Abstract
This chapter considers some of the “roots” to Computer-Supported Argument Visualization (CSAV). The definitions above point to historical ancestors and conceptual foundations, and this chapter seeks to identify the most influential work to whom CSAV owes an intellectual debt. Specifically, we will consider individuals who invented paper-based precursors of argument maps, and/or who envisioned the possibilities that computers opened up. In mapping CSAV’s intellectual terrain, I may well omit important branches to its roots that I have not encountered, but hope that this chapter will serve to stimulate the forging of further connections to other traditions.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aleven V. & Ashley K. D. (1994). An instructional environment for practising argumentation skills. AAAI’94: Proceedings of Annual Conferrence American Assoc. Artificiallntelligence, 485–492. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Andriessen J., Baker M., & Suthers D. (Ed.). (in press). Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Baker M.J. (1999). Argumentation and constructive interaction. In J. Andriessen & P. Coier (Eds.) Foundations of Argumentative Text Processing. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press.
Begeman M. and Conklin J. (1988). The right tool for the right job. BYTE, Oct. 1988.
Bench-Capon, T. J. M., Leng, P. H., & Stanford, G. (1998). A computer supported environment for the teaching of legal argument. The Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 3. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/98-3/capon.html
Bootstrap Institute. Available from http://www.bootstrap.org
Brown J. S. (1986). From cognitive ergonomics to social ergonomics and beyond. In D. Norman & S. Draper (Ed.), User Centered System Design (pp. 457–486). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brown/MIT (1995). Brown/MIT Bush Symposium. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://www.cs.brown.edu/memex/
Buckingham Shum S., & Hammond N. (1994). Argumentation-Based design rationale: What use at what cost? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40(4), 603–652.
Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://www.theadantic.com/unbound/flashbks/computer/bushfhtm
Buzan, T. (1974). Useyour head. London: BBC.
Conklin, J. (1987). Hypertext: An introduction and survey. IEEE Computer, 20(9), 1741.
Conklin, J., & Begeman, M. L. (1988). gIBIS: A hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 4(6), 303-331.
CSILE: Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environment. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://csile.olse.utoronto.ca/
Diagrammatic Reasoning (2002). Gateway to the diagrammatic reasoning website. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/gal/Diagrams/
Eastgate Systems: Storyspace. Available from http://www.eastgate.com
ConceptFrameworkInd.html
Engelbart, D. C. (1963). A conceptual framework for the augmentation of man’s intellect. In P. Howerton & D. Weeks (Eds.), Vistas in information handling (pp. 129). Washington, DC: Spartan Books.
Fischer, G., Lemke, A. C., McCall, R., & Morch, A. I. (1991). Making Argumentation Serve Design. Human-Computer Interaction, 6(3&4), 393–419.
Glasgow, J., Narayanan, N. H., & Chandrasekaran, B. (Ed.). (1995). Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Greif, I (ed.), Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: A Book of Readings. Morgan Kaufman, San Mateo, California, 1988.
Grudin, J. (1994). Groupware and social dynamics: Eight challenges for developers. Communications of the ACM, 37(1), 92-105.
Halasz, F. G., Moran, T. P., & Trigg, R. H. (1987). NoteCards in a nutshell. Proceedings of CHI and GI’87: Human Factors in Computing Systems and Graphic Interface, 45-52. New York: ACM.
Horn, R. (1989). Mapping hypertext. The analysis, organisation, and display of knowledge for the nextgeneration of on-line text and graphics. Lexington, MA: Lexington Institute.
Horn, R. (1998). Visual language: Global communication for the 21st century. Bainbridge Island, WA: MacroVIJ, Inc.
Knowledge Forum. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://www.learn.motion.com/lim/kf/KFO.html
Kolb D. (1994). Socrates in the Labyrinth: Hypertext, Argument, Philosophy (A Hypertext. Watertown: Eastgate Systems. http://www.eastgate.com
Kolb, D. (1997). Scholarly hypertext: Self-represented complexity. Proceedings of the Eighth ACM Conference on Hypertext, (Southampton), 29-37. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http.//journals.ecs.soton.ac.uk/-lac/ht97/pdfs/kolb.pdf
Lee, J. (1991). Extending the Potts and Bruns model for recording design rationale. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Software Engineering, 114-125. New York: IEEE-ACM.
MacLean, A. Bellotti, V. and Buckingham Shum, S. (1993). Developing the design space with design space analysis. In P. F. Byerley, P. J. Barnard, and J. May (Eds.). Computers, Communication and Usability: Design issues, research and methods for integrated services. (North Holland Series in Telecommunication) pp.197-219. Amsterdam: Elsevier%
MacLean, A., Young, R. M., Bellotti, V., & Moran, T. (1991). Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of design space analysis. Human-Computer Interaction, 6(3, 4), 201250.
Malone, T. W., Grant, K. R., Lai, K.-Y., Rao, R., & Rosenblitt, D. (1987). Semistructured messages are surprisingly useful for computer-supported coordination. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 5,(2), 115-131.
Marshall, C. C. (1989). Representing the structure of legal arguments. Proceedings of the International Conference on AI and Law, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Marshall, C. C., & Rogers, R. A. (1992). Two years before the mist: Experiences with aquanet. Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Conference on Hypertext (pp. 53-62)
Mason, R., & Kaye, A. (Ed.). (1989). Mindweave: communication, computers and distance education. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://wwvv-icdl.open.ac.uk/hteraturestore/mindweave/mindweave.html
McCall, R. J. (1991). PHI: A conceptual foundation for design hypermedia. Design Studies, 12(1), 30-41
MindMap.com-Tony Buzan. Available from http://www.mind-map.com/
Moran, T. P., & Carroll, J. M. (Ed.). (1996). Design rationale: concepts, techniques, and use. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
MouseSite: Sloan School of Management, Stanford University, CA. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://sloan.stanford.edu/mousesite/
Novak, J. D. (1976). Understanding the learning process and effectiveness of teaching methods in the Classroom, laboratory, and field. Science Education, 60(4), 493-512. Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning creating and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York and Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetorzc., A Treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame, IN.: Notre Dame University Press.
Pilkington, R. M., Hartley, J. R., Hintze, D., & Moore, D. J. (1992). Learning to argue and arguing to learn: An interface for computer-based dialogue games. Journal of ArtificialIntelligence in Education, 3(3), 275-285.
PPIG (2002). Psychology of Programming Interest Group: Workshops. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://www.ppig.org/workshops
Ravenscroft, A. (2000). Designing argumentation for conceptual development. Computers and Education, 34, 241-255.
Rein, G. L., & Ellis, C. A. (1991). rIBIS: A real-time group hypertext system. International f ournal of Man Machine Studies, 24(3), 349-367.
Rittel, H. W. J. (1972). Second generation design methods. Interview in: Design Methods Group 5th Anniversary Report: DMG Occasional Paper, 1, 5-10. Reprinted in: Developments in Design Methodology, N. Cross (Ed.), 1984, pp. 317-327.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155-169.
Scardamaha, M., Bereiter, C., McLean, R. S., Swallow, J., & Woodruff, E. (1989). Computer supported intentional learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 51-68.
Schuler, W., & Smith, J. (1990). Author’s Argumentation Assistant (AAA): A hypertextbased authoring tool for argumentative texts. Proceedings of ECHT’90: European
Conference on Hypertext. Argumentation, Design & Knowledge Acquisition, 137-151. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
Selvin, A. (1999). Supporting collaborative analysis and design with hypertext functionality. Journal of Digital Information, 1(4). Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://jodi.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Articles/v01/104/Selvin/
Shipman, F. M., & Marshall, C. C. (1999). Formality considered harmful: Experiences, emerging themes, and directions on the use of formal representations in Interactive systems. Computer Supported Cooperative Fork, 8(4), 333-352. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://bush.cs.tamu.edu:80/-shipman/cscw.pdf
SIGWEB Special Interest Group in Hypertext, Hypermedia and the Web. New York: ACM. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://www.acm.org/slgweb/
Sillince, J. A. A. (1997). Intelligent argumentation systems: Requirements, models, research agenda and applications. In A. Kent (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Library and Information Science, 59(22) (pp. 176-218). New York: Marcel Dekker.
Sillince, J. A. A., & Saeedi, M. H. (1999). Computer-Mediated communication: problems and potentials of argumentation support systems. Decision Support Systems, 26, 287-306. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://staff.abs.aston.ac.uk/jsillince/ARTICLE8.htm
Sjoberg, C., & Timpka, T. (1995). Inside multidisciplinary design in medical informatics: Experiences from the use of an argumentative design method. MEDINPO’95: Triannual Ilorld Conference in Medical Informatics, Vancouver.
Stefik, M. (1986). The next knowledge medium. AI Magazine, 7(1), 34-46.
Stefik, M., Foster, G., Bobrow, D. G., Kahn, K., Lanning, S., and Suchman, L. (1987). Communications of the ACM, 30(1), 32-47
Streitz, N., Hanneman, J., & Thuring, M. (1989). From ideas and arguments to hyperdocuments: Travelling through activity spaces. Proceedings of Hypertext’89, 343364. New York: ACM.
Suthers, D., & Weiner, A. (1995, October). Groupware for developing critical discussion skills. Paper presented at CSCL’95: Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Bloomington, IN.
Tatar, D. G., Foster, G., & Bobrow, D. G. (1991). Design for conversation: Lessons from cognoter. International Journal of Man Machine Studies, 34, 185-209. Reprinted from Computer supported cooperative work and Groupware, 55-80, by S. Greenberg, Ed., 1991, London: Academic Press.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press. Toulmin:ICAIL (2002). Results of a search on “Toulmin” in proceedings of International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. ACM Digital Library. Retrieved on August 1 2002 from http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=2680449&CFTOKEN=58630376
Toulmin: Research Index (2002). Results of a search on “Toulmin” in computer Science literature. Retrieved on August 1, 2002 from http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cs?q=toulmin&cs=1
Trigg, R., & Weiser, M. (1983). TEXTNET: A network-based approach to text handling. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 4(l).
Turoff M. (1970). Delphi conferencing: computer based conferencing with anonymity. Journal of Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 3(2), 159–204.
Van Eemeren F., Grootendorst R., Jackson S., & Jacobs S. (1983). Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa and London: The University of Alabama Press.
VanLehn K. (1985). Theory reform caused by an argumentation tool (Technical Report ISL11). Xerox Palo Alto Research Center.
Veerman A., Andriessen J. E. B., & Kanselaar G. (1999). Collaborative learning through computer-mediated argumentation. In C. Hoadly & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Proceedings of the third conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 640–650). Palo Alto, California: Stanford University.
Walton D. G. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wigmore H. J. A. (1913). The principles of judicial proof as given by logic, psychology, and General experience and illustrated in judicial trials. Boston: Little Brown (2nd Edition, 1931. Reprint 2000, William S. Hein & Co., Inc.).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Buckingham Shum, S. (2003). The Roots of Computer Supported Argument Visualization. In: Kirschner, P.A., Buckingham Shum, S.J., Carr, C.S. (eds) Visualizing Argumentation. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0037-9_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0037-9_1
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-664-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0037-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive