Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Argumentation in Context
Vol. 13:3 (2024) ► pp.319–372

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB

Superquestions and some ways to answer them

ORCiD logo with link | Università della Svizzera italiana
 | University of Dundee
 | University of Dundee
 | Università della Svizzera italiana
 | Università della Svizzera italiana
 | University of Dundee
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Open Access publication of this article was funded through a Transformative Agreement with Università della Svizzera italiana.

Published online: 21 January 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.24002.dag
Abstract
Earnings Conference Calls, in which corporate management are quizzed by investment analysts, are a particularly rich source of a phenomenon of question-asking that, though less prevalent, also occurs in many other genres of discourse. When a participant in a dialogue is allowed to ask more than one question consecutively — particularly in order to extend or refine or recast — we see that respondents often react by answering either one or more of the individual questions, or by answering a question that was never actually asked, but which is related to the explicit questions and to other content introduced in the turn. We call this overarching implicit question a superquestion, and explore how they can be formed, how they can be answered, how they trigger argumentation, and, indeed, how they can be dodged.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Earnings conference calls
    • 1.2Inference anchoring theory
  • 2.Maximal interrogative and answering units
    • 2.1Maximal interrogative units
    • 2.2Maximal answering units
  • 3.Data
  • 4.Capturing MIUs and MAUs in IAT
    • 4.1Question structures in Maximal Interrogative Units
      • 4.1.1Non-interrogatives
      • 4.1.2Questions
      • 4.1.3Arguments in MIUs
      • 4.1.4Superquestions
    • 4.2Answer structures in Maximal Answering Units
      • 4.2.1Answering a question that forms a part of the MIU but is not part of the superquestion
      • 4.2.2Answering a question that forms a part of the MIU and is a part of the superquestion
      • 4.2.3Answering the superquestion
      • 4.2.4Superanswers
      • 4.2.5Individual question-answers that contribute to superanswers
      • 4.2.6Non question-answers in MAUs that contribute to superanswers
      • 4.2.7Arguments in MAUs
    • 4.3Answerhood
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (49)
References
Amgoud, L., S. Belabbès, and H. Prade. 2006. A Formal General Setting for Dialogue Protocols, In Artificial Intelligence: Methodology, Systems, and Applications, eds. Gerhard, J. Euzenat, and J. Domingue, Volume 41831, 13–23. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, L. D., A. C. Call, M. B. Clement, and N. Y. Sharp. 2015. Inside the ”Black Box” of sell-side financial analysts. Journal of Accounting Research 53(1): 1–47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Budzynska, K., M. Janier, J. Kang, C. Reed, P. Saint-Dizier, M. Stede, and O. Yaskorska. 2014. Towards Argument Mining from Dialogue. In Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Volume 2661, pp. 185–196. ISSN: 09226389.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Budzynska, K., M. Janier, C. Reed, and P. Saint-Dizier. 2016. Theoretical foundations for illocutionary structure parsing. Argument and Computation 7(1): 91–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, J. V., V. Nagar, and J. Schoenfeld. 2018. Manager-analyst conversations in earnings conference calls. Review of Accounting Studies 23(4): 1315–1354. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, C. E. 2021, July. How do standard setters define materiality and why does it matter? Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility 30(3): 378–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, S. E. 2004. Arenas of interaction in the mediated public sphere. Poetics 32(1): 29–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, S. E. and M. P. Fox. 2017. Hardballs and softballs. Modulating adversarialness in journalistic questioning. Journal of Language and Politics 16(1): 19–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, S. E. and J. Heritage. 2002. Questioning presidents: Journalistic deference and adversarialness in the press conferences of U.S. Presidents Eisenhower and Reagan. Journal of Communication 52(4): 749–775. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, J. 1960. A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20(1): 37–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crawford Camiciottoli, B. 2006. Corporate earnings calls: a hybrid genre?, In English for international and intercultural business communication, eds. Fortanet Gòmez, I., J. C. Palmer Silveira, and M. Ruiz Garrido, 109–138. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2009. “Just wondering if you could comment on that”: Indirect requests for information in corporate earnings calls. Text and Talk 29(6): 661–681. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
D’Agostino, G. 2022. “(so long, and) thanks for all the color”. Requests of Elaboration and Answers They Trigger in Earnings Conference Calls. In Proceedings of the 22nd Edition of the Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA), Cardiff.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2023. Opposition Without Argumentation, Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI, Volume 41, 24–28. arXiv. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
D’Agostino, G., C. Reed, and D. Puccinelli. 2024. Segmentation of Complex Question Turns for Argument Mining: A Corpus-based Study in the Financial Domain. In Proceedings of LREC-COLING 2024, Torino.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Oliveira, M.d.C. L. and S. M. R. Pereira. 2017. Formulations in Delicate Actions: A Study of Analyst Questions in Earnings Conference Calls. International Journal of Business Communication 55(3): 293–309. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
D’Agostino, G. 2023. Transformation, exploitation, and complication of transcribed calls in the financial domain. Presented at AILA 20th World Congress.
