Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T20:21:48.284Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

34 - Reasoning and Conversation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Lance J. Rips
Edited by
Jonathan E. Adler  and
Lance J. Rips
Lance J. Rips
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
Jonathan E. Adler
Affiliation:
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
Lance J. Rips
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Reasoning
Studies of Human Inference and its Foundations
 , pp. 694 - 730
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agresti, A. (1990). Categorical data analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Allen, J. (1995). Natural language understanding. Redwood City, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bailenson, J., and Rips, L. J. (1996). Informal reasoning and burden of proof. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, S13–S16.3.0.CO;2-7>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, J. (1991). Beliefs about thinking. In Voss, J. F., Perkins, D. N., and Segal, J. W. (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 169–186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Baron, J. (1995). Myside bias in thinking about abortion. Thinking and Reasoning, 1, 221–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D. M., and Watts, D. G. (1988). Nonlinear regression analysis and its applications. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Black, J. B., and Wilensky, R. (1979). An evaluation of story grammars. Cognitive Science, 3, 213–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bly, B. (1993). Uncooperative language and the negotiation of meaning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Booth, W. C. (1967). The revival of rhetoric. In Steinmann, M. Jr. (Ed.), New rhetorics (pp. 2–15). New York: Scribners.Google Scholar
Brem, S., and Rips, L. J. (1995). Explanation and evidence in informal reasoning. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 271–276.Google Scholar
Brown, P., and Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavalli-Sforza, V., Lesgold, A. M., and Weiner, A. W. (1992). Strategies for contributing to collaborative arguments. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 755–760.Google Scholar
Chierchia, G., and McConnell-Ginet, S. (1990). Meaning and grammar: An introduction to semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chinn, C. A. (1995). Representing dialectical arguments. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 544–549.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., and Schaefer, E. F. (1989). Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13, 259–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinchy, B. M. (1989). The development of thoughtfulness in college women. American Behavioral Scientist, 32, 647–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, R. (1990). A processing model for the analysis of one-way arguments in discourse. Argumentation, 4, 431–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, A., and Michalski, R. (1989). A logic of plausible reasoning: A core theory. Cognitive Science, 13, 1–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S., and Flor, N. V. (1994). Rational choice and framing devices: Argumentation and computer programming. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 219–224.Google Scholar
Curley, S. P., Browne, G. J., Smith, G. F., and Benson, P. G. (1995). Arguments in practical reasoning underlying constructed probability responses. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, A. R., and Garvey, C. (1981). Children's use of verbal strategies in resolving conflicts. Discourse Processes, 4, 149–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. (1995). Strategic uses of argument. In Arrow, K. J., Mnookin, R. H., Ross, L., Tversky, A., and Wilson, R. B. (Eds.), Barriers to conflict resolution (pp. 237–257). New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Farley, A. M., and Freeman, K. (1995). Burden of proof in legal argumentation (Tech. Rep. No. CIS-TR-95-11). Eugene: University of Oregon, Department of Computer and Information Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firth, A. (1995). “Accounts” in negotiation discourse: A single-case analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 23, 199–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, A. (1988). The logic of real arguments. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flowers, M., McGuire, R., and Birnbaum, L. (1982). Adversary arguments and the logic of personal attacks. In Lehnert, W. G. and Ringle, M. H. (Eds.), Strategies for natural language processing (pp. 275–294). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ford, C. E. (1994). Dialogic aspects of talk and writing: Because on the interactive-edited continuum. Text, 14, 531–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garnham, A. (1983). What's wrong with story grammars?Cognition, 15, 145–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaskins, R. H. (1992). Burden of proof in modern discourse. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gentzen, G. (1969). Investigations into logical deduction. In Szabo, M. E. (Ed.), The collected papers of Gerhard Gentzen. (Original work published 1935.)Google Scholar
Goldman, A. I. (1994). Argumentation and social epistemology. Journal of Philosophy, 91, 27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottman, J. M. (1979). Marital interaction: Experimental investigations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Graesser, A. C., and Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 104–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1989). Logic and conversation. In Studies in the way of words (pp. 1–143). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Grosz, B. J., Pollack, M. E., and Sidner, C. L. (1989). Discourse. In Posner, M. I. (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 437–468). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hamblin, C. L. (1970). Fallacies. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Harman, G. (1986). Change in view: Principles of reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hewitt, L. E., Duchan, J. F., and Segal, E. M. (1993). Structure and function of verbal conflicts among adults with mental retardation. Discourse Processes, 16, 525–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, J. (1984). Questioning as a philosophical method. In Fetzer, J. H. (Ed.), Principles of philosophical reasoning (pp. 25–43). Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld.Google Scholar
