Justin Pierre

Online argumentation platforms enable groups to share information in a centralized database to gather information related to public works projects, planning and research projects. Argumentation maps provide the ability to link geographic objects to each other using conversational or logical connections. Available argumentation maps have significant technological barriers to use and may not offer features required for data access that have been identified in the literature. The purpose of this research is to create a data model and application architecture for an extensible online argumentation map and to evaluate it as a platform in two naturalistic use cases. The use cases are designed to demonstrate that unassisted users are able to interact with the system as effectively as users who are obligated to use it and are assisted through the process. The two use cases had similar statistics for user participation and content. Some users intuitively connected geographic objects to logical arguments, demonstrating the effectiveness of the data model and user interface. Based on the observed user participation rates and the degree to which users link spatial objects to conversational elements, I conclude that the data model and architecture are successful at providing an online argumentation map platform.