Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring the Mobile Usability of Argumentative Dialogue Systems for Opinion Building

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Design, Operation and Evaluation of Mobile Communications (HCII 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 14052))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 445 Accesses

Abstract

Nowadays speech-driven interfaces such as mobile digital assistants and chatbots can support collaborative information seeking and are becoming increasingly commonplace. Especially, mobile dialogue assistants offer innovative approaches to deliver and access information and thus, display a promising approach to assist humans in their opinion building process. Still, due to the complexity of argumentative tasks mobile argumentative speech interfaces are still very scarce. Hence, the effect of such interfaces on a user’s opinion building process is quite unexplored. In this paper, we investigate the influence of such interfaces on the interest and opinion building process of users. Both categories Therefore we introduce two (I/O) modalities (menu/speech) of the argumentative dialog system (ADS) BEA (“Building Engaging Argumentation” [2]) which enables the user to scrutinize arguments on both sides of a controversial topic. In particular, we reflect on the influence and advantages of a spoken hands-free versus a clickable drop-down menu-based ADS with regard to “mobile” dialog systems use cases. Therefore the users’ expectations and experiences in a self-assessment questionnaire are evaluated and discussed in comparison to our user interest and opinion model.

This work has been funded by the DFG within the project “BEA - Building Engaging Argumentation”, Grant no. 313723125, as part of the Priority Program “Robust Argumentation Machines (RATIO)” (SPP-1999).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Rating categories: (not) interesting, (not) convincing, (not) comprehensible and (not) related.

  2. 2.

    https://idebate.org/debatabase (last accessed 23th June 2021). Material reproduced from www.iedebate.org with the permission of the International Debating Education Association. Copyright © 2005 International Debate Education Association. All Rights Reserved.

  3. 3.

    Here preference denotes the following options: preference, indifference and rejection.

  4. 4.

    https://pypi.org/project/SpeechRecognition/, last accessed 17.02.2022.

  5. 5.

    https://www.crowdee.com/.

  6. 6.

    Such questionnaires can be used to evaluate the quality of speech-based services.

  7. 7.

    Due to the argument tree structure described in Sect. 3 the respective argument component is a root node of the corresponding branch.

  8. 8.

    Neutral indicates that the participants’ opinion towards the Major Claim is neutral. This does not mean that participants’ positive and negative opinions cancel each other out.

  9. 9.

    5 = Excellent, 4 = Good, 3 = Fair, 2 = Poor, 1 = Bad.

  10. 10.

    For better readability we refer to all preference-related moves (indifferent, reject, prefer, prefer_current, prefer_old, equal) as preferences.

References

  1. Abro, W.A., Aicher, A., Rach, N., Ultes, S., Minker, W., Qi, G.: Natural language understanding for argumentative dialogue systems in the opinion building domain. Knowl.-Based Syst. 242, 108318 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aicher, A., Rach, N., Minker, W., Ultes, S.: Opinion building based on the argumentative dialogue system BEA. In: Marchi, E., Siniscalchi, S.M., Cumani, S., Salerno, V.M., Li, H. (eds.) Increasing Naturalness and Flexibility in Spoken Dialogue Interaction. LNEE, vol. 714, pp. 307–318. Springer, Singapore (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-9323-9_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Amgoud, L., Ben-Naim, J.: Evaluation of arguments from support relations: axioms and semantics. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-16, pp. 900–906 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Amgoud, L., Ben-Naim, J.: Weighted bipolar argumentation graphs: axioms and semantics. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-18, pp. 5194–5198 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Amgoud, L., Bonnefon, J.-F., Prade, H.: An argumentation-based approach to multiple criteria decision. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 269–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_24

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making and explaining decisions. Artif. Intell. 173, 413–436 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Baroni, P., Romano, M., Toni, F., Aurisicchio, M., Bertanza, G.: Automatic evaluation of design alternatives with quantitative argumentation. Argument Comput. 6(1), 24–49 (2015)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Bechhofer, S.: Owl: Web ontology language. In: Liu, L., Özsu, M.T. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Database Systems, pp. 2008–2009. Springer, Boston (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-39940-9_1073

