Bicharra Garcia (2014): The Bag of Stars: High-Speed Idea Filtering for Open Innovation, In: SSRN Electronic Journal, doi:10.2139/ssrn.2387180
  • Mahmood Jasim, Enamul Hoque, Ali Sarvghad, Narges Mahyar (2021): CommunityPulse: Facilitating Community Input Analysis by Surfacing Hidden Insights, Reflections, and Priorities, In: Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021, doi:10.1145/3461778.3462132
  • Caiquan Xiong, Xuan Li, Yuan Li, Gang Liu (2018): Multi-Documents Summarization Based on TextRank and its Application in Online Argumentation Platform, In: International Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining 3(14), doi:10.4018/ijdwm.2018070104
  • Lesley S. J. Farmer (2019): Cross-Cultural Aspects of Collective Intelligence Online, In: Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development, doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-8286-1.ch001
  • Kirsikka Grön, Matti Nelimarkka (2020): Party Politics, Values and the Design of Social Media Services, In: Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction CSCW2(4), doi:10.1145/3415175
  • Adam Westerski, Theodore Dalamagas, Carlos A. Iglesias (2013): Classifying and comparing community innovation in Idea Management Systems, In: Decision Support Systems 3(54), doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.12.004
  • Lu Xiao, Jennifer Stromer-Galley, Ágnes Sándor (2016): Toward the Automated Detection of Individuals’ Rationales in Large-Scale Online Open Participative Activities: A Conceptual Framework, In: Group Decision and Negotiation 5(26), doi:10.1007/s10726-016-9516-4
  • Mark Klein, Ana Cristina Bicharra Garcia (2014): High-Speed Idea Filtering with the Bag of Lemons, In: SSRN Electronic Journal, doi:10.2139/ssrn.2501787
  • Mark Klein (2020): Crowd-Scale Deliberation for Group Decision-Making, In: Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_40-1
  • Hiroki Ono, Kaito Koike, Takeshi Morita, Takahira Yamaguchi (2019): Ontologies-Based Pupil Robot Interaction with Group Discussion, In: Procedia Computer Science, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.380
  • Ravi Santosh Arvapally, Xiaoqing Frank Liu, Donald C. Wunsch (2013): Fuzzy c-Means Clustering Based Polarization Assessment in Intelligent Argumentation System for Collaborative Decision Support, In: 2013 IEEE 37th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference, doi:10.1109/compsac.2013.12
  • Saskia Goldberg, André Bächtiger (2018): Wünsche an Demokratie: Politische Einstellungen, Entscheidungsthema und Demokratiepräferenzen von Bürgern, In: Einstellungen und Verhalten in der empirischen Sozialforschung, doi:10.1007/978-3-658-16348-8_13
  • Detlef Schoder, Johannes Putzke, Panagiotis Takis Metaxas, Peter A. Gloor, Kai Fischbach (2014): Informationssysteme für „Wicked Problems“, In: WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK 1(56), doi:10.1007/s11576-013-0395-x
  • Panagiotis Gourgaris, Andreas Kanavos, Nikos Karacapilidis, Vassilis Tampakas (2018): Argumentative Discourse Concepts as Revealed by Traversing a Graph, In: IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-92016-0_12
  • Weiyu Zhang, Carol Soon (2017): The Main and Spillover Effects of Online Deliberation: Changes in Opinions, Informational Media Use and Political Activities, In: 2017 Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government (CeDEM), doi:10.1109/cedem.2017.21
  • Mark Klein (2015): The CATALYST Deliberation Analytics Server, In: SSRN Electronic Journal, doi:10.2139/ssrn.2962524
  • Mark Klein (2021): Crowd-Scale Deliberation for Group Decision-Making, In: Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-49629-6_40
  • Ruth Shortall, Anatol Itten, Michiel van der Meer, Pradeep Murukannaiah, Catholijn Jonker (2022): Reason against the machine? Future directions for mass online deliberation, In: Frontiers in Political Science, doi:10.3389/fpos.2022.946589
  • Ravi Santosh Arvapally, Xiaoqing (Frank) Liu (2013): Polarisation assessment in an intelligent argumentation system using fuzzy clustering algorithm for collaborative decision support, In: Argument & Computation 3(4), doi:10.1080/19462166.2013.794163
  • Mark Klein (2015): A Critical Review of Crowd-Scale Online Deliberation Technologies, In: SSRN Electronic Journal, doi:10.2139/ssrn.2652888
  • Thomas Wagenknecht, Olga Levina, Christof Weinhardt (2017): Designing Anonymous Collaboration in Computer-Supported Organizational Participation, In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59144-5_6
  • Eleonore Fournier-Tombs, Giovanna Di Marzo Serugendo (2019): DelibAnalysis: Understanding the quality of online political discourse with machine learning, In: Journal of Information Science 6(46), doi:10.1177/0165551519871828
  • José Luis Fernández-Martínez, Maite López-Sánchez, Juan Antonio Rodríguez Aguilar, Dionisio Sánchez Rubio, Berenice Zambrano Nemegyei (2018): Co-Designing Participatory Tools for a New Age, In: International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age 4(5), doi:10.4018/ijpada.2018100101
  • Dominik Wyss, Simon Beste (2017): Artificial facilitation: Promoting collective reasoning within asynchronous discussions, In: Journal of Information Technology & Politics 3(14), doi:10.1080/19331681.2017.1338175
  • Mark Klein (2015): A Critical Review of Crowd-Scale Online Deliberation Technologies, In: SSRN Electronic Journal, doi:10.2139/ssrn.2658811
  • Ravi S. Arvapally, Xiaoqing Frank Liu, Fiona Fui‐Hoon Nah, Wei Jiang (2017): Identifying outlier opinions in an online intelligent argumentation system, In: Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 8(33), doi:10.1002/cpe.4107
  • Lesley S. J. Farmer (2019): Using Virtual Environments to Transform Collective Intelligence, In: Crowdsourcing, doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-8362-2.ch006
  • Weichen Liu, Sijia Xiao, Jacob T. Browne, Ming Yang, Steven P. Dow (2018): ConsensUs, In: ACM Transactions on Social Computing 1(1), doi:10.1145/3159649
  • Livia C Gouvea, Ana Cristina B Garcia, Adriana S Vivacqua (2019): Behavior Indicators for Sensemaking of Online Discussions, In: 2019 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC), doi:10.1109/smc.2019.8914182
  • Sanja Tanasijevic, Klemens Bohm (2013): A New Approach to Large-Scale Deliberation, In: 2013 International Conference on Cloud and Green Computing, doi:10.1109/cgc.2013.45
  • Claudia Niemeyer, Timm Teubner, Margeret Hall, Christof Weinhardt (2018): The Impact of Dynamic Feedback and Personal Budgets on Arousal and Funding Behaviour in Participatory Budgeting, In: Group Decision and Negotiation 4(27), doi:10.1007/s10726-018-9578-6
  • Masaki Matsubara, Yuhei Matsuda, Ryohei Kuzumi, Masanori Koizumi, Atsuyuki Morishima (2020): Collecting and Organizing Citizen Opinions: A Dynamic Microtask Approach and Its Evaluation, In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-43687-2_4
  • Luca Iandoli, Ivana Quinto, Anna De Liddo, Simon Buckingham Shum (2015): On online collaboration and construction of shared knowledge: Assessing mediation capability in computer supported argument visualization tools, In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 5(67), doi:10.1002/asi.23481
  • Jordi Ganzer-Ripoll, Maite López-Sánchez, Juan Antonio Rodriguez-Aguilar (2017): A Multi-agent Argumentation Framework to Support Collective Reasoning, In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-57285-7_7
  • Najla Althuniyan, Joseph W Sirrianni, Md Mahfuzer Rahman, Xiaoqing Frank Liu (2020): Design and Analysis of Mobile App for Large-Scale Cyber-Argumentation, In: 2020 Second International Conference on Transdisciplinary AI (TransAI), doi:10.1109/transai49837.2020.00013
  • Luca Iandoli, Ivana Quinto, Anna De Liddo, Simon Buckingham Shum (2014): Socially augmented argumentation tools: Rationale, design and evaluation of a debate dashboard, In: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 3(72), doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.08.006
  • Takayuki Ito, Takanobu Otsuka, Satoshi Kawase, Akihisa Sengoku, Shun Shiramatsu, Tokuro Matsuo, Tetsuya Oishi, Rieko Fujita, Naoki Fukuta, Katsuhide Fujita (2016): Preliminary results on a large-scale cyber-physical hybrid discussion support experiment, In: 2016 11th International Conference on Knowledge, Information and Creativity Support Systems (KICSS), doi:10.1109/kicss.2016.7951436
  • Ko Kitagawa, Shun Shiramatsu, Akira Kamiya (2019): Developing a Method for Quantifying Degree of Discussion Progress Towards Automatic Facilitation of Web-Based Discussion, In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-17294-7_12
  • Claudia Niemeyer, Thomas Wagenknecht, Timm Teubner, Christof Weinhardt (2016): Participatory Crowdfunding: An Approach towards Engaging Employees and Citizens in Institutional Budgeting Decisions, In: 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), doi:10.1109/hicss.2016.351
  • Matti Nelimarkka, Antti Salovaara, Bryan Semaan, Giulio Jacucci (2017): Theory-Driven Collocated CMC, In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, doi:10.1145/3025453.3025885
  • Chunsheng Yang, Wen Gu, Takayuki Ito (2019): Toward Case-based Reasoning Facilitation for Online Discussion in Deliberation, In: 2019 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), doi:10.1109/cscwd.2019.8791866
  • Gafari Lukumon, Mark Klein (2023): Crowd-sourced idea filtering with Bag of Lemons: the impact of the token budget size, In: DECISION 2(50), doi:10.1007/s40622-023-00349-w
  • D. Khartabil, C. Collins, S. Wells, B. Bach, J. Kennedy (2021): Design and Evaluation of Visualization Techniques to Facilitate Argument Exploration, In: Computer Graphics Forum 6(40), doi:10.1111/cgf.14389
