Argumentation as an object of interest and as a social and cultural resource

Argumentation and Education: Theoretical Foundations and Practices

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 9-66

  Rigotti, Eddo ^a   Greco Morasso, Sara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LUGANO   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Argument schemes; Argumentation; Argumentation studies; Argumentum Model of Topics; Loci; Manipulative processess; Reasonableness

Indexed keywords

EID: 84879306344     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-98125-3_2     Document Type: Chapter

References (171)

1. Aakhus, M. (2003). Neither naïve nor critical reconstruction: dispute mediators, impasse, and the design of argumentation. Argumentation, 17, 265-290 .
2. Aakhus, M., & Vasilyeva, A. (2007). Managing disagreement in multiparty deliberation. In H. van Eemeren, J. Anthony Blair, C.A. Willard, & B. Garssen (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 1-7). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
3. Adam, J.-M., & Bonhomme, M. (1997). L'argumentation publicitaire: rhétorique de l'éloge et de la persuasion. Paris: Nathan .
4. Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003). Arguing to Learn: Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning environments. Dordrecht: Kluwer .
5. Barth, E.M., & Krabbe, E.C.W. (1982). From Axiom to Dialogue. A Philosophical Study of Logics and Argumentation. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter .
6. Bigi, S. (2007). Keywords in argumentative texts and their persuasive power. In F.H. van Eemeren, A.J. Blair, Ch. Willards, & B. Garssen (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 129-135). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
7. Bigi, S. (2009, Forthcoming). Using keywords to analyze conflicts in doctor-patient consultations. L'analisi linguistica e letteraria (1).
8. Blair, J.A., & Johnson, R.H. (1987). Argumentation as dialectical. Argumentation, 1 (1), 41-56 .
9. Bochensky, M. (ed.). (1947). Petri Hispani Summulae logicales. Torino: Marietti .
10. Braet, A. (2005). The Common Topic in Aristotle's Rhetoric: Precursor of the Argumentation Scheme. Argumentation, 19, 65-83 . (Pubitemid 41152213)
11. Brashers, D.E., Rintamaki, L.S., Hsieh, E., & Peterson, J. (2006). Pragma-dialectics and self-advocacy in physician-patient interactions. In P. Houtlosser & A. van Rees (eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 75-85). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates .
12. Burger, M. (2005). Argumentative and hierarchical dimensions of a broadcast debate sequence: a micro analysis. Studies in Communication Sciences (Special issue of Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction), 249-264.
13. Burger, M., & Filliettaz, L. (2002). Media interviews: an intersection of multiple socialpractices. In Ch. N. Candlin (ed.), Research and Practice in Professional Discourse (pp. 567-588). Hong Kong: City University Press .
14. Burger, M., and G. Martel (2005). Argumentation et communication dans less médias, Québec: Nota Bene.
15. Cantoni, L., & Di Blas, N. (2006). Comunicazione. Teoria e Pratiche, 2nd edition. Milano: Apogeo .
16. Crawshay-Williams, R. (1957). Methods and Criteria of Reasoning. An Inquiry into the Structure of Controversy. London: Routledge .
17. Christopher Guerra, S. (2008). Themen, Thesen und Argumente zur Position des Italienischen in der viersprachigen Schweiz. Studies in Communication Sciences, 8 (1), 135-159 .
18. Cigada, S. (1999). Nomi e cose. Aspetti semantici e pragmatici delle strutture nominali. Milano: ISU .
19. Cigada, S. (2006). Connectif et relation entre locuteurs. Application à l'analyse d'un corpus de presse politique sur la question européenne («Le Monde», 11 mai 1950). In G. Gobber, M.C. Gatti, & S. Cigada (eds.), Sýndesmoi. Connettivi nella realtà dei testi (pp. 97-173). Milano: Vita e Pensiero .
20. Cigada, S. (2007). Past-oriented and future-oriented emotions in argumentation for Europe during the Fifties. In F.H. van Eemeren, A.J. Blair, F. Snoeck Henkemans, & Ch. Willards (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
21. Cigada, S. (2008). Les émotions dans le discours de la construction européenne. Milano: ISU .
22. Dascal, M. (1998). Types of polemics and types of polemical moves. In S. Cmejrkova, J. Hoffmannova, O. Mullerova, & J. Svetla (eds.), Dialoganalyse VI ( vol. 1, pp. 15-33). Tubingen: Niemeyer .
