Albeit well-intentioned, the practice of selectively changing the strike zone to promote young players' welfare is critically flawed. After discussing the central purpose of competitive sport, the duty of officials, and the significance of impartiality in officiating, this article demonstrates that this practice presents numerous practical…

Prior research has found that referees are harsher toward sporting offenses in regional-level matches between women than in regional-level matches between men. We tested whether this bias also occurs at a higher, national level of competition, despite the greater pressures for objectivity and fairness at this level. Referees' decisions were…

There is a tendency for debaters and judges to view a single quote or opinion as conclusive evidence proving a point. But evidence can only point toward a conclusion; it cannot prove a conclusion conclusively. Experts may offer their opinions (sometimes as fact) but these opinions are only educated guesses. This is not to say that evidence from…

Because legal argument shares many of the characteristics of academic debate, it can serve as a paradigm for evaluating debates. Like debate, legal argument is bilateral, the judge is external to the deliberation and excluded from raising his or her own arguments, and reasons have been developed for assigning presumption, determining the wording…

Evaluators of argument are frequently confronted by conflicting claims. While these claims are usually based on probabilities, they are often resolved with the accepted claim treated as though it were "true," while the rejected claim is treated as though it were "false." Scenario testing is the label applied to a set of…