Pith. sign in

REVIEW

The Moral Debater: A Study on the Computational Generation of Morally Framed Arguments

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2203.14563 v1 pith:Z6TFGAXD submitted 2022-03-28 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords argumentsframedmorallyaffectedaudiencebeliefsdifferentmoral
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

An audience's prior beliefs and morals are strong indicators of how likely they will be affected by a given argument. Utilizing such knowledge can help focus on shared values to bring disagreeing parties towards agreement. In argumentation technology, however, this is barely exploited so far. This paper studies the feasibility of automatically generating morally framed arguments as well as their effect on different audiences. Following the moral foundation theory, we propose a system that effectively generates arguments focusing on different morals. In an in-depth user study, we ask liberals and conservatives to evaluate the impact of these arguments. Our results suggest that, particularly when prior beliefs are challenged, an audience becomes more affected by morally framed arguments.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools