Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seeing the point of politics: exploring the use of CSAV techniques as aids to understanding the content of political debates in the Scottish Parliament

  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Governments now recognise the potential for ICTs to improve the way in which they can engage with the population, whether conducting online consultations to elicit the people’s views on proposed policy, or disseminating information via websites. However, much of the information remains in text format, leaving the task of extracting data the viewer’s responsibility. This can be a daunting prospect, especially in the case of reports of parliamentary proceedings. In the past, Argument Visualisation techniques were used in training law students to render legal cases easier to comprehend; now, enhanced by all the advantages ICT has to offer, these techniques are employed to help make sense of thorny problems in academia and business. The possibility exists that such methods might also serve to clarify complex political issues of interest to the public. This paper describes an investigation into such a possibility. Two debates taken from the Scottish Parliament 2003 Autumn session were converted into argument visualisations and presented for comparison with the ‘Official Report’ to assess whether the visualisations offered any advantages over the textual alternative.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Araucaria (2004). URL: http://www.computing.dundee.ac.uk/staff/creed/araucaria/ [8.11.04]

  • ArguMed (2004). URL: http://www.ai.rug.nl/∼verheij/aaa/index.htm [8.11.04]

  • Athena (2004). URL: http://www.athenasoft.org/index.htm [8.11.04]

  • Atkinson K. M., Bench-Capon T., McBurney P., (2004), PARMENIDES: Facilitating Democratic Debate. In R. Traunmuller (Ed), Electronic Government (EGOV 2004), Springer: Berlin. pp 313–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Belvedere (2004). URL: http://lilt.ics.hawaii.edu/lilt/software/belvedere/index.html [8.11.04]

  • Bench-Capon, T. J. M., Lowes, D., and McEnery, A. M. (1991). Argument-based Explanation of Logic Programs. Knowledge Based Systems 4(3): 177–183

  • Buzan T. (1996), The Mind Map Book. B.B.C.: London

    Google Scholar 

  • ClaiMaker (2004). URL: http://claimaker.open.ac.uk/ [8.11.04]

  • Coleman S., (2005), Direct Representation: Towards a Conversational Democracy. IPPR: London

    Google Scholar 

  • Compendium (2004). URL: http://www.compendiuminstitute.org/tools/compendiumvsquestmap.htm [8.11.2004]

  • Concept map. (2006). URL: http://users.edte.utwente.nl/lanzing/cm_home.htm [24.5.06]

  • Conklin J., (2003), Dialog Mapping: Reflections on an Industrial Strength Case Study. In P. A. Kirshchner, S. J. Buckingham Shum., C. S. Carr (Eds), Visualizing Argumentation. Springer: London

    Google Scholar 

  • DebateMapper URL: http://debatemapper.net/dm1/Default.aspx [8.11.04]

  • Donath J., (2002), A Semantic Approach to Visualizing Online Conversations. Communications of the ACM, 45/4: 45–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Electoral Commission (2002), Scotland Votes? Public Attitudes towards Scottish Parliament Elections. The Electoral Commission: London

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn R. E. (2003), Infrastructure for Navigating Interdisciplinary Debates: Critical Decisions for Representing Argumentation. In P. A. Kirshchner, S. J. Buckingham Shum., C. S. Carr (Ed.), Visualizing Argumentation. Springer: London

    Google Scholar 

  • Karacapilidis N., Loukis E., Dimopoulos S., (2004), A Web-based System for Supporting Structured Collaboration in the Public Sector. In R. Traunmuller (Eds), Electronic Government (EGOV 2004). Springer: Berlin. pp 218– 225

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunz, W. and Rittel, H. (1979). Issues as Elements of Information Systems, Working Paper No. 131, California: Berkley. URL: http://www-iurd.ced.berkeley.edu/pub/WP-131.pdf [8.11.04]

  • Phillis, B. (2003). Government Communications Review Group Interim Report 27th August 2003. Cabinet office. URL: http://www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/reports/commrev/pdf/pmguidance.pdf [4.11.03]

  • Reason!Able (2004). URL: http://www.goreason.com/ [8.11.04]

  • Renton, A. and Macintosh, A. (2005). Exploiting Argument Mapping Techniques to Support Policy-Making. In Andersen, K. V., Gronlund, A., Traunmuller, R., and Wimmer, M. (eds.), Electronic Government: Workshop and Paper Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference, EGOV 2005. Springer: Berlin

  • Rittel H., Webber M., (1973), Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning, Policy Sciences, 4: 155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scottish Civic Forum (2004). URL: http://www.civicforum.org.uk/introductions/intro_whatisscf.html [8.11.2004]

  • Selvin A. M. (2003), Fostering Collective Intelligence: Helping Groups Use Visualized Argumentation. In P. A. Kirshchner, S. J. Buckingham Shum., C. S. Carr (Eds), Visualizing Argumentation Springer: London

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefik M., Foster G., Bobrow D. G., Kahn K., Lanning S., Suchman L. (1987), Beyond the Chalkboard: Computer Support for Collaboration and Problem Solving in Meetings, Communications of the ACM, 30(1): 32–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin S., (1958), The uses of Argument. CUP: Cambridge, England

    Google Scholar 

  • van Gelder T., (2003), Enhancing Deliberation Through Computer Supported Argument Mapping. In P. A. Kirshchner, S. J. Buckingham Shum., C. S. Carr (Eds), Visualizing Argumentation. Springer: London

    Google Scholar 

  • Verheij, B. (1998). Argu-Med – A Template-based Argument Mediation System for Lawyers. In Hage, J. C., Bench-Capon, T. J. M., Koers, A. W., de Vey Mestdagh, C. N. J. and Grutters, C. A. F. M. (eds.), Legal Knowledge Based Systems, JURIX: Proceedings of The Eleventh Conference. Gerard Noodt Instituut: Nijmegan

  • Vivato (2003). URL: http://www.vivarto.com/tiki-index.php [8.11.04]

  • Whyte A., Smith E., Alberts I., Macintosh A. (2005), Continuing the Dialogue on Radioactive Waste Management: Engaging Young Scots Innovatively. Scottish Executive Central Research Unit: Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigmore H. J. A., (1913), The Principles of Judicial Proof as Given by Logic, Psychology, and General Experience and Illustrated in Judicial Trials. Little Brown: Boston

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Teledemocracy Centre, Napier University, Edinburgh, EH10 5DT, Scotland

    Alastair Renton

Authors
  1. Alastair Renton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alastair Renton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Renton, A. Seeing the point of politics: exploring the use of CSAV techniques as aids to understanding the content of political debates in the Scottish Parliament. Artif Intell Law 14, 277–304 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-007-9040-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-007-9040-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation