The representation of argumentation in scientific papers: A comparative analysis of two research areas.
Scientific papers are essential manifestations of evolving scientific knowledge, and arguments are an important avenue to communicate research results. This study aims to understand how the argumentation process is represented in scientific papers, which is important for knowledge representation, di...
| Publicado en: | Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology Vol. 73; no. 6; pp. 863 - 879 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , |
| Formato: | pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Jun2022
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=156522563&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 156522563 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 23301635 H6JN jtl: Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology issn: 23301635 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jun2022 vid: 73 iid: 6 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 156522563 153136309 156522563 156522563 10.1002/asi.24590 156522563 ppf: 863 ppct: 16 formats: tig: atl: The representation of argumentation in scientific papers: A comparative analysis of two research areas. aug: au: Wang, Xiaoguang Song, Ningyuan Zhou, Huimin Cheng, Hanghang affil: School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China sug: subj: Psychological Theory Research, Medical Semantics Ontologies Human Librarianship Literature Review Comparative Studies Knowledge Grammar Funding Source ab: Scientific papers are essential manifestations of evolving scientific knowledge, and arguments are an important avenue to communicate research results. This study aims to understand how the argumentation process is represented in scientific papers, which is important for knowledge representation, discovery, and retrieval. First, based on fundamental argument theory and scientific discourse ontologies, a coding schema, including 17 categories was constructed. Thereafter, annotation experiments were conducted with 40 scientific articles randomly selected from two different research areas (library and information science and biomedical sciences). Statistical analysis and the sequential pattern mining method were then employed; the ratio of different argumentation units and evidence types were calculated, the argumentation semantics of figures and tables analyzed, and the argumentation structures extracted. A correlation analysis between argumentation and rhetorical structures was also performed to further reveal how argumentation was represented within scientific discourses. The results indicated a difference in the proportion of the argumentation units in the two types of scientific papers, as well as a similar linear construction with differences in the specific argument structures of each knowledge domain and a clear correlation between argumentation and rhetorical structure. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|