23. Dascal, M. (ed.). (2003). Understanding controversies. Interpretation and Understanding (pp. 280-292). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
24. (First published as: Dascal, M. (1989). Controversies as quasi-dialogues. In E. Weigand & F. Hundsnurscher (eds.), Dialoganalyse II ( vol. 1, pp. 147-159). Tübingen: Niemeyer .
25. Dascal, M. (ed.). (2006). Introductory Essay. G.W. Leibniz: The Art of Controversies ( xix-lxxii). Dodrecht: Springer .
26. Demel, W. (1992). Wie die Chinesen gelb wurden: Ein Beitrag zur Frühgeschichte der Rassentheorien. Historische Zeitschrift, 255, 625-666 .
27. De Rijk, L.M. (1970). Petrus Abaelardus, Dialectica: First Complete Edition of the Parisian Manuscript with an Introduction. Assen: Van Gorcum.
28. van Eemeren, F.H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates .
29. van Eemeren, F.H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Account. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
30. van Eemeren, F.H., & Houtlosser, P. (2002a). Strategic maneuvering: maintaining a delicate balance. In F.H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis (pp. 131-159). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers .
31. van Eemeren, F.H., & Houtlosser, P. (2002b). And always the twain shall meet. In F.H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers .
32. van Eemeren, F.H., Garssen, B., & Meuffels, B. (2003). The conventional validity of the pragmadialectical freedom rule. In F.H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Argumentation in Practice (pp. 349-365). Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
33. van Eemeren, F.H. (2003). A glance behind the scenes: the state of the art in the study of argumentation. Studies in Communication sciences, 3 (1), 1-23 .
34. van Eemeren, F.H., & Grootendorst, R. (1994). Rationale for a pragma-dialectical perspective. In F.H. van Eemeren & R. Grootendorst (eds.), Studies in Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 11-28). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
35. van Eemeren, F.H., & Houtlosser, P. (1998). William the silent's argumentative discourse. In F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair, & C.A. Willard (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 168-171). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
36. van Eemeren, F.H., & Houtlosser, P. (2003). Strategic manoeuvring: William the silent's Apologie. A case in point. In L.I. Komlósi, P. Houtlosser, & M. Leezenberg (eds.), Communication and Culture. Argumentative, Cognitive and Linguistic Perspectives (pp. 177-185). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
37. van Eemeren, F.H., & Houtlosser, P. (2005). Theoretical construction and argumentative reality: an analytic model of critical discussion and conventionalised types of argumentative activity. In D. Hitchcock & D. Farr (eds.), The Uses of Argument. Proceedings of a Conference at McMaster University 18-21 May 2005 (pp. 75-84). Ontario: Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation .
38. van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1993). Mediation as critical discussion. In F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson, & S. Jacobs (eds.), Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse (pp. 117-141). Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press .
39. van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., & Snoeck-Henkemans, A.F. (1996). Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory. A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Mahwah (New Jersey): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates .
40. van Eemeren, F.H., Houtlosser, P., & Snoeck-Henkemans, A.F. (2007). Argumentative Indicators in Discourse. A Pragma-Dialectical Study. New York: Springer .
41. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Agency theory: an assessment and review. The Academy of Management Review, 14, 57-74 .
42. Ennis, R.H. (1962). A concept of critical thinking. Harvard Educational Review, 32, 81-111 .
43. Eppler, M.J., & Burkhart, R.A. (2007). Visual representations in knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4 (11), 112-122 .
44. Erduran, S., Osborne, J.F., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (10), 994-1020 . (Pubitemid 40002954)
45. Feteris, E.T. (1999). Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation: A Survey of Theories on the Justification of Judicial Decisions. Dodrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers .
46. Feteris, E.T. (ed.). (2005). Schemes and structures of legal argumentation. Argumentation, 19(4), Special issue.
47. Frege, G. (1892). Über Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 100, 25-50 .
48. Garssen, B. (2001). Argument schemes. In F.H. van Eemeren (ed.), Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory (pp. 81-99). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
49. Gatti, M.C. (2004). La negazione in prospettiva semantico-pragmatica. Le dinamiche dello scope. Milano: ISU .
50. Goodnight, G.T. (1990). The rhetorical tradition, modern communication, and the grounds of justified assent. In D. Williams & M. Hazen (eds.), A rgumentation Theory and the Rhetoric of Assent. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press .
51. Goodnight, G.T. (2006). When reasons matter most: pragma-dialectics and the problem of informed consent. In P. Houtlosser & A. van Rees (eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 75-85). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates .
52. Govier, T. (2006). A Practical Study of Argument, 6th edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth .
53. Greco, S. (2003). When presupposing becomes dangerous. How the procedure of presuppositional accommodation can be exploited in manipulative discourses. Studies in Communication Sciences, 3 (2), 217-234 .
54. Greco Morasso, S. (2006). Comments on "Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Confrontations". Argumentation, 20 (4), 393-398 .
55. Greco Morasso, S. (2007). The covert argumentativity of mediation: developing argumentation through asking questions. In Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 513-520). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
56. Greco Morasso, S. (2008). The ontology of conflict. Pragmatics and Cognition, 16 (3), 540-567 .
57. Greco Morasso, S. (2009). Argumentative and other communicative strategies of the mediation practice. PhD thesis, University of Lugano (Faculty of Communication sciences).
58. Grennan, W. (1997). Informal Logic. Montreal: Mc-Gill University Press .
59. Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics. ( Vol. 3, pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press .
60. Grize, J.-B. (1982). De la logique à l'argumentation. Genève: Librairie Droz .
61. Groarke, L. (2007). Informal logic. In E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2007 Edition). http://www.plato.stanford.edu/ archives/sum2007/entries/logicinformal/.
62. Grossen, M., & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (1994). Psychosocial perspective on cognitive development: construction of adult-child intersubjectivity in logic tasks. In W.D. Graaf & R. Maier (eds.), Sociogenesis Reexamined (pp. 243-260). New York: Springer .
63. Grossen, M., & Salazar Orvig, A. (eds.). (2006). L'entretien clinique en pratiques. Analyse des interactions verbales d'un genre hété rogène. Paris: Belin .
64. Hamblin, C.L. (1970). Fallacies. London: Methuen .
65. Hastings, A.C. (1963). A reformulation of the modes of reasoning in argumentation. Evanston, Illinois: Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University .
66. Healy, P.M., & Palepu, K.G. (2001). Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: a review of the empirical disclosure literature. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31, 405-440 . (Pubitemid 33668037)
67. Ilie, C. (2003). Histrionic and agonistic features of parliamentary discourse. Studies in Communication Sciences, 3 (1), 25-53 .
68. Klima, G. (2001). Iohannis Buridani Summulae de Dialectica. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
69. Jacobs, S. (2002). Maintaining neutrality in dispute mediation: managing disagreement while managing not to disagree. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1402-1426 .
70. Jacobs, S., & Aakhus, M. (2002a). How to resolve a conflict: two models of dispute resolution. In F.H. van Eemeren (ed.), Advances in Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 29-44). Amsterdam/Newport News, VA: Sic Sat/Vale Press .
71. Jacobs, S., & Aakhus, M. (2002b). What mediators do with words: implementing three models of rational discussion in dispute mediation. Conflict resolution quarterly, 20 (2), 177-203 .
72. Johnson, R.H. (1992). The problem of defining critical thinking. In S.P. Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking (pp. 38-53). New York: Teachers' College Press .
73. Kahane, H. (1971). Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric. The Use of Reasoning in Everyday Life. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth .
74. Katzav, J., & Reed, C. (2004). On argumentation schemes and the natural classification of arguments. Argumentation, 18 (2), 239-259 .
75. Kienpointner, M. (1992). Alltagslogik: Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern. Stuttgart, Germany: Fromman-Holzboog .
76. Latour, B., & Weibel, P. (2002). Iconoclash. Beyond the Image Wars. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press .
77. Latour, B., & Weibel, P. (eds.). (2005). Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy. Karlsruhe: MIT Press .
78. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications .
79. Levinson, S. (1978). Activity types and language, Pragmatics Microfiche Volume 3, Fiche 3-3, D.1-G.5.
80. Reprinted in Levinson, S. (1979). Activity types and language. Linguistics, 17, 365-399 .
81. Locke, J. (1975). Essay on Human Understanding. Oxford: Clarendon Press .
82. López, C., & Vicuña, A.M. (2006). Pragma-dialectical ideal of reasonableness and an education for critical thinking and for the building of a moral community. In P. Houtlosser & A. van Rees (eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates .
83. Lorenzen, P., & Lorenz, K. (1978). Dialogische Logik. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft .
84. Macagno, F., & Walton, D. (2008). The argumentative structure of persuasive definitions. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 11, 525-549 .
85. Mann, S. (1997). Agency theory. In J. Garrett (ed.), The Blackwell Enclyclopedia of Management, 2nd edition. Malden: Blackwell Publishing .
86. Mercer, N. (1995). The Guided Construction of Knowledge: Talk Amongst Teachers and Learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters .
87. Mercer, N. (2000). Words and Minds: How We Use Language to Think Together. London: Routledge .
88. Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the Development of Children's Thinking: Aa Sociocultural Approach. London: Routledge .
89. Michaels, S., O'Connor, M.C., Sohmer, R., & Resnick, L. (Forthcoming). Guided construction of knowledge in the classroom: How well-structured talk, tasks, and tools build the mind. In B. Schwarz & T. Dreyfus (eds.).
90. Minio-Paluello, L. (ed.). (1949). Aristotelis Categoriae et Liber de Interpretatione. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
91. Mishkin, F.S. (2004). The Economics of Money, Banking, and Financial Markets. Boston: Addison Wesley .
92. Naess, A. (1966). Communication and Argument. Elements of Applied Semantics. Oslo, London: Allen & Unwin .
93. Nonnon, E. (1996). Activités argumentatives et élaboration de connaissances nouvelles: Le dialogue comme espace d'exploration. Langue Française, 112, 67-87 .
94. O'Keefe, D.J. (2007). Potential Conflicts between Normatively-Responsible Advocacy and Successful Social Influence: Evidence from Persuasion Effects Research. Argumentation 21(2): 151-163.
95. O'Keefe, D.J. (2008a). Elaboration likelihood model. In W. Donsbach, et al. (eds.), International Encyclopedia of Communication. Oxford: Blackwell .
96. O'Keefe, D.J. (2008b). Persuasion. In W. Donsbach, et al. (eds.), International Encyclopedia of Communication. Oxford: Blackwell .
97. Palmieri, R. (2008). Reconstructing argumentative interactions in M&A offers. Studies in Communication Sciences, 8 (2), 279-302 .
98. Paul, R. (1982). Teaching critical thinking in the strong sense. Informal Logic Newsletter, 4, 2-7 .
99. Paul, R. (1989). Critical thinking in North America: a new theory of knowledge, learning, and literacy. Argumentation, 3, 197-235 .
100. Perelman, C. (1979). The rational and the reasonable. In Ch. Perelman (ed.), The New Rhetoric and the Humanities. Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company .
101. Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1958). La nouvelle rhétorique. Traité de l'argumentation. Bruxelles: l'Université de Bruxelles .
102. Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. New York: Springer .
103. Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T., & Schumann, D.T. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: the moderating effect of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 135-146 .
104. Plantin, C. (1998). Les raisons des émotions. In M. Bondi (ed.), Forms of the Argumentative Discourse. Per un'analisi linguistica dell'argomentare (pp. 3-50). Bologna: Clueb .
105. Plantin, C. (2004). On the inseparability of emotion and reason in argumentation. In E. Weigand (ed.), Emotion in Dialogic Interaction (pp. 269-281). Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
106. Pontecorvo, C. (ed.). (1993). La condivisione della conoscenza. Firenze: La Nuova Italia .
107. Pontecorvo, C., & Arcidiacono, F. (2007). Famiglie all'italiana. Parlare a tavola. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore .
108. Reed, C., Walton, D., & Macagno, F. (2007). Argument diagramming in logic, law and artificial intelligence. Knowledge Engineering Review, 22 (1), 87-109 . (Pubitemid 46825800)
109. van Rees, M.A. (2001). The diagnostic power of the stages of critical discussion in the analysis and evaluation of problem-solving discussions. Argumentation, 15 (4), 457-470 . (Pubitemid 33807825)
110. van Rees, M.A. (2002). A new approach to problem-solving discussions. In F.H. van Eemeren (ed.), Advances in Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 83-92). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
111. van Rees, M.A. (2003). Pragma-dialectical analysis and evaluation of problem-solving discussions. Argumentation, 17 (4), 465-479 .
