Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

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

Bibliographic Data

ID6170486
AuthorsJos Hornikx (0000-0002-5362-0997, Radboud University Nijmegen), Annemarie Weerman (Radboud University Nijmegen), Hans Hoeken (0000-0002-7535-1273, Utrecht University)
Year2021
Publication date2021-12-17
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueStudies in Communication Sciences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1424-4896 • E-ISSN: 2296-4150
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.24434/j.scoms.2022.02.003
OpenAlexW4200573091
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited13

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

  • On being drawn to different types of arguments

    Open Access•Annika M Svedholm‐Häkkinen, Mika Hietanen•Thinking & Reasoning•2025

  • Individual Differences in Argument Strength Discrimination

    Open Access•Annika M Svedholm‐Häkkinen, Mika Hietanen et al.•Argumentation•2024

  • Argumentation Schemes

    Open Access•D Walton, Douglas N Walton et al.•Argumentation Schemes•2008

  • Intuition, reason, and metacognition

    Open Access•Valerie A Thompson, Jamie A Prowse Turner et al.•Cognitive Psychology•2011

  • Intuition and Reasoning

    Jonathan St B T Evans•Psychological Inquiry•2010

  • Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory

    Open Access•Hugo Mercier, Dan Sperber•Behavioral and Brain Sciences•2011

  • Logic, Fast and Slow

    Open Access•Wim De Neys, Gordon Pennycook•Current Directions in Psychological…•2019

  • Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition

    Open Access•Jonathan St B T Evans, Keith E Stanovich•Perspectives on Psychological…•2013

  • The Relationship Between the Perceived and Actual Effectiveness of Persuasive Messages

    Open Access•James Price Dillard, Kirsten M Weber et al.•Journal of Communication•2007

  • The Relative Persuasiveness of Different Forms of Arguments-From-Consequences

    Daniel J O’keefe•Annals of the International…•2013

  • Message Pretesting Using Perceived Persuasiveness Measures

    Open Access•Daniel J O’keefe•Communication Methods and Measures•2019

  • A Measure of Perceived Argument Strength

    Xiaoquan Zhao, Andrew A Strasser et al.•Communication Methods and Measures•2011

  • Cultural Differences in the Persuasiveness of Evidence Types and Evidence Quality

    Jos Hornikx, Hans Hoeken•Communication Monographs•2007

  • When is Statistical Evidence Superior to Anecdotal Evidence in Supporting Probability Claims? The Role of Argument Type

    Open Access•Hans Hoeken, Lettica Hustinx et al.•Human Communication Research•2009

  • Self-Schema Matching and Attitude Change

    Christian Wheeler, S Christian Wheeler et al.•Journal of Consumer Research•2005

Unique citing works2
Citations per year1
Citation span2024 - 2025 (2)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 2
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae