The content of argumentative essays is determined by multiple factors, but belief influences are understudied compared to topic knowledge and argument schema. We investigate how beliefs influence the inclusion of basic components in argumentative writing. A pre-screening survey identified believers and disbelievers in gun control effectiveness. In…

The concept of learning has obtained great popularity in many fields. In common cause with neo-liberal ideology, learning has led to a learnification process that turns social pathologies into individual deficits. Various ways out of this situation have been sought; chief among them is the recruitment of unlearning as a promising negation of…

This study addressed an issue relevant to information and research literacy: how students cope with the challenges of reading a one-sided informational text that is combined with ambiguous graphical information. The topic discussed in the text was the impact of digitalization on students' reading comprehension, and 120 university students were…

The present study examined the justifications used by children, adolescents, and adults to justify eating animals. Children (n = 100, M[superscript age] = 9.82, SD = 0.77, female n = 49) as compared to adolescents (n = 76, M[superscript age] = 14.0, SD = 1.62, female n = 36) and adults (n = 113, M[superscript age] = 44.1, SD = 14.4, female n = 54)…

Pseudoskepticism, which typically is portraying someone's work as despicable with scientifically unsound polemics, is a modern day threat to the traditional standard of discussion in science and popular science. This opinion article gives seven tell-tale signs by which pseudoskepticism can be recognized.

Perpetual and nominating phrases in academic spaces, such as "good teacher," "meet students where they are," and "teachers don't teach for the income," argue specific social assumptions and have subjective consequences. Furthermore, the subjected may help perpetuate such rhetorical phrases due to ideological…

We examined the efficacy of a Model Statement to detect opinion lies. A total of 93 participants discussed their opinion about the recent strikes on two occasions, 1 week apart. In one interview they told the truth and in the other interview they lied. Each interview consisted of two phases. In Phase 1 they discussed their alleged opinion (truth…

More and more lately, commentators who have defended Socrates have emphasized the extent to which he uses non-rational means of educating his interlocutors, and commentators have downplayed the extent to which he means to offer arguments that provide justification or are rationally persuasive. The trend is refreshing since students of Socrates…

Argumentation is an indispensable part of scientific knowledge construction, and the inquiry laboratory is full of opportunities for argumentation. Yet, at primary schools, students learn science without any inducement to argumentation or inquiry. To fill this need, this study was aimed to develop pre-service primary teachers' understanding of and…

Throughout the history of science, novel ideas that diverge from mainstream thought have often been met with condemnation, derision, and ad hominem attacks. These reactions have sometimes led to the premature rejection of such ideas, only for them to be later revived and even accepted as the prevailing paradigm. While robust debate is essential in…

Given the emphasis on critical thinking across the undergraduate curricula, research on argument visualisation has significant implications for designing learning activities in higher education. This systematic review examines research on the use of argument maps or diagrams by postsecondary students. The goals were to identify the themes,…

Thousands of students and hundreds of institutions participate in intercollegiate forensics competitions each year. Previous research has discovered instances of plagiarism by competitors on multiple occasions, despite this being against the rules of competition and a violation of academic norms. The purpose of this pragmatic qualitative research…

Philosophy for/with Children (P4wC) is a pedagogical practice that aims to enhance thinking skills through group dialogue. One way it achieves this goal is by providing exposure to arguments. In a philosophical group dialogue, participants encounter, examine, or construct arguments. These arguments not only emerge spontaneously during discussions…

This study investigates how quantifiers are used strategically to serve different argumentative goals. We report two experiments on how English speakers describe the results of school exams when being instructed to frame their descriptions either as a good or bad outcome. Experiment 1 shows that participants have clear preferences for specific…

The main aim of this paper is to propose a critical view of the application of Toulmin's model of argument to mathematics education, focusing on aspects that have strong teaching implications. It is claimed that Toulmin's description of arguments in mathematics, in particular as regards the relations between form and meaning, is misleading and out…