How to Disagree Well

a post by by Stephen Abram for the Stephen’s Lighthouse blog

“The hierarchy of disagreement is a concept proposed by Paul Graham in his 2008 essay How to Disagree [lots more information about each of the levels listed below]. His hierarchy has seven levels, from “Name-calling” to “Refuting the central point”.

1. Name-calling
   This is the lowest form of disagreement, and probably also the most common.
2. Ad Hominem
   An ad hominem attack is not quite as weak as mere name-calling.
3. Responding to Tone
   The next level up we start to see responses to the writing, rather than the writer.
4. Contradiction
   In this stage, we finally get responses to what was said, rather than how or by whom.
5. Counterargument
   At this level, we reach the first form of convincing disagreement: counterargument.
6. Refutation
   The most convincing form of disagreement is refutation.
7. Refuting the Central Point
   The force of a refutation depends on what you refute. The most powerful form of disagreement is to refute someone’s central point.

Paul Graham’s Disagreement Hierarchy

---

Debunking rumors on social media: The use of denials

Anjan Pal, Alton Y.K. Chua and Dion Hoe-Lian Goh (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore) published in Computers in Human Behavior Volume 96 (July 2019)

Highlights

• The use of denials can be a proactive strategy to debunk rumors on social media.
• Sharing denials helps to spread the truth.
• Friends and the online community encourage the behavior of sharing denial.
• Source credibility of denials encourages sharing.
• Incorporating salient beliefs in denials enhances users' intention to share

Abstract

The literature currently lacks an understanding of how denials can be crafted to effectively debunk rumors on social media. Underpinned by the theory of planned behavior, this research develops denials by incorporating salient beliefs to enhance users' likelihood to share such messages.

Two related studies were conducted.

The first was a survey of 276 participants to identify salient beliefs that could be incorporated to develop rumor denials. The following salient beliefs were identified in the survey:

1. Sharing denials helps to spread the truth;
2. Friends and the online community encourage the behavior of sharing denials; and
3. Source credibility of denials encourages sharing.

From among the pool of survey participants, 206 took part in a second study that employed an experiment to measure the efficacy of the developed denials. The experiment revealed that denials incorporating all the salient beliefs had the greatest potential to influence users' likelihood of sharing. With a theory-driven approach to develop denials, this research offers insights to practitioners such as social media managers and website authorities on ways to debunk rumors.

---