References
- Dempsey, R. H. , & Hartmann, D. J. (1985). Mirror state counterplans: Illegitimate, topical, or magical? Journal of the American Forensic Association , 21, 161–166.
- Hynes, T. J., Jr. (1980). Study: Hope or false promise. Journal of the American Forensic Association , 16, 192–198.
- Hynes, T. J., Jr. (1985). The study counterplan— Still hoping—A reply to Shelton. Journal of the American Forensic Association , 21, 156–160.
- Mayer, M. E. (1983). Epistemological considerations of the studies counterplan. Journal of the American Forensic Association , 19, 67–72.
- Mayer, M. E. (1986). The study counterplan: Misunderstanding or misunderstood—a reply to Shelton. Journal of the American Forensic Association , 22, 179–183.
- Mayer, M. E. , and Hale, J. (1979). Evaluating the studies counterplan: Topicality and competitiveness. Speaker and Gavel , 16, 67–72.
- Shelton, M. W. (1985). In defense of the study counterplan. Journal of the American Forensic Association , 21, 150–155.
- Ulrich, W. The agent in argument: Toward a theory of fiat. Paper presented at the meeting of the Central States Speech Association, St. Louis. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 170 800)
- Unger, J. J. (1979). Investigating the investigators: A study of the studies counterplan. Debate Issues , 12, 1–8.