argument types to test their affect on belief change: a Curated Monolog ([mono]{}) (Table \[death-procon\]), an emotional argument ([emot]{}) (R2 in Table \[sample-quote-response\]), or a factual argument ([fact]{}) (R1 in Table \[sample-quote-response\]). After each person read one of these three types of arguments, we retested their reactions to the original stance question, while viewing the argument. Responses were again recorded on a -5 to 5 slider scale with 0.01 degrees of precision, with labels on the slider of “Yes”, “No”, or “Neutral”. We computed belief change by measuring differences in stance before and after reading each argument. We created 20 HITs on Mechanical Turk for this task, with 5 items per hit.

Experimental Corpus Results
===========================

Entrenchment and Belief Change
------------------------------

Our first question is whether our method changed participant’s beliefs. Table  \[tab:beliefchange\_means\_stddev\] shows belief change as a function of argument type: monologs ([mono]{}), factual ([fact]{}) and emotional ([emot]{}). Belief change occurred for all argument types: and the change was statistically significant as measured by paired t-tests ($t_{(5184)}$ = 38.31, p &lt;0.0001). This confirms our hypothesis that social media can be mined for persuasive materials. In addition, all three types of arguments independently led to significant changes in belief.[^2]

[|c\*[2]{}[|c]{}|c|]{} 