112. van Rees, M.A. (2005). Dissociation: a dialogue technique. In M. Dascal, F.H. van Eemeren, E. Rigotti, S. Stati, & A. Rocci (eds.), Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction (pp. 35-50). Special issue of Studies of Communication Sciences .
113. Reinhardt, T. (ed.). (2003). Marcus Tullius Cicero, Topica. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
114. Rigotti, E. (1993). La sequenza testuale. L'analisi linguistica e letteraria, 1, 43-148 .
115. Rigotti, E. (2003). La linguistica tra le scienze della comunicazione. In A. Giacalone Ramat, E. Rigotti, & A. Rocci (eds.), Linguistica e nuove professioni. Milano: FrancoAngeli .
116. Rigotti, E. (2005a). Congruity theory and argumentation. In M. Dascal, F.H. van Eemeren, E. Rigotti, S. Stati, & A. Rocci (eds.), Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction (pp. 75-96), Special issue of Studies in Communication Sciences .
117. Rigotti, E. (2005b). Towards a typology of manipulative processes. In L. de Saussure & P. Schulz P (eds.), Manipulation and Ideologies in the Twentieth Century. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
118. Rigotti, E. (2006). Relevance of context-bound loci to topical potential in the argumentation stage. Argumentation, 20 (4), 519-540 .
119. Rigotti, E. (2009a). Whether and how classical topics can be revived within contemporary argumentation theory. In F.H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (eds.), Pondering on Problems of Argumentation: Twenty Essays on Theoretical Issues. New York: Springer (pp. 157-178).
120. Rigotti, E. (2007). Comparing argumentum-model of topics with some other analytical approaches to argument schemes. Paper presented at the seventh Amsterdam-Lugano Colloquim, Lugano, 30 November 2007.
121. Rigotti, E. (2009b). Locus a causa finali. L'analisi linguistica e letteraria (2).
122. Rigotti, E., & Cigada, S. (2004). La comunicazione verbale. Milano: Apogeo .
123. Rigotti, E., & Greco, S. (2006). Topics: the argument generator. In E. Rigotti, et al. (eds.), Argumentation for Financial Communication, Argumentum eLearning Module. http://www.argumentum.ch.
124. Rigotti, E., et al. (2006a). Argomentazione nei media, Argumentum eLearning module. http://www.argumentum.ch.
125. Rigotti, E., Rocci, A., & Greco, S. (2006b). The semantics of reasonableness. In P. Houtlosser & A. van Rees (eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics (pp 257-274). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates .
126. Rigotti, E., & Rocci, A. (2001). Sens-non-sens-contresens. Tentative d'une definition explicative. Studies in Communication Sciences, 1 (2), 45-80 .
127. Rigotti, E., & Greco Morasso, S. (Forthcoming). Comparing the Argumentation Model of Topics with other contemporary approaches to argument schemes: the procedural and material components. Submitted to Argumentation.
128. Rocci, A. (2005). Connective predicates in monologic and dialogic argumentation. In M. Dascal, F.H. van Eemeren, E. Rigotti, S. Stati, & A. Rocci (eds.), Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction (pp. 97-118), Special issue of Studies in Communication Sciences .
129. Rocci, A. (2006). Pragmatic inference and argumentation in intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics, 3 (4), 409-442 .
130. Rocci, A. (2008). Analysing and evaluating persuasive media discourse in context. In M. Burger (ed.), L'analyse linguistique des discours médiatiques. Entre sciences du langage et sciences de la communication. Québec: Nota Bene .
131. Ross, S.A. (1973). The economic theory of agency: the principal's problem. The American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings of the Eighty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, May 1973, 63 (2), 134-139 .
132. Ross, W.D. (ed.). (1950). Aristotelis Physica. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
133. Ross, W.D. (ed.). (1958). Aristotelis Topica et Sophistici Elenchi. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
134. Ross, W.D. (ed.). (1959). Aristotelis Ars Rhetorica. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
135. Rubinelli, S., Nakamoto, K., Schulz, P., & De Saussure, L. (2006). What are we to think about consumer advertising? A case-study in the field of misinterpreted argumentation. Studies in Communication Sciences, 6 (3), 337-348 .
136. Rubinelli, S., & Schulz, P.J. (2006). "Let Me Tell You Why!". When argumentation in doctor-patient interaction makes a difference. Argumentation, 20 (3), 353-375 . (Pubitemid 44893064)
137. de Saussure L., & Schulz P. (eds.). (2005). Manipulation and Ideologies in the Twentieth Century: Discourse, Language, Mind. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
138. Schwarz, B., & Glassner, A. (2003a). The blind and the paralytic: supporting argumentation in everyday and scientific issues. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting Cognition in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic publishers .
