Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset
This coded database presents a corpus of argumentative tweets published by four politicians (Matteo Salvini, Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, and Joe Biden) within 6 months from their taking office, which corresponds to the official end of their election campaign. The coding is based on a threefold met...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2022-10-01
|
| Series: | Data in Brief |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352340922006953 |
| _version_ | 1798000896055967744 |
|---|---|
| author | Fabrizio Macagno |
| author_facet | Fabrizio Macagno |
| author_sort | Fabrizio Macagno |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This coded database presents a corpus of argumentative tweets published by four politicians (Matteo Salvini, Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, and Joe Biden) within 6 months from their taking office, which corresponds to the official end of their election campaign. The coding is based on a threefold method of analysis based on the instruments of argumentation theory and pragmatics. First, the types of arguments are recognized and classified according to a systematic organization of the argumentation schemes developed in the literature. Second, arguments are evaluated considering the fallacies committed. Third, the uses and misuses of “emotive words” are assessed. Based on this theoretical framework, each tweet is thus attributed three categories of codes: 1) argument types (maximum two, corresponding to the most important ones); 2) fallacies (maximum two types of fallacies, plus a distinct indication of the lack of necessary evidence or false presupposition); and 3) emotive language (maximum three emotive words, plus the most important emotion expressed). A total of 2657 tweets are coded, providing a ground for comparative works and an instrument for training further coding of different corpora. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T11:27:33Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e53ea197c32d4a0e8dbd391a09decae0 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2352-3409 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T11:27:33Z |
| publishDate | 2022-10-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Data in Brief |
| spelling | doaj.art-e53ea197c32d4a0e8dbd391a09decae02022-12-22T04:26:14ZengElsevierData in Brief2352-34092022-10-0144108501Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded datasetFabrizio Macagno0Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas, Gabinete A408 (TORRE A), Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Av. de Berna 26C, 1069-061 Lisboa, PortugalThis coded database presents a corpus of argumentative tweets published by four politicians (Matteo Salvini, Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, and Joe Biden) within 6 months from their taking office, which corresponds to the official end of their election campaign. The coding is based on a threefold method of analysis based on the instruments of argumentation theory and pragmatics. First, the types of arguments are recognized and classified according to a systematic organization of the argumentation schemes developed in the literature. Second, arguments are evaluated considering the fallacies committed. Third, the uses and misuses of “emotive words” are assessed. Based on this theoretical framework, each tweet is thus attributed three categories of codes: 1) argument types (maximum two, corresponding to the most important ones); 2) fallacies (maximum two types of fallacies, plus a distinct indication of the lack of necessary evidence or false presupposition); and 3) emotive language (maximum three emotive words, plus the most important emotion expressed). A total of 2657 tweets are coded, providing a ground for comparative works and an instrument for training further coding of different corpora.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352340922006953Argument miningArgumentationDiscourse analysisArgument evaluationGold standard corpusPragmatics |
| spellingShingle | Fabrizio Macagno Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset Data in Brief Argument mining Argumentation Discourse analysis Argument evaluation Gold standard corpus Pragmatics |
| title | Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset |
| title_full | Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset |
| title_fullStr | Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset |
| title_full_unstemmed | Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset |
| title_short | Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset |
| title_sort | argumentation schemes fallacies and evidence in politicians argumentative tweets a coded dataset |
| topic | Argument mining Argumentation Discourse analysis Argument evaluation Gold standard corpus Pragmatics |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352340922006953 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fabriziomacagno argumentationschemesfallaciesandevidenceinpoliticiansargumentativetweetsacodeddataset |