Argumentation

Papers
(The TQCC of Argumentation is 2. The table below lists those papers that are above that threshold based on CrossRef citation counts [max. 250 papers]. The publications cover those that have been published in the past four years, i.e., from 2021-11-01 to 2025-11-01.)
ArticleCitations
Is Natural Selection in Trouble? When Emotions Run High in a Philosophical Debate15
Cross-Cultural Comparison of Argument Structures Among English Learners: Argument Proficiency, Patterns, and Communication Styles14
Arguing with Children: Exploring Problems of Charity and Strawmanning13
Frans H. A. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen (Eds.): Argumentation in Actual Practice: Topical Studies About Argumentative Discourse in Context12
The Correlations Between Parliamentary Debate Participation, Communication Competence, Communication Apprehension, Argumentativeness, and Willingness to Communicate in a Japanese Context12
Exploring TED Speakers’ Narrative Positioning from a Strategic Maneuvering Perspective: A Single Case Study from Winch’s (2014) TED Talk11
Consolation Through Argumentation? Prototypical and Stereotypical Argumentative Patterns in Secular Eulogies10
“Agreement Builds and Disagreement Destroys:” How Polish Undergraduates and Graduates Understand Interpersonal Arguing8
Argumentation and Identity: A Normative Evaluation of the Arguments of Delegates to the COP26 UN Climate Change Conference7
Representing the Structure of a Debate6
Bramhall Versus Hobbes: The Rhetoric of Religion vs. the Rhetoric of Philosophy5
Textbook Treatments of Fallacies5
Studying Controversies: A Path for Expansion of Argumentation Theory5
Secundum Quid and the Pragmatics of Arguments. The Challenges of the Dialectical Tradition4
Teaching the Fallacies4
When Evaluative Adjectives Prevent Contradiction in a Debate3
Selective Dispute Avoidance, Deep Disagreements, and Pragmatic Meta-Arguments for Engagement3
‘Argumentative Disobedience’ as a Strategy to Confront Hate Speech3
Apples Ergo Oranges: The Argumentative Use of Comparisons3
Argumentation in Philosophical Controversies3
Why Argumentation Theory? Realizing the Practical Objectives of Argumentation Theory as the Study of Effectiveness Through Reasonableness3
Individual Differences in Argument Strength Discrimination3
Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Moral Foundations in Argumentation2
Questions as Elements of Argumentation in Political Debates2
Teachers’ Perceptions of Argumentation in Citizenship Education: Psychometric Validation of the AASES Instrument and Mediation Analysis of Sociodemographic Variables Using SEM2
Presuppositional Fallacies2
Negotiation as Practical Argumentation2
Logic Diagrams as Argument Maps in Eristic Dialectics2
Social Justice, Fallacies of Argument, and Persistent Bias2
The Effects of Parliamentary Debate as a Pedagogy for Argumentation in L1 and L2 Contexts2
Authority Argument Schemes, Types, and Critical Questions2
Fernando Leal and Hubert Marraud: How Philosophers Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell−Copleston Debate2
Fallacies and Their Place in the Foundations of Science2
Info-arguments: Dialogical Ambiguity, Argument Interpretation, and the Problem of Meaning in Argumentation2
From Theory of Rhetoric to the Practice of Language Use: The Case of Appeals to Ethos Elements2
0.05826997756958