Emergent Voting Criteria and Judicial Impotence of Critics

References

• Adler, R. B. , Rosenfeld, L. B. , & Towne, N. (1983). Interplay: the process of interpersonal communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Bonanno Linen Service, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board et al. 80–931, 454 S. Ct. 403–423 (1982).
   Google Scholar
• Bostrom, R. N. (1983) Persuasion. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Colbert, K. R. (1983). A survey of NDT committee rules and guidelines. Journal of the American Forensic Association 19, 198–204.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, J. D. & Matlon, R. J. (1978). An analysis of judging philosophies in academic debate. Journal of the American Forensic Association 15, 112–123.
   Google Scholar
• Dowling, R. E. (1981). Debate as game, educational tool, and argument: an evaluation of theory and rules. Journal of the American Forensic Association 17, 235–236.
   Google Scholar
• Ehninger, D. & Brockriede, W. (1970) Decision by debate. NY: Dodd, Mead, and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Faules, D. F. , Rieke, R. D. , & Rhodes, J. (1976) Directing forensics: contest and debate speaking. Denver: Morton Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Freeley, A. J. (1981) Argumentation & debate: reasoned decision-making. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, B. & Bowman, D. L. (1983). A study to determine if judges' judging philosophy statements are consistent with their later related ballot statements. Journal of the American Forensic Association 19, 191–198.
   Google Scholar
• Herbeck, D. A. (1984, April) The nature and scope of evaluative criteria: An argument for nonintervention. Paper presented at the meeting of the Central States Speech Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Hollihan, T. A. (1983, April) Generic argument: contrivance of scoundrels or a refuge for the unimaginative? Paper presented at the meeting of the Central States Speech Association, Lincoln, NE.
   Google Scholar
• Katsulas, J. P. (1984, April) The interventionist cure: A remedy worse than the disease. Paper presented at the meeting of the Central States Speech Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1977) The essential tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Matheny, D. L. (1982, February) Minutes from the national debate tournament committee. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, P. & Pearson, J. C. (1981) Confidence in public speaking. Dubuque, IA: W. C. Brown.
   Google Scholar
• Patterson, J. W. & Zarefsky, D. (1983) Contemporary debate. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Rowland, R. (1982). The primacy of standards for paradigm evaluation. Journal of the American Forensic Association 18, 154–160.
   Google Scholar
• Rowland, R. (1982). Standards for paradigm evaluation. Journal of the American Forensic Association 18, 133–140.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, G. H. (1984, April) Futile intervention. Paper presented at the meeting of the Central States Speech Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Schultz, W. (1966) The interpersonal underworld. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, W. (1957). Attitude change through reward of verbal behavior. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 55, 72–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulrich, W. (1982). Flexibility in paradigm evaluation. Journal of the American Forensic Association 18, 151.
   Google Scholar
• Warnick, B. (1980). The argumentation and debate course in the 1980's. Speaker and Gavel 17, 155.
   Google Scholar
• Zarefsky, D. (1982). The perils of assessing paradigms. Journal of the American Forensic Association 18, 141–144.
   Google Scholar