Garcia, A. and G. Simari. 2004, 01. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hautli-Janisz, A., K. Budzynska, C. McKillop, B. Plüss, V. Gold, and C. Reed. 2022. Questions in argumentative dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 1881: 56–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hirsto, H., M. Koskela, and A. Jokipii. 2023, September. Performing financial communication as professional practice: The interplay of consensus and tension in earnings calls. Journal of Professions and Organization 10(2): 165–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hitchcock, D. 1992. Relevance. Argumentation 61: 251–270. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2019. We justify questions, so how does that work? In B. Garssen, J. Wagemans, G. Mitchell, and Godden (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Argumentation, Amsterdam. SICSAT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2020. Arguing for Questions, In From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild: A Variety of Contributions to Argumentation Theory, eds. Garssen, B. and F. H. van Eemeren, 167–184. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Janier, M., J. Lawrence, and C. Reed. 2014. OVA+: an Argument Analysis Interface. Computational Models of Argument: 463–464. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keung, E., Z. X. Lin, and M. Shih. 2010. Does the Stock Market See a Zero or Small Positive Earnings Surprise as a Red Flag? Journal of Accounting Research 48(1): 105–135. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kimbrough, M. D. 2005. The Effect of Conference Calls on Analyst and Market Underreaction to Earnings Announcements. The Accounting Review 80(1): 189–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klie, J. C., M. Bugert, B. Boullosa, R. Eckart de Castilho, and I. Gurevych. 2018. The INCEpTION Platform: Machine-Assisted and Knowledge-Oriented Interactive Annotation. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, Santa Fe, New Mexico, pp. 5–9. Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koller, V. and X. Wu. 2023,. Analysts’ identity negotiations and politeness behaviour in earnings calls of US firms with extreme earnings changes. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 28(5): 769–787. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krippendorff, K. 1995. On the Reliability of Unitizing Continuous Data. Sociological Methodology 251:47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krippendorff, K., Y. Mathet, S. Bouvry, and A. Widlöcher. 2016,. On the reliability of unitizing textual continua: Further developments. Quality & Quantity 50(6): 2347–2364. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lawrence, J. and C. Reed. 2014. AIFdb Corpora. In Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2014, pp. 465–466.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lucchini, C. and G. D’Agostino. 2023. Good answers, better questions. Building an annotation scheme for financial dialogues. Technical report. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lucchini, C., A. Rocci, and G. D’Agostino. 2022. Annotating argumentation within questions. Prefaced questions as genre specific argumentative pattern in earnings conference calls. In F. Grasso, N. Green, J. Schneider, and S. Wells (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Edition of the Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA 22), Volume vol. 32051, Cardiff, pp. 61–66. CEUR.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lucchini, C., O. Yaskorska-Shah, and A. Rocci. in press. Comparing Prefaced Questions Across Activity Types. Journalists and Financial Analysts as Argumentative Questioners, De l’argumentativité à l’argumentation. Peter Lang.
Oswald, S., S. Greco, J. Miecznikowski, C. Pollaroli, and A. Rocci. 2020. Argumentation and meaning. Journal of Argumentation in Context 9(1): 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmieri, R. 2017. The Role of Argumentation in Financial Communication and Investor Relations, In The Handbook of Financial Communication and Investor Relations, ed. Laskin, A. V., 45–60. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmieri, R., A. Rocci, and N. Kudrautsava. 2015. Argumentation in earnings conference calls. Corporate standpoints and analysts’ challenges. Studies in communication sciences 15, 2015(1): 120–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peldszus, A. and M. Stede. 2013. From Argument Diagrams to Argumentation Mining in Texts. International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence 7(1): 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rigotti, E. 2006. Relevance of Context-bound loci to Topical Potential in the Argumentation Stage. Argumentation 20(4): 519–540. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rigotti, E. and S. Greco. 2019. Inference in Argumentation: A Topics-Based Approach to Argument Schemes (1st ed. 2019 ed.). Number 34 in Argumentation Library. Cham: Springer International Publishing: Imprint: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rigotti, E. and A. Rocci. 2006. Towards a Definition of Communication Context. Foundations of an Interdisciplinary Approach to Communication. Studies in Communication Sciences 6(2): 155–180.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rocci, A. 2013. The discourse system of financial communication. Cahiers de l’ILSL (34): 201–221. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rocci, A. and C. Raimondo. 2018. Dialogical Argumentation in Financial Conference Calls : The Request of Confirmation of Inference (ROCOI). In S. Oswald and D. Maillat (Eds.), Argumentation and Inference: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, pp. 699–715. College Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H. and B. Garssen. 2013. Argumentative patterns in discourse. In D. Mohammed and M. Lewinski (Eds.), Virtues of argumentation: proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22–26 May 2013.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H. 2009. Examining Argumentation in Context: Fifteen Studies on Strategic Maneuvering. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, H., N. Naderi, I. Habernal, Y. Hou, G. Hirst, I. Gurevych, and B. Stein. 2017,. Argumentation quality assessment: Theory vs. practice. In R. Barzilay and M.-Y. Kan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers), Vancouver, Canada, pp. 250–255. Association for Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wells, S. and C. Reed. 2012. A domain specific language for describing diverse systems of dialogue. Journal of Applied Logic 10(4): 309–329. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, D. and D. Sperber. 2004. Relevance Theory, In The Handbook of Pragmatics, eds. Horn, L. R. and G. Ward, 607–632. Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhou, P. and J. Shon. 2013. Option strategies for earnings announcements: a comprehensive, empirical analysis. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: FT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Lucchini, Costanza, Andrea Rocci & Johanna Miecznikowski
2025. Managers see, analysts hear. Epistemic divide in financial dialogues. Journal of Pragmatics 248 ► pp. 37 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue