Examining the factors that the counter-speech uses is at the core of
understanding the optimal methods for confronting hate speech online. Various
studies assess the emotional base factor used in counter speech, such as
emotion-empathy, offensiveness, and level of hostility. To better understand
the counter-speech used in conversational interactions, this study distills
persuasion modes into reason, emotion, and credibility and then evaluates their
use in two types of conversation interactions: closed (multi-turn) and open
(single-turn) conversation interactions concerning racism, sexism, and
religion. The evaluation covers the distinct behaviors of human versus
generated counter-speech. We also assess the interplay between the replies'
stance and each mode of persuasion in the counter-speech. Notably, we observe
nuanced differences in the counter-speech persuasion modes for open and closed
interactions -- especially on the topic level -- with a general tendency to use
reason as a persuasion mode to express the counterpoint to hate comments. The
generated counter-speech tends to exhibit an emotional persuasion mode, while
human counters lean towards using reasoning. Furthermore, our study shows that
reason as a persuasion mode tends to obtain more supportive replies than do
other persuasion types. The findings highlight the potential of incorporating
persuasion modes into studies about countering hate speech, as these modes can
serve as an optimal means of explainability and paves the way for the further
adoption of the reply's stance and the role it plays in assessing what
comprises the optimal counter-speech.

评估反对仇恨言论的最佳方法，研究将说服模式分为理性、情感和可信度，并评估其在封闭和开放的对话互动中的使用，揭示不同模式在反对仇恨评论和话题层面上的微妙差异以及理性作为说服模式的支持回复更多的潜力。