  • Adam Binks, Alice Toniolo, Miguel A. Nacenta (2022): Representational transformations: Using maps to write essays, In: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102851
  • Juan A. Rodriguez-Aguilar, Marc Serramia, Maite Lopez-Sanchez (2016): Aggregation Operators to Support Collective Reasoning, In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-45656-0_1
  • Karen Schrier (2016): Designing role-playing video games for ethical thinking, In: Educational Technology Research and Development 4(65), doi:10.1007/s11423-016-9489-7
  • Lesley S. J. Farmer (2016): Using Virtual Environments to Transform Collective Intelligence, In: Advances in Human and Social Aspects of Technology, doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-9899-4.ch008
  • Nardine Alnemr (2020): Emancipation cannot be programmed: blind spots of algorithmic facilitation in online deliberation, In: Contemporary Politics 5(26), doi:10.1080/13569775.2020.1791306
  • Najla Althuniyan, Joseph W. Sirrianni, Md Mahfuzer Rahman, Xiaoqing “Frank” Liu (2019): Design of Mobile Service of Intelligent Large-Scale Cyber Argumentation for Analysis and Prediction of Collective Opinions, In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-23367-9_10
  • Jordi Ganzer-Ripoll, Maite Lopez-Sanchez, Juan Antonio Rodriguez-Aguilar (2017): A Target-Oriented Discussion Framework to Support Collective Decision Making, In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59294-7_39
  • Rafał Olszowski, Marcin Chmielowski (2020): Collective Intelligence in Polish-Ukrainian Internet Projects. Debate Models and Research Methods, In: Future Internet 6(12), doi:10.3390/fi12060106
  • Ilse Verdiesen, Virginia Dignum, Jeroen Van Den Hoven (2018): Measuring Moral Acceptability in E-deliberation, In: ACM Transactions on Internet Technology 4(18), doi:10.1145/3183324
  • Chunsheng Yang, Wen Gu, Takayuki Ito, Xiaohua Yang (2021): Machine learning-based consensus decision-making support for crowd-scale deliberation, In: Applied Intelligence 7(51), doi:10.1007/s10489-020-02118-z
  • Liang Xiao, Hao Zhou, John Fox (2022): Towards a systematic approach for argumentation, recommendation, and explanation in clinical decision support, In: Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering 10(19), doi:10.3934/mbe.2022489
  • Alberto Cottica, Guy Melançon, Benjamin Renoust (2017): Online community management as social network design: testing for the signature of management activities in online communities, In: Applied Network Science 1(2), doi:10.1007/s41109-017-0049-9
  • Mark Klein, Ana Cristina Bicharra Garcia (2015): High-speed idea filtering with the bag of lemons, In: Decision Support Systems, doi:10.1016/j.dss.2015.06.005
  • José Luis Fernández-Martínez, Maite López-Sánchez, Juan Antonio Rodríguez Aguilar, Dionisio Sánchez Rubio, Berenice Zambrano Nemegyei (2020): Co-Designing Participatory Tools for a New Age, In: Natural Language Processing, doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-0951-7.ch042
  • Detlef Schoder, Johannes Putzke, Panagiotis Takis Metaxas, Peter A. Gloor, Kai Fischbach (2014): Information Systems for “Wicked Problems”, In: Business & Information Systems Engineering 1(6), doi:10.1007/s12599-013-0303-3
  • Mark Klein (2017): Towards Crowd-Scale Deliberation, In: SSRN Electronic Journal, doi:10.2139/ssrn.2987624
  • Anna Mikhaylovskaya (2024): Enhancing Deliberation with Digital Democratic Innovations, In: Philosophy & Technology 1(37), doi:10.1007/s13347-023-00692-x
  • Anna De Liddo, Grazia Concilio, Francesca Rizzo (2023): Critical Deliberative Democracy Tech: Questions, Tensions, Norms and Directions for Working with Institutions, Communities and Technologies to Scale Up Democratic Innovations, In: The 11th International Conference on Communities and Technologies (C&T), doi:10.1145/3593743.3593775
  • Fabio Paglieri (2016): A Plea for Ecological Argument Technologies, In: Philosophy & Technology 2(30), doi:10.1007/s13347-016-0222-6
  • Saskia Goldberg, Dominik Wyss, André Bächtiger (2019): Deliberating or Thinking (Twice) About Democratic Preferences: What German Citizens Want From Democracy, In: Political Studies 2(68), doi:10.1177/0032321719843967
  • Guillaume Bouchard, Stephane Clinchant, Gregorio Convertino (2014): E-Participation with Stakeholders' Feedback Platforms, In: Advances in Electronic Government, Digital Divide, and Regional Development, doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6236-0.ch010
Please note: Providing information about citations is only possible thanks to to the open metadata APIs provided by crossref.org and opencitations.net. These lists may be incomplete due to unavailable citation data.source: opencitations.net, crossref.org