{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032175032175032175, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.274193548387097, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Extending the Conversational Argument Coding Scheme: Argument Categories, Units, and Coding Procedures

The Conversational Argument Scheme (CAS) has been shaped by a host of researcher colleagues. Each revision has attempted to improve the scheme, apply it in a different context, or submit its data to unique analyses. All of these combined efforts have increased the scheme's utility, reliability, and validity. As part of this series of articles that trace the history of the CAS and speculate on its future, three revisions to the scheme are discussed: (a) adding categories, (b) establishing unitizing rules, and (c) creating a multistage coding process. The benefits and limits of these extensions are discussed and directions for future work involving the CAS suggested.