Analysing viewpoints in design through the argumentation process

Dans INTERACT 2001 (2001) 521-529 We present an empirical study aimed at analysing the use of viewpoints in an industrial Concurrent Engineering context. Our focus is on the viewpoints expressed in the argumentative process taking place in evaluation meetings. Our results show that arguments enablin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Martin, Géraldine, Détienne, Françoise, Lavigne, Elisabeth
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title
container_volume
creator Martin, Géraldine
Détienne, Françoise
Lavigne, Elisabeth
description Dans INTERACT 2001 (2001) 521-529 We present an empirical study aimed at analysing the use of viewpoints in an industrial Concurrent Engineering context. Our focus is on the viewpoints expressed in the argumentative process taking place in evaluation meetings. Our results show that arguments enabling a viewpoint or proposal to be defended are often characterized by the use of constraints. Firstly, we show that, even if some constraints are apparently identically used by the different specialists involved in meetings, various meanings and weightings are associated with these constraints by these different specialists. Secondly, we show that the implicit or explicit nature of constraints depends on several interlocutive factors. Thirdly, we show that an argument often covers not only one constraint but a network of constraints. The type of combination reflects viewpoints which have specific status in the meeting. Then, we will propose a first model of the dynamics of viewpoints confrontation/integration.
doi_str_mv 10.48550/arxiv.cs/0612020
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>arxiv_GOX</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_arxiv_primary_cs_0612020</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>cs_0612020</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a670-bb299c168058bef68ec1a2aebb4e41403610c2d19f20dddc53012110e02885053</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotz71OwzAUQGEvDKjwAEz4BdLe68TG2agq_qRKLN2ja_smtdQ6kZ0W-vYg6PRtRzpCPCAsG6s1rCh_x_PSlxUYVKDgVjyvEx0uJaZBniN_TWNMc5ExycAlDknO-zyehv2vLCkPpyOnmeY4Jjnl0XMpd-Kmp0Ph-6sLsXt92W3eq-3n28dmva3IPEHlnGpbj8aCto57Y9kjKWLnGm6wgdogeBWw7RWEELyuARUiMChrNeh6IR7_s38L3ZTjkfKl86W7rtQ__rFE7g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Analysing viewpoints in design through the argumentation process</title><source>arXiv.org</source><creator>Martin, Géraldine ; Détienne, Françoise ; Lavigne, Elisabeth</creator><creatorcontrib>Martin, Géraldine ; Détienne, Françoise ; Lavigne, Elisabeth</creatorcontrib><description>Dans INTERACT 2001 (2001) 521-529 We present an empirical study aimed at analysing the use of viewpoints in an industrial Concurrent Engineering context. Our focus is on the viewpoints expressed in the argumentative process taking place in evaluation meetings. Our results show that arguments enabling a viewpoint or proposal to be defended are often characterized by the use of constraints. Firstly, we show that, even if some constraints are apparently identically used by the different specialists involved in meetings, various meanings and weightings are associated with these constraints by these different specialists. Secondly, we show that the implicit or explicit nature of constraints depends on several interlocutive factors. Thirdly, we show that an argument often covers not only one constraint but a network of constraints. The type of combination reflects viewpoints which have specific status in the meeting. Then, we will propose a first model of the dynamics of viewpoints confrontation/integration.</description><identifier>DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.cs/0612020</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>Computer Science - Other Computer Science</subject><creationdate>2006-12</creationdate><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>228,230,776,881</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0612020$$EView_record_in_Cornell_University$$FView_record_in_$$GCornell_University$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cs/0612020$$DView paper in arXiv$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Martin, Géraldine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Détienne, Françoise</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lavigne, Elisabeth</creatorcontrib><title>Analysing viewpoints in design through the argumentation process</title><description>Dans INTERACT 2001 (2001) 521-529 We present an empirical study aimed at analysing the use of viewpoints in an industrial Concurrent Engineering context. Our focus is on the viewpoints expressed in the argumentative process taking place in evaluation meetings. Our results show that arguments enabling a viewpoint or proposal to be defended are often characterized by the use of constraints. Firstly, we show that, even if some constraints are apparently identically used by the different specialists involved in meetings, various meanings and weightings are associated with these constraints by these different specialists. Secondly, we show that the implicit or explicit nature of constraints depends on several interlocutive factors. Thirdly, we show that an argument often covers not only one constraint but a network of constraints. The type of combination reflects viewpoints which have specific status in the meeting. Then, we will propose a first model of the dynamics of viewpoints confrontation/integration.</description><subject>Computer Science - Other Computer Science</subject><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GOX</sourceid><recordid>eNotz71OwzAUQGEvDKjwAEz4BdLe68TG2agq_qRKLN2ja_smtdQ6kZ0W-vYg6PRtRzpCPCAsG6s1rCh_x_PSlxUYVKDgVjyvEx0uJaZBniN_TWNMc5ExycAlDknO-zyehv2vLCkPpyOnmeY4Jjnl0XMpd-Kmp0Ph-6sLsXt92W3eq-3n28dmva3IPEHlnGpbj8aCto57Y9kjKWLnGm6wgdogeBWw7RWEELyuARUiMChrNeh6IR7_s38L3ZTjkfKl86W7rtQ__rFE7g</recordid><startdate>20061204</startdate><enddate>20061204</enddate><creator>Martin, Géraldine</creator><creator>Détienne, Françoise</creator><creator>Lavigne, Elisabeth</creator><scope>AKY</scope><scope>GOX</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20061204</creationdate><title>Analysing viewpoints in design through the argumentation process</title><author>Martin, Géraldine ; Détienne, Françoise ; Lavigne, Elisabeth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a670-bb299c168058bef68ec1a2aebb4e41403610c2d19f20dddc53012110e02885053</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Computer Science - Other Computer Science</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Martin, Géraldine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Détienne, Françoise</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lavigne, Elisabeth</creatorcontrib><collection>arXiv Computer Science</collection><collection>arXiv.org</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Martin, Géraldine</au><au>Détienne, Françoise</au><au>Lavigne, Elisabeth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Analysing viewpoints in design through the argumentation process</atitle><date>2006-12-04</date><risdate>2006</risdate><abstract>Dans INTERACT 2001 (2001) 521-529 We present an empirical study aimed at analysing the use of viewpoints in an industrial Concurrent Engineering context. Our focus is on the viewpoints expressed in the argumentative process taking place in evaluation meetings. Our results show that arguments enabling a viewpoint or proposal to be defended are often characterized by the use of constraints. Firstly, we show that, even if some constraints are apparently identically used by the different specialists involved in meetings, various meanings and weightings are associated with these constraints by these different specialists. Secondly, we show that the implicit or explicit nature of constraints depends on several interlocutive factors. Thirdly, we show that an argument often covers not only one constraint but a network of constraints. The type of combination reflects viewpoints which have specific status in the meeting. Then, we will propose a first model of the dynamics of viewpoints confrontation/integration.</abstract><doi>10.48550/arxiv.cs/0612020</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.cs/0612020
ispartof
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_arxiv_primary_cs_0612020
source arXiv.org
subjects Computer Science - Other Computer Science
title Analysing viewpoints in design through the argumentation process
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T08%3A27%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-arxiv_GOX&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Analysing%20viewpoints%20in%20design%20through%20the%20argumentation%20process&rft.au=Martin,%20G%C3%A9raldine&rft.date=2006-12-04&rft_id=info:doi/10.48550/arxiv.cs/0612020&rft_dat=%3Carxiv_GOX%3Ecs_0612020%3C/arxiv_GOX%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true