Identifying paralogisms in two ethnically different contexts at university level / Identificación de paralogismos en dos contextos universitarios diferenciados étnicamente

References / Referencias

• Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93, 26–55. doi:10.1002/sce.20286
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brem, S. K., & Rips, L. J. (2000). Explanation and evidence in informal argument. Cognitive Science, 24, 573–604, doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2404_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Students’ questions and discursive interaction: Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 883–908. doi:10.1002/tea.20385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. J. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 63–103. doi:10.1207/S15327809JLS1101_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287–312. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felton, M., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2009). Deliberation versus dispute: The impact of argumentative discourse goals on learning and reasoning in the science classroom. Informal Logic, 29, 417–446.
   Google Scholar
• Ferretti, R. P., Lewis, W. E., & Andrews-Weckerly, S. (2009). Do goals affect the structure of students’ argumentative writing strategies? Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 577–589. doi:10.1037/a0014702
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia-Mila, M., & Andersen, C. (2008). Cognitive foundations of learning argumentation. In S. Erduran, & M. P. Jimenez- Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education. Recent developments and future directions (pp. 29–47). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gilabert, S., Garcia-Mila, M., & Felton, M. K. (2013). The effect of task instructions on students’ use of repetition in argumentative discourse. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 2857–2878. doi:10.1080/09500693.2012.663191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golanics, J., & Nussbaum, E. (2008). Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 167–180. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00251.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, W. (2010). The ‘passes-for’ fallacy and the future of critical thinking. Argumentation, 24, 363–374. doi:10.1007/s10503-009-9170-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hample, D., & Anagondahalli, D. (2015). Understandings of arguing in India and the United States: Argument frames, personalization of conflict, argumentativeness, and verbal aggressiveness. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 44, 1–26. doi:10.1080/17475759.2014.1000939
   Google Scholar
• Hornikx, J., & ter Haar, M. (2013). Evidence quality and persuasiveness: Germans are not sensitive to the quality of statistical evidence. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 13, 483–501. doi:10.1163/15685373-12342105
   Google Scholar
• Ismail, S. (2010). Arabic and English persuasive writing of Arabs from a contrastive rhetoric perspective ( Unpublished dissertation). Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. H., & Blair, A. (1994). Logical self-defense. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Johnstone-Koch, B. (1983). Presentation as proof: The language of Arabic rhetoric. Anthropological Linguistics, 25, 47–60.
   Google Scholar
• Johnstone-Koch, B. (1987). Parataxis in Arabic: Modification as a model for persuasion. Studies in Language, 11, 85–98. doi:10.1075/sl.11.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karabenick, S. A., & Moosa, S. (2005). Culture and personal epistemology: U.S. and Middle Eastern students’ beliefs about scientific knowledge and knowing. Social Psychology of Education, 8, 375–393. doi:10.1007/s11218-005-1826-3
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students’ use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314–342. doi:10.1002/sce.10024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klaczynski, P. A. (2001). Analytic and heuristic processing influences on adolescent reasoning and decision-making. Child Development, 72, 844–861. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00319
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lun, V. M. C., Fischer, R., & Ward, C. (2010). Exploring cultural differences in critical thinking: Is it about my thinking style or the language I speak? Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 604–616. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marttunen, M., & Laurinen, L. (2001). Learning of argumentation skills in networked and face-to-face environments. Instructional Science, 29, 127–153. doi:10.1023/A:1003931514884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marttunen, M., Laurinen, L., Litosseliti, L., & Lund, K. (2005). Argumentation skills as prerequisites for collaborative learning among Finnish, French, and English Secondary school students. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11, 365–384. doi:10.1080/13803610500110588
   Google Scholar
• Means, M., & Voss, J. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 139–178. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1402_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercier, H. (2013). Introduction: Recording and explaining cultural differences in argumentation. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 13, 409–417. doi:10.1163/15685373-12342101
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, Y. (2003). Go ahead, prove that God does not exist! On high school students’ ability to deal with fallacious arguments. Learning and Instruction, 13, 367–380. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00011-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuman, Y., Glassner, A., & Weinstock, M. (2004). The effect of a reason’s true-value on the judgment of a fallacious argument. Acta Psychologica, 116, 173–184. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.01.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently… and why. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norenzayan, A., Smith, E. E., Kim, B. J., & Nisbett, R. E. (2002). Cultural preferences for formal versus intuitive reasoning. Cognitive Science, 26, 653–684. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2605_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M., & Kardash, C. M. (2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 157–169. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.157
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkins, D. N., Farady, M., & Bushey, B. (1991). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 83–105). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Rapanta, C. (2013). How do young Arab Emiratis argue? A pilot study. In A. L. Sellami (Ed.), Argumentation, rhetoric, debate and pedagogy: Proceedings of the 2013 4th International Conference on Argumentation, Rhetoric, Debate and Pedagogy (ICARD) (pp. 67–78). Doha, January 11–13, London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Rapanta, C., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2013). What is meant by argumentative competence? An integrative review of methods of analysis and assessment in education. Review of Educational Research, 83, 483–520. doi:10.3102/0034654313487606
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rips, L. J. (2002). Circular reasoning. Cognitive Science, 26, 767–795. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2606_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S. R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90, 986–1004. doi:10.1002/sce.20165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89, 71–93. doi:10.1002/sce.20023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2007). Learning argumentation skills through the use of prompts for self-explaining examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 285–296. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.285
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, G. F. (2003). Beyond critical thinking and decision making: Teaching business students how to think. Journal of Management Education, 27, 24–51. doi:10.1177/1052562902239247
   Google Scholar
• Terwel, J. (1999). Constructivism and its implications for curriculum theory and practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31, 195–199. doi:10.1080/002202799183223
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Hofstede Centre. (2015). Comparison between United Arab Emirates and Spain. Retrieved from http://geert-hofstede.com/arab-emirates.html
   Google Scholar
• van Gelder, T. J. (2007). The rationale for Rationale™. Law, Probability and Risk, 6, 23–42. doi:10.1093/lpr/mgm032
   Google Scholar
• von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies on how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 101–131. doi:10.1002/tea.20213
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (1998). The new dialectic. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (2010). Why fallacies appear to be better arguments than they are. Informal Logic, 30, 159–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (2011). Defeasible reasoning and informal fallacies. Synthese, 179, 377–407. doi:10.1007/s11229-009-9657-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (2013). Methods of argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weinstock, M., Neuman, Y., & Tabak, I. (2004). Missing the point or missing the norms? Epistemological norms as predictors of students’ ability to identify fallacious arguments. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 77–94. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(03)00024-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, C. R. (2011). Argumentation across the curriculum. Written Communication, 28, 193–219. doi:10.1177/0741088311399236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie, Y., Hample, D., & Wang, X. (2014, July 1–4). A cross-cultural analysis of argument predispositions in China: Argumentativeness, verbal aggressiveness, argument frames, and personalization of conflict. Paper presented at the 8^th International Conference of the Society for the Study of Argumentation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
   Google Scholar