Epistemic Frames and Political Discourse Modeling

Hamilton, Eric; Hobbs, Woodson

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-67788-6_3

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Nachtigall and Sung [9] utilize debate as a code to describe student interactions during collaboration, but do not delve into the components of that debate. Hamilton & Hobbs [10] considered political debates which would tend to be included as SD, but their analysis strayed from the pro/con focus and towards a more epistemic view of arguments and positions. We were interested in utilizing QE methodology to map the structure of SDs, identify challenges and affordances of debate discourse, and explore some ways to model such data.…”

Section: Introduction 11 Classroom and Online Structured Debatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaching Structured Debate with Quantitative Ethnography in Mind

Scianna

Kaliisa

Boisvenue

et al. 2022

Communications in Computer and Information Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structured Debate (SD) is a constrained discourse style that is popular in many different forums. The expansion of SD to online platforms leaves many questions about addressing this type of data during analysis. Quantitative Ethnography (QE) may provide a framework for the considerations that need to be made when analyzing SD datasets. In this paper, we review the ways in which QE methods are compatible with SD and the challenges associated with applying this method. Using data from an online, SD forum, we present a narrative of the decision-making process throughout the analysis process. We find that QE allows for myriad insights to be gained from this form of data depending on the approach one takes including insights into structures, content, and participation. This work intends to serve as a model for researchers hoping to utilize QE on SD and, more broadly, for approaching novel datasets.

show abstract

Section: Introduction 11 Classroom and Online Structured Debatesmentioning

confidence: 99%