Hogarth, R. M., and Kunreuther, H. (1995). Decision making under ignorance: Arguing with yourself. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 10, 15–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Homer-Dixon, T. F., and Karapin, R. S. (1989). Graphical argument analysis: A new approach to understanding arguments, applied to a debate about the window of vulnerability. International Studies Quarterly, 33, 389–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E. (1980). Culture and inference: A Trobriand case study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, S., and Jacobs, S. (1980). The structure of conversational argument: Pragmatic bases for the enthymeme. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 66, 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeffrey, R. C. (1965). The logic of decision. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. C. (1967). Hierarchical clustering schemes. Psychometrika, 32, 241–254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, G. G., Landis, J. R., Freeman, J. L., Freeman, D. H., and Lehnen, R. G. (1977). A general methodology for the analysis of experiments with repeated measurement of categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 133–158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. (1979). Score keeping in a language game. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8, 339–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, J. D. (1979). Question-begging in non-cumulative systems. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8, 117–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, J. D. (1984). Begging the question in dialogue. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 62, 174–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In Lindzey, G. and Aronson, E. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 233–346). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Miller, P. M., Danaher, D. L., and Forbes, D. (1986). Sex-related strategies for coping with interpersonal conflict in children aged five and seven. Developmental Psychology, 22, 543–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muntigl, P., and Turnbull, W. (1998). Conversational structure and face-work in arguing. Journal of Pragmatics, 29, 225–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osherson, D. N., Smith, E. E., Wilkie, O., Lopez, A., and Shafir, E. (1990). Category-based induction. Psychological Review, 97, 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perelman, C. (1982). The realm of rhetoric. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Perkins, D. N., Farady, M., and Bushey, B. (1991). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In Voss, J. F., Perkins, D. N., and Segal, J. W. (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 83–105). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pilkington, R. M., Hartley, J. R., Hintze, D., and Moore, D. J. (1992). Learning to argue and arguing to learn: An interface for computer-based dialogue games. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 3, 275–295.Google Scholar
Pollock, J. (1989). How to build a person. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ranney, M., Schank, P., Hoadley, C., and Neff, J. (1994). “I know one when I see one”: How (much) do hypotheses differ from evidence?Proceedings of the 5th ASIA SAG/C Classification Research Workshop, 139–155.Google Scholar
Reichman-Adar, R. (1984). Extended person-machine interface. Artificial Intelligence, 22, 157–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rescher, N. (1977). Dialectics: A controversy-oriented approach to the theory of knowledge. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Resnick, L. B., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C. M., Wathen, S. H., and Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 347–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, P., Hollihan, T. A., and Freadhoff, K. D. (1987). Argument in law: The special case of the small claims court. In Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Blair, J. A., and Willard, C. A. (Eds.), Argumentation: Analysis and practices (pp. 142–151). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.Google Scholar
Rips, L. J. (1975). Inductive judgments about natural categories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 665–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rips, L. J. (1998). Reasoning and conversation. Psychological Review, 105, 411–441.CrossRef
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). On evaluating story grammars. Cognitive Science, 4, 313–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., and McClelland, J. L. (1986). A general framework for parallel distributed processing. In Rumelhart, D. E. and McClelland, J. L. (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing (Vol. 1, pp. 45–76). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E., and Norman, D. A. (1988). Representation in memory. In Atkinson, R. C., Hernstein, R. J., Lindzey, G., and Luce, R. D. (Eds.), Steven's handbook of experimental psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 511–587). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1972). Sequencing in conversational openings. In Gumperz, J. J. and Hymes, D. (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics (pp. 346–380). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D. (1984). Jewish argument as sociability. Language in Society, 13, 311–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, D. (1985). Everyday argument: The organization of diversity in talk. In Dijk, T. A. (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis (Vol. 3, pp. 35–46). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafir, E., Simonson, I., and Tversky, A. (1993). Reason-based choice. Cognition, 49, 11–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaw, V. F. (1996). Cognitive processes in informal reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 2, 51–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D., and Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Starr, J. (1978). Negotiations: A pre-law stage in rural Turkish disputes. In Gulliver, P. H. (Ed.), Cross-examinations (pp. 110–132). Leiden, Holland: Brill.Google Scholar
Sun, R. (1995). Robust reasoning: Integrating rule-based and similarity-based reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 75, 241–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarski, A. (1956). The concept of truth in formalized languages (J. H. Woodger, Trans.). In Logic, semantics, metamathematics (pp. 152–278). Oxford, England: Clarendon Press. (Original work published 1936.)Google Scholar
ten Have, P. (1995). Disposal negotiations in general practice consultations. In Firth, A. (Ed.), The discourse of negotiations (pp. 319–344). Tarrytown, NY: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Thagard, P. (1989). Explanatory coherence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 435–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, S. N. (1973). Practical reasoning in natural language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Toulmin, S. E., Rieke, R., and Janik, A. (1979). An introduction to reasoning. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dijk, T. A., and Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S., and Jacobs, S. (1993). Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., and Henkemans, Snoeck F. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Vicedo, M. (1991). Realism and simplicity in the Castle-East debate on the stability of the hereditary units: Rhetorical devices versus substantive methodology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 22, 201–221.Google ScholarPubMed
Voss, J. F., Blais, J., Means, M. L., Greene, T. R., and Ahwesh, E. (1986). Informal reasoning and subject matter knowledge in the solving of economics problems by naive and novice individuals. Cognition and Instruction, 3, 269–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voss, J. F., and Means, M. L. (1991). Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation. Learning and Instruction, 1, 337–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, D. N., and Krabbe, E. C. W. (1995) Commitment in dialogue. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Whately, R. (1855). Elements of rhetoric. Boston: Munroe.Google Scholar
Wigmore, J. H. (1935). A students' textbook of the law of evidence. Brooklyn, NY: The Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Wright, L. (1995). Argument and deliberation: A plea for understanding. Journal of Philosophy, 92, 565–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwicky, A. M., & Zwicky, A. D. (1973). How come and what for. In Kachru, B. B., Lees, R. B., Malkiel, Y., Pietrangeli, A., and Saporta, S. (Eds.), Issues in linguistics (pp. 923–933). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×