Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Computer Supported Argument Visualisation: Modelling in Consultative Democracy Around Wicked Problems

  • Chapter
Knowledge Cartography

Part of the book series: Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing ((AI&KP))

Abstract

In this case study, computer supported argument visualisation has been applied to the analysis and representation of the draft South East Queensland Regional Plan Consultation discourse, demonstrating how argument mapping can help deliver the transparency and accountability required in participatory democracy. Consultative democracy for regional planning falls into a category of problems known as “wicked problems”. Inherent in this environment are heterogeneous viewpoints, agendas and voices, all built on disparate and often contradictory logic. An argument ontology and notation that was designed specifically to deal with consultative urban planning around wicked problems is the Issue Based Information System (IBIS) and IBIS notation (Rittel & Webber, 1984). The software used for argument visualisation in this case was Compendium, a derivative of IBIS. The high volume of stakeholders and discourse heterogeneity in this environment calls for a unique approach to argument mapping. The map design model developed from this research has been titled a “Consultation Map”. The design incorporates the IBIS ontology within a hybrid of mapping approaches, amalgamating elements from concept, dialogue, argument, debate, thematic and tree-mapping. The consultation maps developed from the draft South East Queensland Regional Plan Consultation provide a transparent visual record to give evidence of the themes of citizen issues within the consultation discourse. The consultation maps also link the elicited discourse themes to related policies from the SEQ Regional Plan providing explicit evidence of SEQ Regional Plan policy-decisions matching citizen concerns. The final consultation map in the series provides explicit links between SEQ Regional Plan policy items and monitoring activities reporting on the ongoing implementation of the SEQ Regional Plan. This map provides updatable evidence of and accountability for SEQ Regional Plan policy implementation and developments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bentivegna, S. (2006). Rethinking Politics in the World of ICTs. European Journal of Communication, 21(3), 331–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, E., Jelinek, F., Lafferty, J., Mercer, R., & Roukos, S. (1992). Decision tree models applied to the labeling of text with parts of speech. Paper presented at the 1992 DARPA Speech and Natural Language Workshop.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckingham Shum, S. (1997, 24–26, March). Representing Hard-to-Formalise,Contextualised, Multidisciplinary, Organisational Knowledge. Paper presented at the AAAI Spring Symposium on Artificial Intelligence in Knowledge Management, Stanford University, Palo Alto: US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. New York, US: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chintalapani, G., Plaisant, C., & Shneiderman, B. (2004). Extending the Utility of Treemaps with Flexible Hierarchy. Paper presented at the Information Visualisation, Eighth International Conference on (IV’04) London, England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clift, S. (2002). E-Governance to E-Democracy: Progress in Australia and New Zealand toward Information-Age Democracy. Retrieved 15th April, 2004, from http://www.publicus.net/

  • Coleman, S., & Gotze, J. (2001). Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation. London: Hansard Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, S., & Norris, D. (2005). A New Agenda for e-Democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford Internet Institute (OII): Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, J. (2006). Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. Brisbane, Australia: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dansereau, D. (2005). Node-Link Mapping Principles for Visualizing Knowledge and Information. In S. Tergan & T. Keller (Eds.), Knowledge Visualization and Information Visualization: Searching for Synergies. (pp. 61–81). Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Diaper, D. (2004). Understanding Task Analysis for Human—Computer Interaction. In D. Diaper & N. Stanton (Eds.), The Handbook of Task Analysis for Human—Computer Interaction. (pp. 650). New Jersey, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliman, T., Macintosh, A., & Irani, Z. (2006, July 6–7 2006). Argument Maps as Policy Memories for Informed Deliberation: A Research Note. Paper presented at the European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (EMCIS), Costa Blanca, Alicante, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Englebart, D. (1963). Conceptual Framework for the Augmentation of Man’s Intellect. In Vistas in Information Handling (pp. 1–29). Washington, DC: London: Spartan Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill Valley, US: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, T., Macintosh, A., & Renton, A. (2007). Argumentation Support Systems. UK: DEMO-net: The Democracy Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer, R. (1999). Psychology of Intelligence Analysis. Retrieved 15 May, 2007, from http://www.odci.gov/csi/books/19104/index.html

  • Kirschner, P., Buckingham Shum, S., & Carr, C.E. (2003). Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kirshchner, P., Buckingham Shum, S., & Carr, C.E. (2003). Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuklinski, J. (2001). Citizens and Politics: Perspectives from Political Psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A. (2006). eParticipation in policy-making: the research and the challenges. In P. Cunningham and M. Cunningham (Eds.), Exploiting the Knowledge Economy: Issues, Applications and Case Studies. (pp. 364–369). Washington, US: IOS press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A., & Renton, A. (2004, 27–29 October). Argument Visualisation to Support Democratic Decision-Making. Paper presented at the eChallenges e.2004 Conference, Vienna, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, A., Pidd, M., Rooksby, J., Sommerville, I., Warren, I., & Westcombe, M. (2005). Wisdom, decision support and paradigms of decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, Article in Press, 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maguitman, A., Leake, D., Reichherzer, T., & Menczer, F. (2004, November 8–13). Dynamic Extraction of Topic Descriptors and Discriminators: Towards Automatic Context-Based Topic Search. Paper presented at the ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM ’04), Washington, D.C., US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, B., & Madhusudan, T. (2004, June 7–11). Element Matching in Concept Maps. Paper presented at the the fourth ACM and IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL-2004), Tucson: US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. (2005). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York, US: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. (1956). The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity to Process Information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, M., & Riechert, B. (1994). Identifying Themes via Concept Mapping: A New Method of Content Analysis . Paper presented at the the Theory and Methodology Division, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Annual Meeting.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, Q., & Huang, M. (2005). EncCon: an approach to constructing interactive visualization of large hierarchical data. Information Visualization, 4, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J., & Canas, A. (2006). The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct Them.: Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2004). Promise and Problems of e-Democracy: Challenges of Online Citizen Engagement: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, W. (2006). Innovation in the public sector: spare tyres and fourth plinths. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 11(2), 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, L., & Peterson, M. (1959). Short-term Retention of Individual Verbal Items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 193–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Government: Office of Urban Management. (2005). South East Queensland Regional Plan 2005–2026. Brisbane: Department of Local Government, Planning, Sport and Recreation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renton, A., & Macintosh, A. (2007). Computer-Supported Argument Maps as a Policy Memory. The Information Society, 23(2), 125–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repovs, G., & Baddeley, A. (2006). The Multi-Component Model of Working Memory: Explorations in Experimental Cognitive Psychology. Neuroscience, 139, 5–21. Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1984). Planning Problems are Wicked Problems. New Jersey, US: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shneiderman, B. (1992). Tree visualization with tree-maps: 2-d space-filling approach. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 11(1), 92–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shneiderman, B. (2006). Treemaps for space-constrained visualization of hierarchies. Retrieved 14 May, 2007, from http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/treemap-history/

  • Shneiderman, B., & Wattenberg, M. (2001). Ordered Treemap Layouts. Paper presented at the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization., Los Alamitos, US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slocum, T., McMaster, R., Kessler, F., & Howard, H. (2005). Thematic Cartography and Geographic Visualization. 2nd Edition. New York, US: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, US: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, US: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tillers, P. (2007). Introduction: Visualizing Evidence and Inference in Legal Settings. Law, Probability and Risk, 6(1–4), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2004). United Nations Global E-Government Readiness Report 2004: Towards Access for Opportunity. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Public Administration and Development Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2005). United Nations Global e-Government Readiness Report 2005: From e-Government to E-Inclusion. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Public Administration and Development Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vedel, T. (2006). The Idea of Electronic Democracy: Origins, Visions and Questions. Parliamentary Affairs, 59(2), 226–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, A., & Macintosh, A. (2001). Transparency and Teledemocracy: Issues from an ‘E-Consultation. Journal of Information Science, 27(4), 187–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshimi, J. (2004). Mapping the Structure of Debate. Informal Logic, 24(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, S., McGuffin, M., & Chignell, M. (2005). Elastic Hierarchies: Combining Treemaps and Node-Link Diagrams. Paper presented at the 2005 IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, Washington: US.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Griffith University, Department of Management, Nathan, Queensland, Australia

    Ricky Ohl

Authors
  1. Ricky Ohl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ricky Ohl .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Knowledge Media Institute, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK

    Alexandra Okada BSc, MA, PhD  & Simon Buckingham Shum BSc, MSc, PhD  & 

  2. The Centre for Science Education, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK

    Tony Sherborne BSc, MA, PhD

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ohl, R. (2008). Computer Supported Argument Visualisation: Modelling in Consultative Democracy Around Wicked Problems. In: Okada, A., Shum, S.B., Sherborne, T. (eds) Knowledge Cartography. Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-149-7_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-149-7_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84800-148-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84800-149-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation