Do emotional appeals make arguments seem stronger?

References

1. AristotleW. Rhys Roberts
   Aristotle 2004 Rhetoric. Translated byW. Rhys Roberts. Dover Publications.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Banas, John A, Monique Mitchell Turner, and Hart Shulman
   2012 “A Test of Competing Hypotheses of the Effects of Mood on Persuasion.” Communication Quarterly60 (2): 143–164. 10.1080/01463373.2012.668845
   https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2012.668845 [Google Scholar]
3. Barbieri, Francesco, Luis Espinosa Anke, and Jose Camacho-Collados
   2022 “Xlm-t: Multilingual language models in twitter for sentiment analysis and beyond.” InProceedings of the Thirteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, 258–266.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Ben-Zeev, Aaron
   1995 “Emotions and Argumentation.” Informal Logic17 (2): 189–200.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Benlamine, Mohamed S., Serena Villata, Ramla Ghali, Claude Frasson, Fabien Gandon, and Elena Cabrio
   2017 “Persuasive Argumentation and Emotions: An Empirical Evaluation with Users.” Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)102711:659–671. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑58071‑5_50
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58071-5_50 [Google Scholar]
6. Benlamine, Sahbi, Maher Chaouachi, Serena Villata, Elena Cabrio, Claude Frasson, and Fabien Gandon
   2015 “Emotions in argumentation: an empirical evaluation.” InTwenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bizer, George Y., Jeff T. Larsen, and Richard E. Petty
   2011 “Exploring the Valence-Framing Effect: Negative Framing Enhances Attitude Strength.” Political Psychology32 (1): 59–80. 10.1111/j.1467‑9221.2010.00795.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00795.x [Google Scholar]
8. Blanchette, Isabelle
   2006 “The effect of emotion on interpretation and logic in a conditional reasoning task.” Memory & Cognition34 (5): 1112–1125. 10.3758/BF03193257
   https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193257 [Google Scholar]
9. Bodanza, Gustavo A., and Esteban Freidin
   2023 “Confronting value-based argumentation frameworks with people’s assessment of argument strength.” In“Argument strength.” Argument & Computation14 (3): 247–273. 10.3233/AAC‑220008
   https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-220008 [Google Scholar]
10. Boucher, Jerry, and Charles E Osgood
    1969 “The Pollyanna hypothesis.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior8 (1): 1–8.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Budán, Paola Daniela, Melisa Gisselle Escañuela Gonzalez, Maximiliano Celmo David Budán, Maria Vanina Martinez, and Guillermo Ricardo Simari
    2023 “Strength in coalitions: Community detection through argument similarity.” Argument & Computation14 (3): 275–325. 10.3233/AAC‑220006
    https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-220006 [Google Scholar]
12. Cerutti, Federico, Nava Tintarev, and Nir Oren
    2014 “Formal Arguments, Preferences, and Natural Language Interfaces to Humans: an Empirical Evaluation.” InECAI 2014: Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 2631:207–212. 10.3233/978‑1‑61499‑419‑0‑207
    https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-419-0-207 [Google Scholar]
13. Cigada, Sara
    2019 “Emotions in Argumentative Narration: The Case of the Charlie Hebdo Attack.” Informal Logic39 (4): 401–431.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Das, Gopal, Rajat Roy, and Vannie Naidoo
    2020 “When do consumers prefer partitioned prices? The role of mood and pricing tactic persuasion knowledge.” Journal of Business Research1161:60–67. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.013 [Google Scholar]
15. Dung, Phan Minh
    1995 “On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games.” Artificial intelligence77 (2): 321–357.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen, and Bert Meuffels
    2009 Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness: Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules. Vol.161. Argumentation Library. Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Ervas, Francesca
    2021 “Metaphor, ignorance and the sentiment of (ir)rationality.” Synthese, 1981: 6789–6813. 10.1007/s11229‑019‑02489‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02489-y [Google Scholar]
18. Ervas, Francesca, Maria Grazia Rossi, Amitash Ojha and Bipin Indurkhya
    2021 “The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation.” Frontiers in Psychology121:628460. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628460
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628460 [Google Scholar]
19. Gilbert, Michael A.
    1995 “What is an Emotional Argument, or, Why Do Argumentation Theorists Argue with Their Mates?” InProceedings of the Third Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam, NL.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Gilbert, Michael A.
    2004 “Emotion, argumentation and informal logic.” Informal Logic24 (3): 245–264.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Gilbert, Michael A.
    2005 “Let’s Talk: Emotion and the Pragma-Dialectic Model.” InArgumentation in Practice, edited byFrans H. van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser, 43–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cvs.2.05gil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cvs.2.05gil [Google Scholar]
22. Greco, Sara, Sara Cigada, and Chiara Jermini-Martinez Soria
    2022 “The naming of emotions in dispute mediators’ strategic manoeuvring: a case study using a French language corpus.” Text & Talk, (44): 25–46. 10.1515/text‑2021‑0044
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2021-0044 [Google Scholar]
23. Heit, Evan, and Caren M. Rotello
    2012 “The pervasive effects of argument length on inductive reasoning.” Thinking and Reasoning18 (3): 244–277. 10.1080/13546783.2012.695161
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2012.695161 [Google Scholar]
24. Heyninck, Jesse, Kenneth Skiba, and Matthias Thimm
    2023 “Preface for the special issue on argument strength.” Argument & Computation14 (3): 245–246. 10.3233/AAC‑230003
    https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-230003 [Google Scholar]
25. Hornikx, Jos, and Ulrike Hahn
    2012 “Reasoning and argumentation: Towards an integrated psychology of argumentation.” Thinking & Reasoning18 (3): 225–243.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Hornikx, Jos, Annemarie Weerman, and Hans Hoeken
    2022 “An exploratory test of an intuitive evaluation method of perceived argument strength.” Studies in Communication Sciences22 (2): 311–324.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Hullett, Craig R.
    2005 “The Impact of Mood on Persuasion: A Meta-Analysis.” Communication Research32 (4): 423–442. 10.1177/0093650205277317
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650205277317 [Google Scholar]
28. Iliescu, Dragoş
    2017 “Translation designs.” InAdapting tests in linguistic and cultural situations, 355–414. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316273203.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316273203.009 [Google Scholar]
29. International Test Commission
    International Test Commission 2017 “The ITC Guidelines for Translating and Adapting Tests (Second edition).”
    [Google Scholar]
30. James, J. Michael, and Richard Bolstein
    1990 “The effect of monetary incentives and follow-up mailings on the response rate and response quality in mail surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly541:346–361.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Johnson, Blair T., and Alice H. Eagly
    1989 “Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis.” Psychological Bulletin106 (2): 290–314. 10.1037/0033‑2909.106.2.290
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.290 [Google Scholar]
32. Konat, Barbara, Katarzyna Budzyńska, and Patrick Saint-Dizier
    2016 “Rephrase in Argument Structure.” InFoundations of the Language of Argumentation: COMMA 2016 Workshop, 321.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Konat, Barbara, Ewelina Gajewska, and Wiktoria Rossa
    2024 “Pathos in Natural Language Argumentation: Emotional Appeals and Reactions.” Argumentation381:369–403. 10.1007/s10503‑024‑09631‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-024-09631-2 [Google Scholar]
34. Koszowy, Marcin, Steve Oswald, Katarzyna Budzyńska, Barbara Konat, and Pascal Gygax
    2022 “A Pragmatic Account of Rephrase in Argumentation.” Informal Logic42 (1): 49–82. 10.22329/il.v42i1.7212
    https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v42i1.7212 [Google Scholar]
35. Levin, Kenneth D., Diana R. Nichols, and Blair T. Johnson
    2000 “Involvement and persuasion: Attitude functions for the motivated processor.” InWhy we evaluate: Functions of attitudes, edited byGregory R. Maio and James M. Olson, 163–194. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Lukin, Stephanie, Pranav Anand, Marilyn Walker, and Steve Whittaker
    2017 “Argument Strength is in the Eye of the Beholder: Audience Effects in Persuasion.” InProceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume11, Long Papers, 742–753, EACL. Valencia, Spain: Association for Computational Linguistics, April.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Macagno, Fabrizio, and Douglas Walton
    2014 Emotive language in argumentation. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139565776
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139565776 [Google Scholar]
38. Maďarová, Zuzana
    2015 “Love and fear: Argumentative strategies against gender equality in Slovakia.” InAnti-Gender Movements on the Rise? Strategising for Gender Equality in Central and Eastern Europe, edited bythe Heinrich Böll Foundation, 33–42. Berlin: Heinrich Böll Foundation.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Perelman, Chaim, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca
    1969 The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Translated byJohn Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Petty, Richard E., and John T. Cacioppo
    1981 Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo, and Rachel Goldman
    1981 “Personal Involvement as a Determinant of Argument-Based Persuasion.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology41 (5): 847–855.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Petty, Richard E., and John T. Cacioppo
    1986 “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology191:123–205. 10.1016/S0065‑2601(08)60214‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2 [Google Scholar]
43. Plantin, Christian
    2019 “Tense arguments: questions, exclamations, emotions.” Informal Logic39 (4): 347–371.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Polberg, Sylwia, and Anthony Hunter
    2018 “Empirical evaluation of abstract argumentation: Supporting the need for bipolar and probabilistic approaches.” International Journal of Approximate Reasoning931: 487–543. 10.1016/j.ijar.2017.11.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2017.11.008 [Google Scholar]
45. Rahwan, Iyad, Mohammed I. Madakkatel, Jean-François Bonnefon, Ruqiyabi N. Awan, and Sherief Abdallah
    2010 “Behavioral Experiments for Assessing the Abstract Argumentation Semantics of Reinstatement.” Cognitive Science341: 1483–1502. 10.1111/j.1551‑6709.2010.01123.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01123.x [Google Scholar]
46. Rico, Guillem, Marc Guinjoan, and Eva Anduiza
    2017 “The emotional underpinnings of populism: How anger and fear affect populist attitudes.” Swiss Political Science Review23 (4): 444–461.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Santibáñez, Cristián
    2010 “Metaphors and argumentation: The case of Chilean parliamentarian media participation.” Journal of Pragmatics42(4): 973–989. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.08.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.08.019 [Google Scholar]
48. Schreiner, Constanze, Markus Appel, Maj-Britt Isberner, and Tobias Richter
    2018 “Argument Strength and the Persuasiveness of Stories.” Discourse Processes55 (4): 371–386. 10.1080/0163853X.2016.1257406
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1257406 [Google Scholar]
49. Schumann, Jennifer, Sandrine Zufferey, and Steve Oswald
    2019 “What makes a straw man acceptable? Three experiments assessing linguistic factors.” Journal of Pragmatics1411: 1–15. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.12.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.12.008 [Google Scholar]
50. Sinclair, Robert C., Sara E. Moore, Melvin M. Mark, Alexander S. Soldat, and Catherine A. Lavis
    2010 “Incidental moods, source likeability, and persuasion: Liking motivates message elaboration in happy people.” Cognition and Emotion24 (6): 940–961. 10.1080/02699930903000206
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930903000206 [Google Scholar]
51. Szymański, Robert
    2022 Exploring the Validity of the Polish Adaptation of the Perceived Argument Strength Scale (PAS-PL): A Think-Aloud Study. MA thesis, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. Unpublished manuscript.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Teeny, Jacob D., Joseph J. Siev, Pablo Briñol, and Richard E. Petty
    2021 “A review and conceptual framework for understanding personalized matching effects in persuasion.” Journal of Consumer Psychology31 (2): 382–414. 10.1002/jcpy.1198
    https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1198 [Google Scholar]
53. Tindale, Christopher W.
    2015 The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Villata, Serena, Elena Cabrio, Imène Jraidi, Sahbi Benlamine, Maher Chaouachi, Claude Frasson, and Fabien Gandon
    2017 “Emotions and personality traits in argumentation: An empirical evaluation.” Argument & Computation81:61–87. 10.3233/AAC‑170015
    https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-170015 [Google Scholar]
55. Walkowiak, Magdalena T., and Kamil K. Imbir
    2018 “The Role of the Origin (Automatic vs. Reflective) of Affective State for the Effectiveness of Persuasion Based on Strong vs. Weak Arguments.” Roczniki Psychologiczne / Annals of Psychology21 (1): 9–33. 10.18290/rpsych.2018.21.1‑2
    https://doi.org/10.18290/rpsych.2018.21.1-2 [Google Scholar]
56. Walton, Douglas
    1992 The Place of Emotion in Argument. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Walton, Douglas
    2013 Scare tactics: Arguments that appeal to fear and threats. Vol.31. Springer Science & Business Media.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Wolf, Thomas, Lysandre Debut, Victor Sanh, Julien Chaumond, Clement Delangue, Anthony Moi, Pierric Cistac,
    2020 “Transformers: State-of-the-Art Natural Language Processing.” InProceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations, 38–45. Online: Association for Computational Linguistics, October.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Younis, Ramy, Daniel de Oliveira Fernandes, Pascal Gygax, Marcin Koszowy, and Steve Oswald
    2023 “Rephrasing is not arguing, but it is still persuasive: An experimental approach to perlocutionary effects of rephrase.” Journal of Pragmatics2101: 12–23. 10.1016/j.pragma.2023.03.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.03.010 [Google Scholar]
60. Zenker, Frank, Kamila Dębowska-Kozłowska, David Godden, Marcin Selinger, and Simon Wells
    2020 “Five approaches to argument strength: probabilistic, dialectical, structural, empirical, and computational.” InProceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Argumentation, 653–674.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Zenker, Frank, Kamila Dębowska-Kozłowska, David Godden, Marcin Selinger, and Simon Wells
    2023 “Thou Shalt Not Squander Life — Comparing Five Approaches to Argument Strength.” Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric68 (81): 133–167. 10.2478/slgr‑2023‑0007
    https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2023-0007 [Google Scholar]
62. Zhao, Xiaoquan, Andrew Strasser, Joseph N. Cappella, Caryn Lerman, and Martin Fishbein
    2011 “A Measure of Perceived Argument Strength: Reliability and Validity.” Communication Methods and Measures5 (1): 48–75.
    [Google Scholar]