在线辩论中争论的展开结构：无协议脱欧的案例
The Unfolding Structure of Arguments in Online Debates: The case of a No-Deal Brexit
摘要：
在过去的十年里，政治辩论逐渐转向社交媒体。可以捕捉和分析在这些辩论舞台上运作的在线行为者和派别所使用的修辞手段，以对社会争议及其论证动态进行统计阅读。在本文中，我们提出了一个五步的方法，提取，分类和探索潜在的辩论结构的在线辩论。利用Twitter上有关“无协议”脱欧的数据，我们关注的是这一事件发生后的预期影响。首先，我们使用RegEx提取推文中包含的因果关系声明，这些声明利用了与创造，破坏和因果关系相关的动词。其次，我们使用基于一元和二元的结构主题模型对提取的“无交易”效应进行分类。第三，我们选择有争议的效果主题，并探讨自我宣称的党派用户派系之间的主题内的论证差异。因此，我们使用估计的协变量对主题倾向的影响类型的主题，然后，使用主题相关网络，我们研究的拓扑结构的辩论，以确定连贯的主题星座。最后，我们分析了辩论的时间动态，并推断出领导/追随关系的派别。结果表明，所提出的方法可以用来进行统计分析的辩论，并绘制跨时间的争议的架构。特别是，“无协议”脱欧辩论被证明具有一个明显的论证结构，其特点是争论的派系星座，以及通过与创造和毁灭相关的动词调用的两极化叙事框架。我们的研究结果强调了实施系统方法来分析辩论的好处，这使得在网上辩论中使用的参数之间的主题和派别的依赖关系。
英文摘要：
In the last decade, political debates have progressively shifted to social media. Rhetorical devices employed by online actors and factions that operate in these debating arenas can be captured and analysed to conduct a statistical reading of societal controversies and their argumentation dynamics. In this paper, we propose a five-step methodology, to extract, categorize and explore the latent argumentation structures of online debates. Using Twitter data about a "no-deal" Brexit, we focus on the expected effects in case of materialisation of this event. First, we extract cause-effect claims contained in tweets using RegEx that exploit verbs related to Creation, Destruction and Causation. Second, we categorise extracted "no-deal" effects using a Structural Topic Model estimated on unigrams and bigrams. Third, we select controversial effect topics and explore within-topic argumentation differences between self-declared partisan user factions. We hence type topics using estimated covariate effects on topic propensities, then, using the topics correlation network, we study the topological structure of the debate to identify coherent topical constellations. Finally, we analyse the debate time dynamics and infer lead/follow relations among factions. Results show that the proposed methodology can be employed to perform a statistical rhetorics analysis of debates, and map the architecture of controversies across time. In particular, the "no-deal" Brexit debate is shown to have an assortative argumentation structure heavily characterized by factional constellations of arguments, as well as by polarized narrative frames invoked through verbs related to Creation and Destruction. Our findings highlight the benefits of implementing a systemic approach to the analysis of debates, which allows the unveiling of topical and factional dependencies between arguments employed in online debates.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
