Cited by 7,101Linguistics and Discourse AnalysisEpistemology, Ethics, and MetaphysicsLogic and Philosophy of Science

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Uses of Argument

Toulmin, Stephen E.·2003·Cambridge University Press eBooks

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A central theme throughout the impressive series of philosophical books and articles Stephen Toulmin has published since 1948 is the way in which assertions and opinions concerning all sorts of topics, brought up in everyday life or in academic research, can be rationally justified. Is there one universal system of norms, by which all sorts of arguments in all sorts of fields must be judged, or must each sort of argument be judged according to its own norms? In The Uses of Argument (1958) Toulmin sets out his views on these questions for the first time. In spite of initial criticisms from logicians and fellow philosophers, The Uses of Argument has been an enduring source of inspiration and discussion to students of argumentation from all kinds of disciplinary background for more than forty years.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9780511840005

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Time and modality
Prior, A. N. (1957) · Cited by 670
Looking and seeing
Holmes, G. M. (1936) · Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) · doi:10.1007/bf02973405 · Cited by 34
Misconceptions of Inference
Brown, D. G. (1955) · Analysis · doi:10.1093/analys/15.6.135 · Cited by 2

Show all 3 references

Sorted by citations

Items 601–700 of 1,017

Academic-practitioner engaged scholarship
de Ven, A. H. V. (2018) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.02.002 · Cited by 94
Automated text scoring and real‐time adjustable feedback: Supporting revision of scientific arguments involving uncertainty
Lee, H., Pallant, A., Pryputniewicz, S., Lord, T., Mulholland, M., & Liu, O. L. (2019) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21504 · Cited by 100
Rhetorical Strategies in Student Persuasive Writing: Differences between Native and Non-Native English Speakers
Ferris, D. R. (1994) · Research in the Teaching of English · doi:10.58680/rte199415388 · Cited by 94
Explanation and Argumentation Capabilities:Towards the Creation of More Persuasive Agents
Moulin, B., Irandoust, H., Bélanger, M. E. P., & Desbordes, G. (2002) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1023/a:1015023512975 · Cited by 94
‘Opening up’ policy to reflexive appraisal: a role for Q Methodology? A case study of fire management in Cape York, Australia
Ockwell, D. (2008) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11077-008-9066-y · Cited by 102
Peer Argumentation in the School Science Laboratory—Exploring effects of task features
Kind, P. M., Kind, V., Hofstein, A., & Wilson, J. L. F. (2011) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500693.2010.550952 · Cited by 94
Realizing Consructivist Objectives through Collaborative Technologies: Threaded Discussions
Weasenforth, D., Biesenbach-Lucas, S., & Meloni, C. F. (2002) · Language learning & technology · Cited by 94
DISFLUENCIES IN COMPREHENDING ARGUMENTATIVE TEXTS
Larson, M., Britt, M. A., & Larson, A. A. (2004) · Reading Psychology · doi:10.1080/02702710490489908 · Cited by 94
Investigating Instruction for Improving Revision of Argumentative Essays
Butler, J. A., & Britt, M. A. (2011) · Written Communication · doi:10.1177/0741088310387891 · Cited by 92
High school students' situational engagement associated with scientific practices in designed science learning situations
Inkinen, J., Klager, C., Juuti, K., Schneider, B., Salmela‐Aro, K., Krajcik, J. S., & Lavonen, J. (2020) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21570 · Cited by 93
On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning and logic programming
Dũng, P. M. (1993) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · Cited by 93
Empowering the Student: New Perspectives on the Design of Teaching Systems
Schank, R. C., & Jona, M. Y. (1991) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0101_2 · Cited by 93
Analysis of Lines of Reasoning in Written Argumentation
Kelly, G. J., Regev, J., & Prothero, W. A. (2007) · Science & technology education library · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_7 · Cited by 94
Using Computer Supported Argument Visualization to Teach Legal Argumentation
Carr, C. S. (2003) · Computer supported cooperative work · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-0037-9_4 · Cited by 93
Fostering Critical Thinking, Reasoning, and Argumentation Skills through Bioethics Education
Chowning, J. T., Griswold, J. C., Kovarik, D. N., & Collins, L. J. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036791 · Cited by 92
