Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies

Steven Lubet*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

In defense of the PACE trial, Petrie and Weinman employ a series of misleading or fallacious argumentation techniques, including circularity, blaming the victim, bait and switch, non-sequitur, setting up a straw person, guilt by association, red herring, and the parade of horribles. These are described and explained.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1201-1205
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Health Psychology
Volume22
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2017

Fingerprint

Guilt

Keywords

  • PACE trial
  • beliefs
  • chronic fatigue syndrome
  • health beliefs
  • myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

@article{933342703c8149e79fd2c6055177783c,
title = "Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies",
abstract = "In defense of the PACE trial, Petrie and Weinman employ a series of misleading or fallacious argumentation techniques, including circularity, blaming the victim, bait and switch, non-sequitur, setting up a straw person, guilt by association, red herring, and the parade of horribles. These are described and explained.",
keywords = "PACE trial, beliefs, chronic fatigue syndrome, health beliefs, myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome",
author = "Steven Lubet",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1359105317712523",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "1201--1205",
journal = "Journal of Health Psychology",
issn = "1359-1053",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "9",

}

Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies. / Lubet, Steven.

In: Journal of Health Psychology, Vol. 22, No. 9, 01.08.2017, p. 1201-1205.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies

AU - Lubet, Steven

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - In defense of the PACE trial, Petrie and Weinman employ a series of misleading or fallacious argumentation techniques, including circularity, blaming the victim, bait and switch, non-sequitur, setting up a straw person, guilt by association, red herring, and the parade of horribles. These are described and explained.

AB - In defense of the PACE trial, Petrie and Weinman employ a series of misleading or fallacious argumentation techniques, including circularity, blaming the victim, bait and switch, non-sequitur, setting up a straw person, guilt by association, red herring, and the parade of horribles. These are described and explained.

KW - PACE trial

KW - beliefs

KW - chronic fatigue syndrome

KW - health beliefs

KW - myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026777146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026777146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1359105317712523

DO - 10.1177/1359105317712523

M3 - Review article

VL - 22

SP - 1201

EP - 1205

JO - Journal of Health Psychology

JF - Journal of Health Psychology

SN - 1359-1053

IS - 9

ER -