<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="stede-2016-towards">
    <titleInfo>
        <title>Towards assessing depth of argumentation</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <name type="personal">
        <namePart type="given">Manfred</namePart>
        <namePart type="family">Stede</namePart>
        <role>
            <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
        </role>
    </name>
    <originInfo>
        <dateIssued>2016-12</dateIssued>
    </originInfo>
    <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
    <relatedItem type="host">
        <titleInfo>
            <title>Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers</title>
        </titleInfo>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Yuji</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Matsumoto</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Rashmi</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Prasad</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <originInfo>
            <publisher>The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee</publisher>
            <place>
                <placeTerm type="text">Osaka, Japan</placeTerm>
            </place>
        </originInfo>
        <genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
    </relatedItem>
    <abstract>For analyzing argumentative text, we propose to study the ‘depth’ of argumentation as one important component, which we distinguish from argument quality. In a pilot study with German newspaper commentary texts, we asked students to rate the degree of argumentativeness, and then looked for correlations with features of the annotated argumentation structure and the rhetorical structure (in terms of RST). The results indicate that the human judgements correlate with our operationalization of depth and with certain structural features of RST trees.</abstract>
    <identifier type="citekey">stede-2016-towards</identifier>
    <location>
        <url>https://aclanthology.org/C16-1312</url>
    </location>
    <part>
        <date>2016-12</date>
        <extent unit="page">
            <start>3308</start>
            <end>3317</end>
        </extent>
    </part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>

%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Towards assessing depth of argumentation
%A Stede, Manfred
%Y Matsumoto, Yuji
%Y Prasad, Rashmi
%S Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers
%D 2016
%8 December
%I The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee
%C Osaka, Japan
%F stede-2016-towards
%X For analyzing argumentative text, we propose to study the ‘depth’ of argumentation as one important component, which we distinguish from argument quality. In a pilot study with German newspaper commentary texts, we asked students to rate the degree of argumentativeness, and then looked for correlations with features of the annotated argumentation structure and the rhetorical structure (in terms of RST). The results indicate that the human judgements correlate with our operationalization of depth and with certain structural features of RST trees.
%U https://aclanthology.org/C16-1312
%P 3308-3317

Markdown (Informal)

[Towards assessing depth of argumentation](https://aclanthology.org/C16-1312) (Stede, COLING 2016)

• Towards assessing depth of argumentation (Stede, COLING 2016)

ACL

• Manfred Stede. 2016. Towards assessing depth of argumentation. In Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers, pages 3308–3317, Osaka, Japan. The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee.