Abstract

Due to their potential influence on the individual and societal formation of opinions, the quality of online discussions has been a subject of widespread interest. From a deliberative perspective, rational argumentation and critical reflection are central criteria for good discourse. Drawing on research on the perception of arguments and the conditions of disagreement, we ask how argument strength is linked to the likelihood of receiving (reasoned) disagreement and whether the discussion norms and technical features set by the news organizations moderate this effect. Based on a manual content analysis of 14.690 user comments on nine German news websites, we find that comments with a higher argument strength are more likely to receive disagreement in general and reasoned disagreement in particular. Further, the levels of (reasoned) disagreement are higher on platforms with strong discussion norms and supporting technical features. The results show that the quality of a discussion can be related to both users’ argumentation and the decisions of the news organizations.

摘要

由于它们对个人和社会意见形成的潜在影响，在线讨论的质量已成为广泛关注的主题。从审议的角度来看，理性论证和批判性反思是良好话语的核心标准。通过对论点感知和分歧条件的研究，我们询问论点强度如何与接受（合理）分歧的可能性相关联，以及新闻机构设定的讨论规范和技术特征是否会缓和这种影响。基于对 9 个德国新闻网站上 14.690 条用户评论的手动内容分析，我们发现具有较高论点强度的评论更容易收到一般的分歧，特别是有理由的分歧。更远，在具有强大讨论规范和支持技术功能的平台上，（合理的）分歧程度更高。结果表明，讨论的质量可能与用户的论点和新闻机构的决定有关。