139. Schwarz, B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J., & Ilya, M. (2003b). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12 (2), 221-258 .
140. Schwarz, B., Neuman, Y., & Biezuner, S. (2000). "Two wrongs may make a right. if they argue together!" Cognition and Instruction, 18 (4), 461-494 .
141. Schwarz, B., Perret Clermont, A.-N., Trognon, A., & Marro, P. (2008). Emergent learning in successive activities: learning in interaction in a laboratory context. Pragmatics and Cognition, 16 (1), 57-91 .
142. Scriven, M. (1976). Reasoning. New York: McGraw-Hill .
143. Searle, J.R. (1996). The construction of social reality. London: Penguin .
144. Sen, A. (2005). The Argumentative Indian. London: Penguin Books .
145. Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (2-3), 235-260 . (Pubitemid 43135580)
146. Stein, N.L., & Miller, C.A. (1993). A theory of argumentative understanding: relationships among position preference, judgments of goodness, memory and reasoning. Argumentation, 7 (2), 183-204 .
147. Stump, E. (ed.). (2004). Boethius's "De topicis differentiis". Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press .
148. Tardini, S. (2006). Connettivi sequenziali ed 'endoxa'. Strategie argomentative e usi manipolatori della menzione di un 'endoxon'. In G. Gobber, M.C. Gatti, & S. Cigada (eds.), Sýndesmoi. Connettivi nella realtà dei testi. Milano: Vita e Pensiero .
149. Tardini, S. (2007). Argumentum: an e-course for learning argumentation by arguing. In F.H. van Eemeren, A.J. Blair, F. Snoeck Henkemans, & Ch. Willards (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 1353-1358). Amsterdam: Sic Sat .
150. Tillemans, T.J.F. (2008). Introduction: Buddhist argumentation. Argumentation, 22 (1), 1-14 .
151. Tindale, C.W. (2004). Rhetorical Argumentation: Principles of Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications .
152. Thomas, S.N. (1973). Practical reasoning in natural language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall .
153. Toulmin, S., Riecke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan .
154. Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
155. Walton, D. (1995). A Pragmatic Theory of Fallacy. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press .
156. Walton, D. (1998). The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Arguments. Toronto: University of Toronto Press .
157. Walton, D. (2005). Argumentation Methods for Artificial Intelligence in Law. Berlin: Springer .
158. Walton, D. (2006a). Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
159. Walton, D. (2006b). How to make and defend a proposal in deliberation dialogue. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 14, 177-239 . (Pubitemid 46201663)
160. Walton, D. (2007). Media Argumentation: Dialectic, Persuasion and Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
161. Walton, D., & Krabbe, E. (1995). Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. Albany: State University of New York Press .
162. Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
163. Weger, H. Jr., & Aakhus, M. (2003). Competing demands, multiple ideals, and the structure of argumentation practices. A pragma-dialectical analysis of televised town hall meetings following the murder trial of O.J. Simpson. In F.H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Argumentation in Practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
164. Winterbottom, M. (ed.). (1970). M. Fabi Quintiliani Institutionis oratoriae libri duodecim. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
165. Winterbottom, M. (ed.). (1994). M. Tulli Ciceronis De Officiis. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
166. Wüest, J. (2001). La gerarchia degli atti linguistici nel testo. Studies in Communication Sciences, (1/1), 195-211.
167. Zarefsky, D. (1986). President Johnson's War on Poverty. Rhetoric and History. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press .
168. Zarefsky, D. (1990). Lincoln Douglas and Slavery. In the Crucible of Public Debate. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press .
169. Zarefsky, D. (2007). Making the case for war: Colin Powell at the United Nations. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 10 (2), 275-302 .
170. Zarefsky, D., & Benacka, E. (2008). Sizing Up Rhetoric. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press .
171. Zittoun, N. (2007). Tradition juive et construction de sens. L'argumentation dans les textes traditionnels du judaïsme, leur transmission, leur interprétation, et au-delà. In E. Rigotti, et al. (eds.) (2007). Argomentazione nelle istituzioni, Argumentum eLearning module, 2nd edition. http://www.argumentum.ch.