The macrostructure of informal arguments: A proposed model and analysis

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology

Volumn 56 A, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 1021-1051

  Ricco, Robert B ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LOGIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; LOGIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED;

EID: 0344629826     PISSN: 02724987     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02724980244000701     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Bailenson, J. N., & Rips, L. J. (1996). Informal reasoning and burden of proof. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, S3-S16.
2. Black, J. (1991). Quantifying support. Informal Logic, 13, 21-30.
3. Braine, M. D. S., & O'Brien, D. P. (1998). The theory of mental propositional logic: Description and illustration. In M. D. S. Braine & D. P. O'Brien (Eds.), Mental logic (pp. 79-90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
4. Brandt, P. Y., Quiroz, G., & Apotheloz, D. (1991). Towards a formalization of argumentative negation. In F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Proceedings of the second international conference on argumentation (Vol. 1A, pp. 218-225). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
5. Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (1985). Pragmatic reasoning schemas. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 391-416.
6. Conway, D. A. (1991). On the distinction between convergent and linked arguments. Informal Logic, 13(3), 145-158.
7. Copi, I. M. (1986). Informal logic. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
8. Evans, J. St. B. T., Newstead, S. E., & Byrne, R. M. J. (1993). Human reasoning: The psychology of deduction. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
9. Fisher, A. (1988). The logic of real arguments. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10. Fisher, A. (1992). "Dialectics and the macrostructure of argument" by James Freeman. Informal Logic, 14(2-3), 193-204.
11. Freeman, J. B. (1991). Dialectics and the macrostructure of arguments: A theory of argument structure. Berlin/New York: Foris Publications PDA 10.
12. Furlong, P. R. (1993). Personal factors influencing informal reasoning of economic issues and the effect of specific instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1), 171-181.
13. Galotti, K. M. (1989). Approaches to studying formal and everyday reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 331-351.
14. Gilbert, M. (1997). Coalescent argumentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
15. Govier, T. (1985). A practical study of argument. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
16. Green, D. W. (1995). The abstract selection task: Thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. In S. E. Newstead & J. St. B. T. Evans (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking and reasoning. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
17. Haack, S. (1978). Philosophy of logics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. Halpern, D. (1996). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
19. Harris, E. E. (1987). Formal, transcendental, and dialectical thinking: Logic and reality. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
20. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1994). Mental models and probabilistic thinking. Cognition, 50, 189-209.
21. Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. J. (1991). Deduction. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
22. Kienpointner, M. (1987). Towards a typology of argumentative schemes. In F. H. van Eemeren, R Grootendorst, & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Argumentation: Across the lines of discipline (pp. 275-287). Dordrecht/Providence: Floris Publications, PDA 3.
23. Klauer, K. C., Meiser, T., & Naumer, B. (2000). Training propositional reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 868-895.
24. Kruskal, J., & Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional scaling. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
25. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Press.
26. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27. Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A., Sherman, S. J., & Uhles, A. N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 223-246.
28. Moshman, D., & Geil, M. (1998). Collaborative reasoning: Evidence for collective rationality. Thinking and Reasoning, 4(3), 231-248.
29. Perkins, D. N. (1985). Postprimary education has little impact on informal reasoning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 562-571.
30. Rescher, N. (1977). Dialectics: A controversy-oriented approach to the theory of knowledge. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
31. Resnick, L. B., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C. M., Wathen, S. H., & Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3-4), 347-364.
32. Ricco, R. B. (1993). Revising the logic of operations as a relevance logic: From hypothesis testing to explanation. Human Development, 36, 125-146.
33. Ricco, R. B. (2002). Analyzing the roles of challenge and defense in argumentation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 39(1), 1-22.
34. Rips, L. J. (1994). The psychology of proof: Deductive reasoning in human thinking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Rips, L. J. (1995). Deduction and cognition. In D. N. Osherson (Series Ed.) & E. E. Smith & D. N. Osherson (Vol. Eds.), An introduction to cognitive science, Vol. 4, Thinking (2nd ed., pp. 293-343). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36. Rips, L. J. (1998). Reasoning and conversation. Psychological Review, 105(3), 411-441.
37. Salmon, M. H., & Zeitz, C. M. (1995). Analyzing conversational reasoning. Informal Logic, 17, 1-23.
38. Schiffman, S. S., Reynolds, M. L., & Young, F. W. (1981). Introduction to multidimensional scaling: Theories, methods, and applications. New York: Academic Press.
39. Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40. Shaw, V. F. (1996). The cognitive processes in informal reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning, 2(1), 51-80.
41. Snoeck Henkemans, F. (1994). Complex argumentation in a critical discussion. In F. H. van Eemeren & R. Grootendorst (Eds.), Studies in pragma-dialectics (pp. 69-78). Amsterdam: Sic Sat 4.
42. Snoeck Henkemans, F. (2000). State-of-the-Art: The structure of argumentation. Argumentation, 14, 447-473.
43. Thomas, S. (1986). Practical reasoning in natural language. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
44. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45. van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
46. van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F. S., Blair, J. A., Johnson, R. H., Krabbe, E. C. W., et al. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
47. Vorobej, M. (1994). The TRUE test of linkage. Informal Logic, 16(3), 147-157.
48. Vorobej, M. (1995a). Hybrid arguments. Informal Logic, 17(2), 289-296.
49. Vorobej, M. (1995b). Linked arguments and the validity requirement. Argumentation, 9, 291-304.
50. Voss, J. F., Fincher-Kiefer, R., Wiley, J., & Silfies, L. N. (1993). On the processing of arguments. Argumentation, 7, 165-181.
51. Voss, J. F., & Means, M. L. (1991). Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation. Learning and Instruction, 1(4), 337-350.
52. Waller, B. N. (1998). Critical thinking: consider the verdict. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
53. Walton, D. N. (1996a). Argument structure: A pragmatic theory. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
54. Walton, D. N. (1996b). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
55. Ward, S., & Overton, W. F. (1990). Semantic familiarity, relevance, and the development of deductive reasoning. Developmental Psychology, 26, 488-493.
56. Yanal, R. (1988). Basic logic. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.
57. Yanal, R. (1991). Dependent and independent reasons. Informal Logic, 13(3), 137-149.