Skip to main content

Models of Persuasion Dialogue

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence

This chapter1 reviews formal dialogue systems for persuasion. In persuasion dialogues two or more participants try to resolve a conflict of opinion, each trying to persuade the other participants to adopt their point of view. Dialogue systems for persuasion regulate how such dialogues can be conducted and what their outcome is. Good dialogue systems ensure that conflicts of view can be resolved in a fair and effective way [6]. The term ‘persuasion dialogue’ was coined by Walton [13] as part of his influential classification of dialogues into six types according to their goal. While persuasion aims to resolve a difference of opinion, negotiation tries to resolve a conflict of interest by reaching a deal, information seeking aims at transferring information, deliberationdeliberation wants to reach a decision on a course of action, inquiry is aimed at “growth of knowledge and agreement” and quarrel is the verbal substitute of a fight. This classification leaves room for shifts of dialogues of one type to another. In particular, other types of dialogues can shift to persuasion when a conflict of opinion arises. For example, in information-seeking a conflict of opinion could arise on the credibility of a source of information, in deliberation the participants may disagree about likely effects of plans or actions and in negotiation they may disagree about the reasons why a proposal is in one’s interest.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. J. Barwise and L. Moss. Vicious Circles. Number 60 in CSLI Lecture Notes. CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  2. G. Brewka. Dynamic argument systems: a formal model of argumentation processes based on situation calculus. Journal of Logic and Computation, 11:257–282, 2001.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. L. Carlson. Dialogue Games: an Approach to Discourse Analysis. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  4. T. Gordon. The Pleadings Game: an exercise in computational dialectics. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2:239–292, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. C. Hamblin. Fallacies. Methuen, London, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R. Loui. Process and policy: resource-bounded non-demonstrative reasoning. Computational Intelligence, 14:1–38, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. J. Mackenzie. Question-begging in non-cumulative systems. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8:117–133, 1979.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. S. Parsons, M. Wooldridge, and L. Amgoud. Properties and complexity of some formal inter-agent dialogues. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13, 2003. 347-376.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. J. Pollock. Cognitive Carpentry. A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  10. H. Prakken. Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation, 15:1009–1040, 2005.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. H. Prakken. Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 21:163–188, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-classical Logics, 7:25–75, 1997.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. D. Walton. Logical dialogue-games and fallacies. University Press of America, Inc., Lanham, MD., 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Walton and E. Krabbe. Commitment in Dialogue. Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Woods and D. Walton. Arresting circles in formal dialogues. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 7:73–90, 1978.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. T. Yuan, D. Moore, and A. Grierson. A human-computer dialogue system for educational debate: A computational dialectics approach. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18:3–26, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henry Prakken .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag US

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Prakken, H. (2009). Models of Persuasion Dialogue. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-98196-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-98197-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics