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

• Integrated Method for Policy-making using Argument modelling and Computer-assisted Text 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)

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