000014239 001__ 14239
000014239 005__ 20241211100327.0
000014239 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.6082/uchicago.14239
000014239 037__ $$aTHESIS
000014239 037__ $$bThesis
000014239 041__ $$aeng
000014239 245__ $$aDebate and Dialogue: Testing Foundational Assumptions for Studying Linguistic Patterns
000014239 260__ $$bUniversity of Chicago
000014239 269__ $$a2024-12
000014239 336__ $$aThesis
000014239 502__ $$bM.A.
000014239 520__ $$aDisagreement can take many forms, with outcomes that range from constructive to destructive depending on the approach taken. Among these, debate and dialogue are two approaches that emerge from a distinct set of goals, behaviors, and assumptions. Whereas debate focuses on persuading one another, dialogue focuses on understanding one another. This paper seeks to lay the groundwork for identifying and exploring the linguistic features that differentiate these two approaches, serving as a foundational step toward a larger experiment examining disagreement utterances. The studies test a series of core assumptions critical for designing experiments that can reliably analyze disagreement at a linguistic level. The results demonstrate that speakers can be evaluated both at the utterance level and the speaker level across dimensions identified as debate-like or dialogue-like. Using specifically designed practice examples; the study shows that raters can reliably identify these dimensions through textual data. Next, these dimensions are tested on experimental text data collected in prior studies designed to elicit disagreement. The findings reveal consistent patterns in how raters evaluate speakers and their utterances. Furthermore, the analysis shows that utterance-level data can effectively predict speaker-level ratings within the same conversations, highlighting a significant connection between the two levels of evaluation. By understanding the linguistic features associated with debate and dialogue, this research ultimately aims to provide a framework for individuals to approach disagreements more effectively.
000014239 536__ $$oIPSOS$$aIPSOS MicroGrant
000014239 540__ $$a© 2024 Donatella Felice
000014239 542__ $$fCC BY
000014239 6531_ $$adebate
000014239 6531_ $$adialogue
000014239 6531_ $$autterances
000014239 6531_ $$aconversation slices
000014239 690__ $$aSocial Sciences Division 
000014239 691__ $$aMA Program in the Social Sciences (MAPSS)
000014239 7001_ $$2ORCID$$aFelice, Donatella$$uUniversity of Chicago
000014239 72012 $$aJane Risen
000014239 72014 $$aAlex Hofmann
000014239 8564_ $$uhttps://knowledge.uchicago.edu/record/14239/files/Final%20Thesis%20D.Felice%202024%20%281%29.pdf$$9963ad55d-4e3d-4fd5-a694-d1117b6d6825$$s3854898$$eEmbargo (2025-12-10)
000014239 908__ $$aI agree
000014239 909CO $$ooai:uchicago.tind.io:14239$$pGLOBAL_SET$$pTheses
000014239 983__ $$aThesis