评论整理与反对对网络政策讨论连贯性的影响

B. McInnis, D. Cosley, E. Baumer, Gilly Leshed
{"title":"评论整理与反对对网络政策讨论连贯性的影响","authors":"B. McInnis, D. Cosley, E. Baumer, Gilly Leshed","doi":"10.1145/3148330.3148348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Public concern related to a policy may span a range of topics. As a result, policy discussions struggle to deeply examine any one topic before moving to the next. In policy deliberation research, this is referred to as a problem of topical coherence. In an experiment, we curated the comments in a policy discussion to prioritize arguments for or against a policy proposal, and examined how this curation and participants' initial positions of support or opposition to the policy affected the coherence of their contributions to existing topics. We found an asymmetric interaction between participants' initial positions and comment curation: participants with different initial positions had unequal reactions to curation that foregrounded comments with which they disagreed. This asymmetry implies that the factors underlying coherence are more nuanced than prioritizing participants' agreement or disagreement. We discuss how this finding relates to curating for coherent disagreement, and for curation more generally in deliberative processes.","PeriodicalId":334195,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of Comment Curation and Opposition on Coherence in Online Policy Discussion\",\"authors\":\"B. McInnis, D. Cosley, E. Baumer, Gilly Leshed\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3148330.3148348\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Public concern related to a policy may span a range of topics. As a result, policy discussions struggle to deeply examine any one topic before moving to the next. In policy deliberation research, this is referred to as a problem of topical coherence. In an experiment, we curated the comments in a policy discussion to prioritize arguments for or against a policy proposal, and examined how this curation and participants' initial positions of support or opposition to the policy affected the coherence of their contributions to existing topics. We found an asymmetric interaction between participants' initial positions and comment curation: participants with different initial positions had unequal reactions to curation that foregrounded comments with which they disagreed. This asymmetry implies that the factors underlying coherence are more nuanced than prioritizing participants' agreement or disagreement. We discuss how this finding relates to curating for coherent disagreement, and for curation more generally in deliberative processes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":334195,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3148330.3148348\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3148330.3148348","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

公众对一项政策的关注可能涉及一系列议题。因此,政策讨论在转向下一个话题之前,很难深入研究任何一个话题。在政策审议研究中,这被称为主题一致性问题。在一项实验中,我们整理了政策讨论中的评论,以优先考虑支持或反对政策提案的论点,并检查了这种整理和参与者最初支持或反对政策的立场如何影响他们对现有主题的贡献的一致性。我们发现参与者的初始立场和评论策划之间存在不对称的相互作用:不同初始立场的参与者对他们不同意的评论的前景策划的反应不平等。这种不对称意味着,连贯性背后的因素比优先考虑参与者的同意或不同意更为微妙。我们将讨论这一发现如何与协调一致的分歧以及在审议过程中更普遍地进行协调有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of Comment Curation and Opposition on Coherence in Online Policy Discussion
Public concern related to a policy may span a range of topics. As a result, policy discussions struggle to deeply examine any one topic before moving to the next. In policy deliberation research, this is referred to as a problem of topical coherence. In an experiment, we curated the comments in a policy discussion to prioritize arguments for or against a policy proposal, and examined how this curation and participants' initial positions of support or opposition to the policy affected the coherence of their contributions to existing topics. We found an asymmetric interaction between participants' initial positions and comment curation: participants with different initial positions had unequal reactions to curation that foregrounded comments with which they disagreed. This asymmetry implies that the factors underlying coherence are more nuanced than prioritizing participants' agreement or disagreement. We discuss how this finding relates to curating for coherent disagreement, and for curation more generally in deliberative processes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信