Group structured reasoning for coalescing group decisions
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2009
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Group Decision and Negotiation Vol. , no. (2009), p. 1-29
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: In this paper we present the notion of structured reasoning through a model, called the Generic/Actual Argument Model (GAAM). The model which has been used as a computational representation for machine modelling of reasoning and for hybrid combinations of human and machine reasoning can be used as a coalescent framework for decision making. Whilst the notion of structuring reasoning is not new, structured reasoning is advanced as a technique where group consensus on reasoning structures at various levels can be used to facilitate the comprehension of complex reasoning particularly where there are multiple perspectives. For an issue, the approach provides a scaffolding structure for cognitive co-operation and a normative reasoning structure against which group participants can identify points of difference and points in common as well as the nature of the differences and similarities. Intra-group transparency characterized by the ability to recognise points in common and understand the nature of differences is important to the process of coalescing group decisions that carry maximum group support. © 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
The generic/actual argument model of practical reasoning
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2006
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Decision Support Systems Vol. 41, no. 2 (2006), p. 358-379
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: In this paper, we present a model of reasoning called the generic/actual argument model (GAAM). Reasoning within a discursive community can be represented with this model so that participant claims can be accommodated without recourse to combative metaphors such as attack or defeat. The model facilitates the comprehension of complex reasoning for humans as well as being a computational representation for machine modelling of reasoning. As such, the model naturally integrates machine inferences with human. The model has been the basis for the development of practical systems to support reasoning and deliberation in areas of law and organizational decision making. Here, we present a formal description of the model and identify some of its characteristics. © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
- Description: C1
- Description: 2003001594
Generic arguments : A framework for supporting online deliberative discourse
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2002
- Type: Text , Conference paper
- Relation: Paper presented at the Thirteenth Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Melbourne : 4th December, 2002
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: In this paper we propose a framework based on argumentation that can be used to support deliberative discourse on line. Online communities have several distinct advantages as very open forums but they also have some deep disadvantages. We argue that the proposed framework and web application GAAMtalk permits and encourages the positive elements of online deliberation that will enhance discussions.
- Description: E1
- Description: 2003000114