AI & SOCIETY

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 109–120 | Cite as

Recommendations to support interaction with broadcast debates: a study on older adults’ interaction with The Moral Maze

  • Rolando Medellin-Gasque
  • Chris Reed
  • Vicki L. Hanson
Open Forum
  • 188 Downloads

Abstract

Current methods to capture, analyse and present the audience participation of broadcast events are increasingly carried out using social media. Uptake of such technology tools has so far been poor amongst older adults, and it has the worrying effect of excluding the demographic from participation. Our work explores whether a common desire to interact with debates can be tapped with technology with a very low barrier to entry, to both support better engagement with broadcast debates and encourage greater use of social media. This paper describes experiments where older adults interact with a BBC radio debate programme: The Moral Maze. As a result, we obtained common interaction patterns which then are used to define recommendations for software-supported interaction with debates based on theories of argumentation. Our goal is to combine research on computational models of argument and user-driven research on human-centred computing in a project with the potential for high-profile impact in addressing older adults inclusion in the digital economy.

Keywords

Broadcast debates Argument Web Software recommendations 

References

  1. Bolton M (2010) Older people, technology and community the potential of technology to help older people renew or develop social contacts and to actively engage in their communities, Independent Age, Research Report [online]. Available from: http://www.independentage.org/media/9425/gulbenkiannewreport.pdf. Accessed Sept 2014
  2. Bigi B, Portès C, Steuckardt A, Tellier M (2011) Multimodalannotations and categorisation for political debates. In: InICMI workshop on multimodal corpora for machine learning (ICMI-MMC)Google Scholar
  3. Cartwright D, Atkinson K, Bench-Capon T (2009) Supporting argument in e-democracy. In: Electronic government: third international electronic democracy (EDEM 2009) (Vienna, Austria), pp 151–160Google Scholar
  4. Chesñevar C, Mcginnis J, Modgil S, Rahwan I, Reed C, Simari G, South M, Vreeswijk GAW, Willmott S (2006) Towards an argument interchange format. Knowl Eng Rev 21(04):293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gatica-Perez D (2009) Automatic nonverbal analysis of social interaction in small groups: a review. Image Vis Comput 27(12):1775–1787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gordon T, Prakken H, Walton D (2007) The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artif Intell 171(10–15):875–896CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Krippendorff K (1980) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. SAGE Publications, Beverly Hills, CAGoogle Scholar
  8. Kumar R, Novak J, Tomkins A (2010) Structure and evolution of online social networks. In: Yu PS, Han J, Faloutsos C (eds) Link mining: models, algorithms, and applications SE-13. Springer, New York, pp 337–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lawrence J, Bex F, Reed C (2012) Dialogues on the Argument Web: mixed initiative argumentation with Arvina. In: Computational models of argument COMMA 2012, pp 513–514Google Scholar
  10. Lawrence J, Bex F, Reed C, Snaith M (2012) AIFdb: infrastructure for the Argument Web. In: Computational models of argument COMMA 2012, pp 515–516Google Scholar
  11. McBurney P, Parsons S (2001) Dialogue games in multi-agent systems. Informal Log 22(3):257–274Google Scholar
  12. McKeown G, Valstar M, Cowie R, Pantic M, Schroder M (2012) The semaine database: annotated multimodal records of emotionally colored conversations between a person and a limited agent. Affect Comput IEEE Trans 3(1):5–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ofcom (2006) Media literacy audit: report on media literacy amongst older adults [online]. Available from: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/older.pdf. Accessed Sept 2014
  14. Ofcom (2011) Adults’ media literacy in the nations: summary report [online]. Available from: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/media-literacy-bulletin-nations/adults_nations_June11.pdf. Accessed Sept 2014
  15. Ofcom (2012) Adults media use and attitudes report. Research document [online]. Available from: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/media-use-attitudes/adults-media-use-2012.pdf. Accessed Sept 2014
  16. Office for National Statistics (2013) Statistical Bulletin Internet Access Quarterly Update, Q2 2013Google Scholar
  17. Pak A, Paroubek P (2010) Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In: Tapias NCCC, Choukri K, Maegaard B, Mariani J, Odijk J, Piperidis S, Rosner M, Daniel (eds) Proceedings of the seventh international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’10), Valleta, Malta, 2010. European Language Resources Association (ELRA)Google Scholar
  18. Pang B, Lee L (2008) Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Found Trends Inf Retr 2(1–2):1–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Phillipson C, Scharf T, Kingston P, Smith AE (2001) Social exclusion and older people: exploring the connections. Educ Ageing 16(3):303–320Google Scholar
  20. Rahwan I, Zablith F, Reed C (2007) Laying the foundations for a world wide argument web. Artif Intell 171(10–15):897–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Reed C (1997) Representing and applying knowledge for argumentation in a social context. AI Soc 11(1–2):138–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reed C, Devereux J, Wells S, Rowe G (2008) AIF+: dialogue in the argument interchange format. In: Proceedings of the 2008 conference on computational models of argument: proceedings of COMMA 2008. IOS Press, pp 311–323Google Scholar
  23. Reed C, Walton D (2007) Argumentation schemes in dialogue. In: Hansen HV (ed) Dissensus and the search for common ground. OSSA, Windsor, ON, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  24. Sæbø Ø, Nilsen H (2004) The support for different democracy models by the use of a web-based discussion board. In: Electronic government. Springer, Berlin, pp 23–26Google Scholar
  25. Shamma DA, Kennedy L, Churchill EF (2009) Tweet the debates: understanding community annotation of uncollected sources. In: Proceedings of the first SIGMM workshop on social media, WSM ’09, New York, NY, USA. ACM, pp 3–10Google Scholar
  26. Snaith M, Bex F, Lawrence J, Reed C (2012) Implementing ArguBlogging. In: Computational models of argument COMMA 2012. IOS Press, pp 511–512Google Scholar
  27. Tumasjan A, Sprenger TO, Sandner PG, Welpe IM (2010) Predicting elections with Twitter: what 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In: The international AAAI conference on weblogs and social media, pp 178–185Google Scholar
  28. Walton D, Reed C, Macagno F (2008) Argumentation schemes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zickuhr K, Madden M (2012) Older adults and internet use. Technical report, Pew Research Center Internet and American Life ProjectGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rolando Medellin-Gasque
    • 1
  • Chris Reed
    • 1
  • Vicki L. Hanson
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of ComputingUniversity of DundeeDundeeUK
  2. 2.GCCISRochester Institute of TechnologyRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations