@inproceedings{036c1c7bd81549b5aba9554b8e282624,
title = "Enumerating Preferred Extensions: A Case Study of Human Reasoning",
abstract = "This paper seeks to better understand the links between human reasoning and preferred extensions as found within formal argumentation, especially in the context of uncertainty. The degree of believability of a conclusion may be associated with the number of preferred extensions in which the conclusion is credulously accepted. We are interested in whether people agree with this evaluation. A set of experiments with human participants is presented to investigate the validity of such an association. Our results show that people tend to agree with the outcome of a version of Thimm{\textquoteright}s probabilistic semantics in purely qualitative domains as well as in domains in which conclusions express event likelihood. Furthermore, we are able to characterise this behaviour: the heuristics employed by people in understanding preferred extensions are similar to those employed in understanding probabilities.",
keywords = "Argumentation, Probabilistic semantics, User evaluation",
author = "Alice Toniolo and Norman, {Timothy J.} and Nir Oren",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-319-75553-3_14",
language = "English",
isbn = "9783319755526",
series = "Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
pages = "192--210",
editor = "E Black and S Modgil and N Oren",
booktitle = "Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation",
address = "Germany",
note = "4th International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation, TAFA 2017 : (TAFA 2017) ; Conference date: 19-08-2017 Through 20-08-2017",
}