An exploratory test of an intuitive evaluation method of perceived argument strength
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6170486 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jos Hornikx (0000-0002-5362-0997, Radboud University Nijmegen), Annemarie Weerman (Radboud University Nijmegen), Hans Hoeken (0000-0002-7535-1273, Utrecht University) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Publication date | 2021-12-17 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Studies in Communication Sciences (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1424-4896 • E-ISSN: 2296-4150 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.24434/j.scoms.2022.02.003 |
| OpenAlex | W4200573091 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 13 |
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
Argumentation Schemes
Intuition, reason, and metacognition
Intuition and Reasoning
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory
Logic, Fast and Slow
Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition
The Relationship Between the Perceived and Actual Effectiveness of Persuasive Messages
The Relative Persuasiveness of Different Forms of Arguments-From-Consequences
Message Pretesting Using Perceived Persuasiveness Measures
A Measure of Perceived Argument Strength
Cultural Differences in the Persuasiveness of Evidence Types and Evidence Quality
When is Statistical Evidence Superior to Anecdotal Evidence in Supporting Probability Claims? The Role of Argument Type
Self-Schema Matching and Attitude Change
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2025 (2) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |