Visual Argument Structure Tool (VAST) V1.0
by Leising, Grenke & Cramer
Note
This presentation is a stump. Please use Daniel Leising’s slides.
Fuzziness
- The goal are precise theories - but in reality, they often are (at least partially) vague and fuzzy
- VAST allows to make this fuzziness explicit by allowing vague quantifiers of relationship strength, e.g. “weakly positive”, “strong”
- Better than assigning an arbitrary, pseudo-precise number
- It’s about formalizing the current state/precision of a verbal theory - if it is imprecise, let’s show it!
- Show gaps and underspecifications
Explicate different perspectives and analysts
- Whose perspective is displayed?
- Who made the analysis?
- E.g. Analyst Robert displays the perspective of Berta:
TODO Show example.
Notes on the different types of relationships
- Relationships between constructs can be …
- on a theoretical level. Then it’s typically a causal path (c)
- on empirical level: A relationship has been found! This is a prediction path (p)
- Research cycle: One author’s p-path is the next author’s theoretical c-path
- Consider what you want to formalize:
- A certain author’s theoretical point of view at a certain point in time?
- Or your personal, current point of view?
- The empirical support for a statement?
Theory vs. Model
In order to translate a theory into a model, one needs to …
- give a scale to every variable (e.g. by defining it’s measurement/operationalization)
End
Contact
- @nicebread@scicomm.xyz
- ed.uml.ysp@tdorbneohcs.xilef
- https://www.nicebread.de
- https://github.com/nicebread
