The influence of argument structure on judgements of argument strength, function, and adequacy

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 641-664

  Ricco, Robert B ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

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

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

EID: 40049083296     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210701282618     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Bailenson, J. (2001). Contrast ratio: Shifting burden of proof in informal arguments. Discourse Processes, 32, 29-41.
2. Baym, N. K. (1996). Agreements and disagreements in a computer-mediated discussion. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29, 315-345.
3. Blair, J. A. (2001). Walton's argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning: A critique and development. Argumentation, 15, 365-379.
4. Carey, S. S. (2000). The uses and abuses of argument: Critical thinking and fallacious reasoning. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishers.
5. Collins, A., & Michalski, R. (1989). The logic of plausible reasoning: A core theory. Cognitive Science, 13, 1-49.
6. Conway, D. A. (1991). On the distinction between convergent and linked arguments. Informal Logic, 13, 145-158.
7. Evans, J. St. B. T., & Thompson, V. A. (2004). Informal reasoning: Theory and method. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 69-74.
8. Feldman, R. (1999). Reason and argument (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9. Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The development of argumentive discourse skill. Discourse Processes, 32, 135-153.
10. Fisher, A. (1988). The logic of real arguments. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11. Fisher, A. (1992). "Dialectics and the macrostructure of argument" by James Freeman. Informal Logic, 14, 193-204.
12. Freeman, J. B. (1991). Dialectics and the macrostructure of arguments: A theory of argument structure. Berlin, Germany: Foris Publications.
13. Freeman, J. B. (2001). Argument structure and disciplinary perspective. Argumentation, 15, 397-423.
14. Goldman, A. I. (1994). Argumentation and social epistemology. The Journal of Philosophy, 91, 27-49.
15. Govier, T. (1992). A practical study of argument (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
16. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press.
17. Halpern, D. (1996). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18. Heit, E. (2000). Properties of inductive reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 569-592.
19. Heit, E., & Feeney, A. (2005). Relations between premise similarity and inductive strength. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 340-344.
20. Hoaglund, J. (2000). Reasoning and giving reasons. Australian Journal of Philosophy, 78, 575-594.
21. Jacobs, S. (1989). Speech acts and arguments. Argumentation, 3, 345-365.
22. Knott, A., & Sanders, T. (1998). The classification of coherence relations and their linguistic markers: An exploration of two languages. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 135-175.
23. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Press.
24. Leitao, S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development, 43, 332-360.
25. Mann, W. C., & Thompson, S. A. (1988). Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text, 8, 243-281.
26. Martin, B. A., Lang, B., & Wong, S. (2004). Conclusion explicitness in advertising: The moderating role of need for cognition and argument quality on persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 32, 57-65.
27. Medin, D. L., Coley, J. D., Storms, G., & Hayes, B. K. (2003). A relevance theory of induction. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 517-532.
28. Muntigl, P., & Turnbull, W. (1998). Conversational structure and facework in arguing. Journal of Pragmatics, 29, 225-256.
29. Nienkamp, J. (2001). Internal rhetoric: Toward a history and theory of self-persuasion. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
30. O'Keefe, D. J. (1977). Two concepts of argument. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 13, 121-128.
31. O'Keefe, D. J. (1998). Justification explicitness and persuasive effect: A meta-analytic review of the effects of varying support articulation in persuasive messages. Argumentation and Advocacy, 35, 61-75.
32. Proffita, J. B., Coley, J. D., & Medin, D. L. (2000). Expertise and category-based induction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 811-828.
33. Ricco, R. B. (2002). Analyzing the roles of challenge and defense in argumentation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 39, 1-22.
34. Ricco, R. B. (2003). The macrostructure of informal arguments: A proposed model and analysis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 1021-1051.
35. Rips, L. J. (1998). Reasoning and conversation. Psychological Review, 105, 411-441.
36. Sanders, T., & Noordman, L. G. (2000). The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing. Discourse Processes, 29, 37-60.
37. Sanders, T., Spooren, W. P., & Noordman, L. G. (1992). Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes, 15, 1-35.
38. Shaw, V. F. (1996). The cognitive processes in informal reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning, 2, 51-80.
39. Slob, W. H. (2002). How to distinguish good and bad arguments: Dialogico-rhetorical normativity. Argumentation, 16, 179-195.
40. Sloman, S. A. (1994). When explanations compete: The role of explanatory coherence on judgments of likelihood. Cognition, 52, 1-21.
41. Sloman, S. A. (1997). Explanatory coherence and the induction of properties. Thinking and Reasoning, 3, 81-110.
42. Snoeck Henkemans, F. (2000). State-of-the-art: The structure of argumentation. Argumentation, 14, 447-473.
43. Snoeck Henkemans, F. (2003). Complex argumentation in a critical discussion. Argumentation, 17, 405-419.
44. Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
45. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 342-357.
46. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
47. Toulmin, S. (1988). The uses of argument (9th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48. Van der Henst, J., Sperber, D., & Politzer, G. (2002). When is a conclusion worth deriving? A relevancebased analysis of indeterminate relational problems. Thinking and Reasoning, 8, 1-20.
49. van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1984). Speech acts in argumentative discussions: A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. New York: Foris.
50. van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51. van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F. S., Blair, J. A., Johnson, R. H., Krabbe, E. C. et al. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52. van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1993). Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
53. van Eemeren, F. H., Gootendorst, R., & Snoeck Henkemans, F. (2002). Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
54. van Gelder, T., Bissett, M., & Cumming, G. (2004). Cultivating expertise in informal reasoning. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 142-152.
55. Vorobej, M. (1994). The TRUE test of linkage. Informal Logic, 16, 147-157.
56. Vorobej, M. (1995a). Hybrid arguments. Informal Logic, 17, 289-296.
57. Vorobej, M. (1995b). Linked arguments and the validity requirement. Argumentation, 9, 291-304.
58. Waller, B. N. (1998). Critical thinking: Consider the verdict. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
59. Walton, D. N. (1987). Informal fallacies: Toward a theory of argument criticisms. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishers.
60. Walton, D. N. (1989). Dialogue theory for critical thinking, Argumentation, 3, 169-184.
61. Walton, D. N. (1996). Argument structure: A pragmatic theory. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
62. Walton, D. N. (2004). Relevance in argumentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
63. Walton, D. N., & Krabbe, E. C. (1995). Commitment in dialogue. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
64. Weinstock, M., Neuman, Y., & Tabak, I. (2004). Missing the point or missing the norms? Epistemological norms as predictors of students' ability to identify fallacious arguments. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 77-94.
65. Yanal, R. (1988). Basic logic. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.
66. Yanal, R. (1991). Dependent and independent reasons. Informal Logic, 13, 137-149.