Cargando…
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...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9389194/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35990918 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2022.108501 |
_version_ | 1784770388447723520 |
---|---|
author | Macagno, Fabrizio |
author_facet | Macagno, Fabrizio |
author_sort | Macagno, Fabrizio |
collection | PubMed |
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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9389194 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93891942022-08-20 Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset Macagno, Fabrizio Data Brief Data Article 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. Elsevier 2022-07-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9389194/ /pubmed/35990918 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2022.108501 Text en © 2022 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Data Article Macagno, Fabrizio Argumentation schemes, fallacies, and evidence in politicians’ argumentative tweets—A coded dataset |
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 | Data Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9389194/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35990918 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2022.108501 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT macagnofabrizio argumentationschemesfallaciesandevidenceinpoliticiansargumentativetweetsacodeddataset |