The potential conflict between normatively-good argumentative practice and persuasive success: Evidence from persuasion effects research: Theoretical contributions to the study of argumentation

Daniel James O'Keefe

The potential conflict between normatively-good argumentative practice and persuasive success: Evidence from persuasion effects research: Theoretical contributions to the study of argumentation

Communication Studies

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Anyone who has a view
Subtitle of host publication	Theoretical contributions to the study of argumentation
Place of Publication	Amsterdam
Publisher	Kluwer
Pages	309-318
State	Published - 2003

Cite this

@inbook{0992a943af494a8189751c5fa5b01dac,

title = "The potential conflict between normatively-good argumentative practice and persuasive success: Evidence from persuasion effects research: Theoretical contributions to the study of argumentation",

author = "O'Keefe, {Daniel James}",

year = "2003",

language = "English",

pages = "309--318",

booktitle = "Anyone who has a view",

publisher = "Kluwer",

}

The potential conflict between normatively-good argumentative practice and persuasive success: Evidence from persuasion effects research: Theoretical contributions to the study of argumentation. / O'Keefe, Daniel James.
Anyone who has a view: Theoretical contributions to the study of argumentation. Amsterdam: Kluwer, 2003. p. 309-318.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter