Reasoning dialogues

Lance J. Rips*, Sarah K. Brem, Jeremy N. Bailenson

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

When people argue with others in conversatio, they make a variety of conversational moves: They make claims, ask for justification of others' claims, attack claims, and attack claims' justifications. The arrangement of these moves gives argumentation its characteristic shape. This article illustrates a proposed format for conversations of this type, and it reviews some findings about the way people understand and evaluate these conversations. The findings suggest that judgments of the arguers' burden depend not only on the content ot their claims, but also on the coversation's structure. In addition, judgments of the strength of a justification - an arguer's evidence or explanation - are a function of argument's setting.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)172-177
Number of pages6
JournalCurrent Directions in Psychological Science
Volume8
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1999

Keywords

  • Argumentation
  • Discourse understanding
  • Reasoning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this