A Generalizable Rhetorical Strategy Annotation Model Using LLM-based Debate Simulation and Labelling
Rhetorical strategies are central to persuasive communication, from political discourse and marketing to legal argumentation. However, analysis of rhetorical strategies has been limited by reliance on human annotation, which is costly, inconsistent, difficult to scale. Their associated datasets are often limited to specific topics and strategies, posing challenges for robust model development. We propose a novel framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) to automatically generate and label synthetic debate data based on a four-part rhetorical typology (causal, empirical, emotional, moral). We fine-tune transformer-based classifiers on this LLM-labeled dataset and validate its performance against human-labeled data on this dataset and on multiple external corpora. Our model achieves high performance and strong generalization across topical domains. We illustrate two applications with the fine-tuned model: (1) the improvement in persuasiveness prediction from incorporating rhetorical strategy labels, and (2) analyzing temporal and partisan shifts in rhetorical strategies in U.S. Presidential debates (1960-2020), revealing increased use of affective over cognitive argument in U.S. Presidential debates.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Who is we? Disambiguating the referents of first person plural pronouns in parliamentary debates
This paper investigates the use of first person plural pronouns as a rhetorical device in political speeches. We present an annotation schema for disambiguating pronoun references and use our schema to create an annotate…
Data AugmentationDecoding Human and AI Persuasion in National College Debate: Analyzing Prepared Arguments Through Aristotle's Rhetorical Principles
Debate has been widely adopted as a strategy to enhance critical thinking skills in English Language Arts (ELA). One important skill in debate is forming effective argumentation, which requires debaters to select support…
Logical ReasoningMachine-Aided Annotation for Fine-Grained Proposition Types in Argumentation
We introduce a corpus of the 2016 U.S. presidential debates and commentary, containing 4,648 argumentative propositions annotated with fine-grained proposition types. Modern machine learning pipelines for analyzing argum…
BIG-bench Machine LearningHybrid Machine LearningAnalyzing Biases in Political Dialogue: Tagging U.S. Presidential Debates with an Extended DAMSL Framework
We present a critical discourse analysis of the 2024 U.S. presidential debates, examining Donald Trump's rhetorical strategies in his interactions with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. We introduce a novel annotation framewo…
Computational Argumentation Synthesis as a Language Modeling Task
Synthesis approaches in computational argumentation so far are restricted to generating claim-like argument units or short summaries of debates. Ultimately, however, we expect computers to generate whole new arguments fo…
Language ModelingLanguage Modelling