is the speaker, whose influence may depend on factors such as attractiveness, expertise, trustworthiness or group identification or homophily [@EaglyChaiken75; @Kelman61; @bender2011annotating; @LuchokMcCroskey78; @Ludford04; @mcpherson2001birds].

We present experiments evaluating how properties of social media arguments interact with audience factors to affect belief change. We compare the effects of two aspects of the [argument]{}: whether it is monologic or dialogic, and whether it is factual or emotional. We also examine how these factors interact with properties of the [ audience]{}. We profile audience [**prior beliefs**]{} to test if more neutral people are swayed by different types of arguments than people with entrenched beliefs. We also profile the audience for Big Five personality traits to see whether [**different personality types**]{} are more open to different types of arguments, e.g., we hypothesize that people who are highly agreeable ([A]{}) might be more affected by the combative style of emotional arguments. We provide a new corpus for the research community of audience personality profiles, arguments, and belief change measurements.[^1]

Audience factors have been explored in social psychological work on persuasion, but have been neglected in computational work, which has largely drawn from sentiment, rhetorical, or argument structure models [@habernal2016argument; @ConradWiebe12; @BoltuzicSnajder14; @ChoiCardie08]. We demonstrate 