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Briguez, C., Budán, M., Deagustini, C., Maguitman, A., Capobianco, M., Simari, G.: Argument-based mixed recommenders and their application to movie suggestion. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(14), 6467–6482 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Budán, M., Simari, G., Simari, G.: Using argument features to improve the argumentation process. In: Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2016, Potsdam, Germany, 12–16 September, 2016, pp. 151–158 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Carenini, G., Moore, J.D.: Generating and evaluating evaluative arguments. Artif. Intell. 170(11), 925–952 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chalaguine, L., Hunter, A.: Addressing popular concerns regarding covid-19 vaccination with natural language argumentation dialogues. In: Vejnarová, J., Wilson, N. (eds.) ECSQARU 2021. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12897, pp. 59–73. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86772-0_5

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Chalaguine, L.A., Hunter, A.: A persuasive chatbot using a crowd-sourced argument graph and concerns. In: COMMA (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chalyi, S., Pribylnova, I.: The method of constructing recommendations online on the temporal dynamics of user interests using multilayer graph. EUREKA Phys. Eng. (3), 13–19 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chien, Y.H., George, E.I.: A Bayesian model for collaborative filtering. In: AISTATS (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Das, R., Farrell, R.G., Rajput, N.: Social recommender system for generating dialogues based on similar prior dialogues from a group of users. US Patent 8,275,384 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Devlin, J., Chang, M.W., Lee, K., Toutanova, K.: BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In: Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, vol. 1, pp. 4171–4186. Minneapolis, Minnesota. Association for Computational Linguistics (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fazzinga, B., Galassi, A., Torroni, P.: An argumentative dialogue system for COVID-19 vaccine information. In: Baroni, P., Benzmüller, C., Wáng, Y.N. (eds.) CLAR 2021. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 13040, pp. 477–485. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89391-0_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Gauch, S., Speretta, M., Chandramouli, A., Micarelli, A.: User profiles for personalized information access. In: The Adaptive Web, pp. 54–89 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gazdar, A., Hidri, L.: A new similarity measure for collaborative filtering based recommender systems. Knowl.-Based Syst. 188, 105058 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hadoux, E., Hunter, A., Polberg, S.: Strategic argumentation dialogues for persuasion: framework and experiments based on modelling the beliefs and concerns of the persuadee. Argument Comput. 14, 1–53 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-210005

  22. Hawashin, B., Aqel, D., AlZu’bi, S., Jararweh, Y.: Novel weighted interest similarity measurement for recommender systems using rating timestamp. In: 6th International Conference on Software Defined Systems (SDS), pp. 166–170. IEEE (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hurtig, T.: A mobile multimodal dialogue system for public transportation navigation evaluated. In: Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, MobileHCI 2006, pp. 251–254. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2006). ISBN 1595933905

    Google Scholar 

  24. Johnston, M., et al.: MATCH: an architecture for multimodal dialogue systems. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 376–383 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Le, D.T., Nguyen, C.T., Nguyen, K.A.: Dave the debater: a retrieval-based and generative argumentative dialogue agent. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Argument Mining, pp. 121–130 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Liu, J., Pasupat, P., Cyphers, S., Glass, J.: ASGARD: a portable architecture for multilingual dialogue systems. In: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, pp. 8386–8390 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lops, P., de Gemmis, M., Semeraro, G.: Content-based recommender systems: state of the art and trends. In: Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B., Kantor, P.B. (eds.) Recommender Systems Handbook, pp. 73–105. Springer, Boston, MA (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85820-3_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. McKnight, P.E., Najab, J.: Mann-Whitney U Test. American Cancer Society (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Oguego, C., Augusto, J., Muñoz, A., Springett, M.: Using argumentation to manage users’ preferences. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 81, 235–243 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Öztürké, M., Tsoukiàs, A., Vincke, P.: Preference Modelling. In: Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrogott, M. (eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 78, pp. 27–59. Springer, New York (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23081-5_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. P.851, I.T.R.: Subjective quality evaluation of telephone services based on spoken dialogue systems (11/2003). International Telecommunication Union (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Pavlov, D., Pennock, D.M.: A maximum entropy approach to collaborative filtering in dynamic, sparse, high-dimensional domains. In: NIPS, vol. 2, pp. 1441–1448. Citeseer (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pazzani, M.J., Billsus, D.: Content-based recommendation systems. In: Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A., Nejdl, W. (eds.) The Adaptive Web. LNCS, vol. 4321, pp. 325–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72079-9_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Qiu, F., Cho, J.: Automatic identification of user interest for personalized search. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 727–736 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Rach, N., Langhammer, S., Minker, W., Ultes, S.: Utilizing argument mining techniques for argumentative dialogue systems. In: D’Haro, L.F., Banchs, R.E., Li, H. (eds.) 9th International Workshop on Spoken Dialogue System Technology. LNEE, vol. 579, pp. 131–142. Springer, Singapore (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9443-0_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Rach, N., Matsuda, Y., Daxenberger, J., Ultes, S., Yasumoto, K., Minker, W.: Evaluation of argument search approaches in the context of argumentative dialogue systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, pp. 513–522. ELRA, Marseille (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Rago, A., Toni, F., Aurisicchio, M., Baroni, P.: Discontinuity-free decision support with quantitative argumentation debates. In: Fifteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2016), pp. 63–73 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Rakshit, G., Bowden, K.K., Reed, L., Misra, A., Walker, M.A.: Debbie, the debate bot of the future. In: Advanced Social Interaction with Agents - 8th International Workshop on Spoken Dialog Systems, pp. 45–52 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Reithinger, N., Sonntag, D.: An integration framework for a mobile multimodal dialogue system accessing the semantic web. In: INTERSPEECH, pp. 841–844 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B.: Introduction to recommender systems handbook. In: Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B., Kantor, P. (eds.) Recommender Systems Handbook, pp. 1–35. Springer, Boston (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85820-3_1

