Using Toulmin’s Argument Pattern Approach to Identify Infodemics in the Covid-19 Pandemic Era

Abstract

Abstract The emergence of various web pages and social media platforms that exist in today’s digital information era makes it easy for us to access various sources of information and makes us flooded with information. This condition has the potential to result in the loss of our mental health. This is known by the World Health Organization (WHO) as an infodemic which is an excessive amount of information, both true and false, which makes it very difficult for people to find reliable news about the coronavirus, and has increased the spread of fake news, conspiracy theories, worldwide panic and confusion. WHO and all the governments of each country in the world have also carried out various efforts to break the chain of spreading fake news. But the spread of fake news around the world is faster than there is any control over it. Therefore, we need an awareness of each individual in order to equip themselves with the knowledge and skills in identifying fake news. Physics as a branch of science discipline cannot be separated from this fake news. One example of fake news about physics related to Covid-19 is the statement that the thermo gun used to measure body temperature is dangerous to human health because of its laser beam radiation. One alternative way that can be used to evaluate the truth of the news is by assessing the strength of the news argumentation. Toulmin’s argument pattern has been widely applied to analyze the quality of an argument, which can be applied in evaluating the truth of a received news content. This paper aims to provide an alternative in identifying the “infodemic” in the Covid-19 Pandemic era in evaluating the correctness of information by applying the Toulmin Argument Pattern. This argumentation pattern distinguishes three fundamental components and three additional components of a coherent argumentative discourse. The main framework of this pattern in analyzing arguments consists of three main components: claim, data, and warrant. Where data provides the basis for determining claims, warrant acts as a logical reasoning bridge that connects data and claims. Three additional components can be added to construct a more complex pattern for analyzing arguments: backings, qualifiers, and rebuttals. Where backing is the part that provides additional evidence to strengthen the warrant, Qualifiers indicate the strength provided by the warrant in relating data to claims, while rebuttals indicate circumstances where the warrant in this condition is no longer valid so that the claim can be rejected.