Argumentation in Psychology: Background Comments
نویسندگان
چکیده
Argumentation constitutes 1 of the most common forms of human interaction. Yet despite its pervasiveness, relatively little psychological research has been conducted on the topic. This article serves as an introduction to this research and has 2 goals. One is to discuss a number of general issues relevant to the study of argumentation, including the definition, goals and functions, structure, evaluation of arguments and argumentation, and the relation of narrativity and argumentation. The 2nd goal is to describe some examples of the existing psychological research on argumentation, with emphasis on articles in this special issue. Topics include argumentation by children, argumentation skill, writing argumentative text, argumentation and case-based change, argumentation and critical thinking, and argumentation and narrativity in a legal context.
منابع مشابه
Constructive Language in News Comments
We discuss the characteristics of constructive news comments, and present methods to identify them. First, we define the notion of constructiveness. Second, we annotate a corpus for constructiveness. Third, we explore whether available argumentation corpora can be useful to identify constructiveness in news comments. Our model trained on argumentation corpora achieves a top accuracy of 72.59% (...
متن کاملMathematics and Argumentation
Some authors have begun to appeal directly to studies of argumentation in their analyses of mathematical practice. These include researchers from an impressively diverse range of disciplines: not only philosophy of mathematics and argumentation theory, but also psychology, education, and computer science. This introduction provides some background to
متن کاملToward an experimental account of argumentation: the case of the slippery slope and the ad hominem arguments
Argumentation is a crucial component of our lives. Although in the absence of rational debate our legal, political, and scientific systems would not be possible, there is still no integrated area of research on the psychology of argumentation. Furthermore, classical theories of argumentation are normative (i.e., the acceptability of an argument is determined by a set of norms or logical rules),...
متن کاملArgumentation 3.0: how Semantic Web technologies can improve argumentation modeling in Web 2.0 environments
Argumentative discussions are common in Web 2.0 applications, but the social Web still offers limited or no explicit support for argumentation. As Web 2.0 applications become more popular, modeling argumentation happening in these systems becomes important, to enable reuse and further understanding of online discussions. After reviewing four genres of online conversations–Web bulletin boards, W...
متن کاملOn extended conflict-freeness in argumentation
This paper studies a possibility to represent n-ary conflicts within an argumentation framework having only binary attacks. We show that different instantiations of the abstract argumentation framework defined by Dung use very similar constructs for dealing with n-ary conflicts. We start by studying this procedure on two fully-instantiated systems from the argumentation literature and then show...
متن کامل