An exploratory test of an intuitive evaluation method of perceived argument strength

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6170486
AutoresJos Hornikx (0000-0002-5362-0997, Radboud University Nijmegen), Annemarie Weerman (Radboud University Nijmegen), Hans Hoeken (0000-0002-7535-1273, Utrecht University)
Año2021
Fecha de publicación2021-12-17
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaStudies in Communication Sciences (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1424-4896 • E-ISSN: 2296-4150
EditorialElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.24434/j.scoms.2022.02.003
OpenAlexW4200573091
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas2
Referencias citadas13

According to Mercier and Sperber (2009, 2011, 2017), people have an immediate and intuitive feeling about the strength of an argument. These intuitive evaluations are not captured by current evaluation methods of argument strength, yet they could be important to predict the extent to which people accept the claim supported by the argument. In an exploratory study, therefore, a newly developed intuitive evaluation method to assess argument strength was compared to an explicit argument strength evaluation method (the PAS scale; Zhao et al., 2011), on their ability to predict claim acceptance (predictive validity) and on their sensitivity to differences in the manipulated quality of arguments (construct validity). An experimental study showed that the explicit argument strength evaluation performed well on the two validity measures. The intuitive evaluation measure, on the other hand, was not found to be valid. Suggestions for other ways of constructing and testing intuitive evaluation measures are presented

Argument (complex analysis · Cognitive psychology · Construct (python library · Construct validity · Developmental psychology · Feeling · Psychometrics · Test (biology · Computer Science · Psychology · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Psychology