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B.: Recommender systems: introduction and challenges. In: Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B. (eds.) Recommender Systems Handbook, pp. 1–34. Springer, Boston, MA (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7637-6_1

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Rosenfeld, A., Kraus, S.: Strategical argumentative agent for human persuasion. In: ECAI 2016, pp. 320–328 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Saha, T., Saha, S., Bhattacharyya, P.: Towards sentiment-aware multi-modal dialogue policy learning. Cogn. Comput. 14, 1–15 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Slonim, N., et al.: An autonomous debating system. Nature 591(7850), 379–384 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Son, J., Kim, S.B.: Content-based filtering for recommendation systems using multiattribute networks. Expert Syst. Appl. 89, 404–412 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Sonntag, D., Schulz, C., Reuschling, C., Galarraga, L.: Radspeech’s mobile dialogue system for radiologists. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI 2012, pp. 317–318. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2012). ISBN 9781450310482

    Google Scholar 

  47. Stab, C., Gurevych, I.: Annotating argument components and relations in persuasive essays. In: COLING, pp. 1501–1510 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Su, Z., Yan, J., Ling, H., Chen, H.: Research on personalized recommendation algorithm based on ontological user interest model. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 8(1), 169–181 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Tsourakis, N.: Development & evaluation of multilingual multimodal dialogue systems on mobile devices. Ph.D. thesis (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Wilcock, G., Jokinen, K.: Towards increasing naturalness and flexibility in human-robot dialogue systems. In: Marchi, E., Siniscalchi, S.M., Cumani, S., Salerno, V.M., Li, H. (eds.) Increasing Naturalness and Flexibility in Spoken Dialogue Interaction. LNEE, vol. 714, pp. 109–114. Springer, Singapore (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-9323-9_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  51. Woolson, R.: Wilcoxon signed-rank test. In: Wiley Encyclopedia of Clinical Trials, pp. 1–3 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Yi, J., Zhang, Y., Yin, M., Zhao, X.: A novel user-interest model based on mixed measure. In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 887, p. 012061. IOP Publishing (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Zeng, X., Li, J., Wang, L., Mao, Z., Wong, K.F.: Dynamic online conversation recommendation. In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 3331–3341. Association for Computational Linguistics (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Zhou, G., et al.: Deep interest evolution network for click-through rate prediction. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 33, pp. 5941–5948 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Communications Engineering, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 43, 89081, Ulm, Germany

    Annalena Aicher & Wolfgang Minker

  2. Quality and Usability Lab, TU Berlin, Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7, 10587, Berlin, Germany

    Stefan Hillmann & Sebastian Möller

  3. Language Generation and Dialogue Systems, University of Bamberg, An der Weberei 5, 96047, Bamberg, Germany

    Stefan Ultes

Authors
  1. Annalena Aicher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefan Hillmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sebastian Möller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wolfgang Minker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stefan Ultes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annalena Aicher .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

    Gavriel Salvendy

  2. University of West Florida, Pensacola, FL, USA

    June Wei

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Aicher, A., Hillmann, S., Möller, S., Minker, W., Ultes, S. (2023). Exploring the Mobile Usability of Argumentative Dialogue Systems for Opinion Building. In: Salvendy, G., Wei, J. (eds) Design, Operation and Evaluation of Mobile Communications . HCII 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14052. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35921-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35921-7_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-35920-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-35921-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation