Individual differences in argument strength discrimination
Svedholm-Häkkinen, Annika ; Hietanen, Mika LU
and Baron, Jon
(2023)
In Argumentation
- Abstract
- Being able to discriminate poorly justified from well justified arguments is necessary for informed citizenship. However, it is not known whether the ability to recognize argument strength generalizes across different types of arguments, and what cognitive factors predict this ability or these abilities. Drawing on the theory of argument schemes, we examined arguments from consequence, analogy, symptoms, and authority in order to cover all major types of everyday arguments. A study (N = 278) on the general population in Finland indicated that the ability to discriminate between strong and weak arguments was unidimensional across these schemes. Argument strength discrimination ability correlated positively with analytic thinking... (More)
- Being able to discriminate poorly justified from well justified arguments is necessary for informed citizenship. However, it is not known whether the ability to recognize argument strength generalizes across different types of arguments, and what cognitive factors predict this ability or these abilities. Drawing on the theory of argument schemes, we examined arguments from consequence, analogy, symptoms, and authority in order to cover all major types of everyday arguments. A study (N = 278) on the general population in Finland indicated that the ability to discriminate between strong and weak arguments was unidimensional across these schemes. Argument strength discrimination ability correlated positively with analytic thinking dispositions promoting both quality and quantity of thinking, slightly positively with education, and negatively with overconfidence. It was unrelated to an intuitive thinking style, and to self-rated mental effort. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/cd171557-c566-4c69-8334-9981f6a61664
- author
- Svedholm-Häkkinen, Annika
; Hietanen, Mika
LU
and Baron, Jon
- organization
- publishing date
- 2023-09-07
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- epub
- subject
- keywords
- argument strength, assessment measure, argument schemes
- in
- Argumentation
- pages
- 27 pages
- publisher
- Springer
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85170050447
- ISSN
- 1572-8374
- DOI
- 10.1007/s10503-023-09620-x
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- cd171557-c566-4c69-8334-9981f6a61664
- date added to LUP
- 2022-10-14 00:20:22
- date last changed
- 2023-09-20 04:00:07
@article{cd171557-c566-4c69-8334-9981f6a61664,
abstract = {{Being able to discriminate poorly justified from well justified arguments is necessary for informed citizenship. However, it is not known whether the ability to recognize argument strength generalizes across different types of arguments, and what cognitive factors predict this ability or these abilities. Drawing on the theory of argument schemes, we examined arguments from consequence, analogy, symptoms, and authority in order to cover all major types of everyday arguments. A study (N = 278) on the general population in Finland indicated that the ability to discriminate between strong and weak arguments was unidimensional across these schemes. Argument strength discrimination ability correlated positively with analytic thinking dispositions promoting both quality and quantity of thinking, slightly positively with education, and negatively with overconfidence. It was unrelated to an intuitive thinking style, and to self-rated mental effort.}},
author = {{Svedholm-Häkkinen, Annika and Hietanen, Mika and Baron, Jon}},
issn = {{1572-8374}},
keywords = {{argument strength; assessment measure; argument schemes}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{09}},
publisher = {{Springer}},
series = {{Argumentation}},
title = {{Individual differences in argument strength discrimination}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10503-023-09620-x}},
doi = {{10.1007/s10503-023-09620-x}},
year = {{2023}},
}