Mobil's epideictic advocacy: “Observations” of Prometheus‐bound
Crable, R. E., & Vibbert, S. L. (1983) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637758309390176 · Cited by 92
Supporting Use of Evidence in Argumentation Through Practice in Argumentation and Reflection in the Context of SOCRATES Learning Environment
Iordanou, K., & Constantinou, C. P. (2015) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21152 · Cited by 99
Reconsidering the Character and Role of Inquiry in School Science: Framing the Debates
Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. E. (2008) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9789460911453_002 · Cited by 91
Two party immediate response disputes: Properties and efficiency
Dunne, P. E. S., & Bench-Capon, T. J. M. (2003) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/s0004-3702(03)00076-6 · Cited by 92
Supporting CSCL with automatic corpus analysis technology
Dönmez, P., Rosé, C. P., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2005) · Computer-supported collaborative learning/The Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference · doi:10.3115/1149293.1149310 · Cited by 92
Dialectic reasoning with inconsistent information
Elvang-Gøransson, M., Krause, P., & Fox, J. (1993) · Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-1451-1.50018-4 · Cited by 92
How Archaeological Evidence Bites Back
Wylie, A. (2016) · Science Technology & Human Values · doi:10.1177/0162243916671200 · Cited by 91
The Role of Logic in Computational Models of Legal Argument: A Critical Survey
Prakken, H., & Giovanni Sartor, B. (2002) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45632-5_14 · Cited by 91
Diagnostic assessment of children’s proportional reasoning
Misailidou, C., & Williams, J. S. (2003) · The Journal of Mathematical Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0732-3123(03)00025-7 · Cited by 91
Agent-based negotiation and decision making for dynamic supply chain formation
Wang, M., Wang, H., Vogel, D., Kumar, K., & Chiu, D. K. W. (2008) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2008.09.001 · Cited by 90
Evaluating science arguments: Evidence, uncertainty, and argument strength.
Corner, A., & Hahn, U. (2009) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/a0016533 · Cited by 89
Argumentative patterns viewed from a pragma-dialectical perspective
van Eemeren, F. H. (2017) · Argumentation in context · doi:10.1075/aic.11.02van · Cited by 90
Developing scientific argumentation strategies using revised argument-driven inquiry (rADI) in science classrooms in Thailand
Songsil, W., Pongsophon, P., Boonsoong, B., & Clarke, A. (2019) · Asia-Pacific Science Education · doi:10.1186/s41029-019-0035-x · Cited by 90
Effect of Scientific Argumentation on the Development of Critical Thinking
Giri, V., & Paily, M. U. (2020) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-020-00120-y · Cited by 90
Ethical Assurance:A Practical Approach to the Responsible Design, Development, and Deployment of Data-Driven Technologies
Burr, C., & Leslie, D. (2021) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-022-00178-0 · Cited by 116
Arguments, Stories and Criminal Evidence
Bex, F. (2011) · Law and philosophy library · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0140-3 · Cited by 90
On How to Be a Dialogician
Rahman, S., & Keiff, L. (2005) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/1-4020-3167-x_17 · Cited by 90
Using our Heads and HARTSS*: Developing Perspective-Taking Skills for Socioscientific Reasoning (*Humanities, ARTs, and Social Sciences)
Kahn, S., & Zeidler, D. L. (2016) · Journal of Science Teacher Education · doi:10.1007/s10972-016-9458-3 · Cited by 97
Towards a Curricular Model of the Nature of Science
Taber, K. S. (2006) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-006-9056-4 · Cited by 89
Mr. Darwin and his readers: Exploring interpersonal metadiscourse as a dimension ofethos
Crismore, A., & Farnsworth, R. (1989) · Rhetoric Review · doi:10.1080/07350198909388880 · Cited by 89
Discurso de aula y argumentación en la clase de ciencias: cuestiones teóricas y metodológicas
Aleixandre, M. P. J., & de Bustamante, J. M. D. (2003) · Enseñanza de las Ciencias Revista de investigación y experiencias didácticas · doi:10.5565/rev/ensciencias.3914 · Cited by 89
Verbal and visual causal arguments
Oestermeier, U., & Hesse, F. W. (2000) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00060-3 · Cited by 88
The Effects of Microcredit on Women's Control over Household Spending in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Vaessen, J., Rivas, A., Duvendack, M., Jones, R. P., Leeuw, F. L., Gils, G. H. C. V., Lukach, R., Holvoet, N., Bastiaensen, J., Hombrados, J. G., et al. (2014) · Campbell Systematic Reviews · doi:10.4073/csr.2014.8 · Cited by 90
Students' Meaning‐making of Socio‐scientific Issues in Computer Mediated Settings: Exploring learning through interaction trajectories
Furberg, A., & Ludvigsen, S. (2008) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500690701543617 · Cited by 88
Cues Matter: Learning Assistants Influence Introductory Biology Student Interactions during Clicker-Question Discussions
Knight, J., Wise, S. B., Rentsch, J. D., & Furtak, E. M. (2015) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.15-04-0093 · Cited by 90
Modes of reasoning in explanations in Australian eighth-grade mathematics textbooks
Stacey, K., & Vincent, J. (2009) · Educational Studies in Mathematics · doi:10.1007/s10649-009-9193-1 · Cited by 87
On-line synchronous scientific argumentation learning: Nurturing students' argumentation ability and conceptual change in science context
Yeh, K.-H., & She, H. (2010) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.020 · Cited by 88
On the philosophical foundations of psychological measurement
Maul, A., Irribarra, D. T., & Wilson, M. R. (2015) · Measurement · doi:10.1016/j.measurement.2015.11.001 · Cited by 86
A model of properties of compliance‐gaining strategies
Schenck‐Hamlin, W. J., Wiseman, R. L., & Georgacarakos, G. N. (1982) · Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1080/01463378209369434 · Cited by 87
Presumption and the Practices of Tentative Cognition
Rescher, N. (2006) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511498848 · Cited by 86
Pitching a business idea to investors: How new venture founders use micro-level rhetoric to achieve narrative plausibility and resonance
van Werven, R., Bouwmeester, O., & Cornelissen, J. (2019) · International Small Business Journal Researching Entrepreneurship · doi:10.1177/0266242618818249 · Cited by 86
What is the Essence of a Claim? Cross-Domain Claim Identification
Daxenberger, J., Eger, S., Habernal, I., Stab, C., & Gurevych, I. (2017) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d17-1218 · Cited by 89
Translating across macroscopic, submicroscopic, and symbolic levels: the role of instructor facilitation in an inquiry-oriented physical chemistry class
Becker, N. M., Stanford, C., Towns, M. H., & Cole, R. S. (2015) · Chemistry Education Research and Practice · doi:10.1039/c5rp00064e · Cited by 92
Rethinking the Design of Presentation Slides: A Case for Sentence Headlines and Visual Evidence
Alley, M., & Neeley, K. (2005) · Technical Communication: Journal of the Society for Technical Communication · Cited by 84
The politics of fear vs. the politics of hope: analysing the 2015 Greek election and referendum campaigns
Boukala, S., & Dimitrakopoulou, D. (2016) · Critical Discourse Studies · doi:10.1080/17405904.2016.1182933 · Cited by 85
Reflections on the pedagogical imports of western practices for professionalizing ESL/EFL writing and writing-teacher education
Zhang, L. J. (2016) · Australian Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1075/aral.39.3.01zha · Cited by 88
Machine Learning-Enabled Automated Feedback: Supporting Students’ Revision of Scientific Arguments Based on Data Drawn from Simulation
Lee, H., Gweon, G.-H., Lord, T., Paessel, N., Pallant, A., & Pryputniewicz, S. (2021) · Journal of Science Education and Technology · doi:10.1007/s10956-020-09889-7 · Cited by 90
Arguing about how the world is or how the world should be: the role of argument in IELTS tests
Coffin, C. (2004) · Journal of English for Academic Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2003.11.002 · Cited by 85
Toulmin’s Model and the Solving of Ill-Structured Problems
Voss, J. F. (2005) · Argumentation · doi:10.1007/s10503-005-4419-6 · Cited by 85
The everyday production of knowledge: individual differences in epistemological understanding and juror‐reasoning skill
Weinstock, M. P., & Cronin, M. A. (2002) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.860 · Cited by 89
Applying Argumentation Schemes for Essay Scoring
Yi, S., Heilman, M., Klebanov, B. B., & Deane, P. (2014) · Workshop on Argument Mining (ArgMining) · doi:10.3115/v1/w14-2110 · Cited by 85
Argument mapping with Reason!Able
van Gelder, T. (2002) · Cited by 85
The Rhetoric of Reason: Writing and the Attractions of Argument
Crosswhite, J. (1997) · College Composition and Communication · doi:10.2307/358779 · Cited by 85
Model legitimisation in operational research
Landry, M., Banville, C., & Oral, M. (1996) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(96)00003-3 · Cited by 82
Design rationale for software engineering: a survey
Jarczyk, A., Loeffler, P., & Shipmann, F. M. (1992) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.1109/hicss.1992.183309 · Cited by 85
BankXX: Supporting legal arguments through heuristic retrieval
Michener, E. R., Skalak, D. B., & Friedman, M. T. (1996) · Artificial Intelligence and Law · doi:10.1007/bf00123994 · Cited by 85
What's Eliza doing in the Chinese room? Incoherent hyperdocuments---and how to avoid them
Thüring, M., Haake, J. M., & Hannemann, J. (1991) · ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media (HT) · doi:10.1145/122974.122991 · Cited by 85
Graphic variation and graphic ideologies: a metapragmatic approach
Spitzmüller, J. (2015) · Social Semiotics · doi:10.1080/10350330.2015.1010323 · Cited by 84
Three Minute Thesis presentations: Recontextualisation strategies in doctoral research
Carter‐Thomas, S., & Rowley‐Jolivet, E. (2020) · Journal of English for Academic Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100897 · Cited by 84
A theory of legal reasoning and a logic to match
Hage, J. C. (1996) · Artificial Intelligence and Law · doi:10.1007/bf00118493 · Cited by 84
ARGUMENTATION AND STUDENTS’ CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF PROPERTIES AND BEHAVIORS OF GASES
Aydeniz, M., Pabuccu, A., Çetin, P. S., & Kaya, E. (2012) · International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education · doi:10.1007/s10763-012-9336-1 · Cited by 84
Norm autonomous agents
Verhagen, H. (2000) · Cited by 85
Bipolar abstract argumentation systems
Cayrol, C., & Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C. (2009) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_4 · Cited by 84
Novelty in Academic Writing
Kaufer, D. S., & Geisler, C. (1989) · Written Communication · doi:10.1177/0741088389006003003 · Cited by 84
Mapping Children’s Discussions of Evidence in Science to Assess Collaboration and Argumentation
Maloney, J., & Simon, S. (2006) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500690600855419 · Cited by 131
Argument Mining on Twitter: Arguments, Facts and Sources
Dusmanu, M., Cabrio, E., & Villata, S. (2017) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d17-1245 · Cited by 83
Which notion of implication is the right one? From logical considerations to a didactic perspective
Durand-Guerrier, V. (2003) · Educational Studies in Mathematics · doi:10.1023/a:1024661004375 · Cited by 83
Making Mathematical Meaning Through Dialogue: “Once You Think of It, the Z Minus Three Seems Pretty Weird”
Zack, V., & Graves, B. (2006) · Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks · doi:10.1007/0-306-48085-9_7 · Cited by 84
The Role of Argument During Discourse About Socioscientific Issues
Zeidler, D. L., Osborne, J. F., Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Monk, M. (2003) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/1-4020-4996-x_6 · Cited by 83
Dialectic semantics for argumentation frameworks
Jakobovits, H., & Vermeir, D. (1999) · International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law · doi:10.1145/323706.323715 · Cited by 83
Dependency Unification Grammar
Hellwig, P. (1986) · International Conference on Computational Linguistics · doi:10.3115/991365.991423 · Cited by 83
Fostering Second Graders' Scientific Explanations: A Beginning Elementary Teacher's Knowledge, Beliefs, and Practice
Beyer, C. J., & Davis, E. A. (2008) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508400802222917 · Cited by 83
A wider view of business process reengineering
Grant, D. A. (2002) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/503124.503128 · Cited by 83
Argumentation and proof: a contribution to theoretical perspectives and their classroom implementation
Boero, P., Douek, N., Morselli, F., & Pedemonte, B. (2010) · CINECA IRIS Institutial Research Information System (University of Genoa) · Cited by 83
Research on Practical Rationality: Studying the justification of actions in mathematics teaching
Herbst, P., & Chazan, D. (2011) · The Mathematics Enthusiast · doi:10.54870/1551-3440.1225 · Cited by 83
Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in the Space of Debate
Baker, M. J., Quignard, M., Lund, K., & Séjourné, A. (2003) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-0195-2_4 · Cited by 83
Interactive Learning Environments: A New Look at Assessment and Instruction
Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., Webber, L. S., & McGilly, K. (1992) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-2968-8_5 · Cited by 79
Against Logical Form
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2010) · Psychologica Belgica · doi:10.5334/pb-50-3-4-193 · Cited by 82
NSSE Benchmarks and Institutional Outcomes: A Note on the Importance of Considering the Intended Uses of a Measure in Validity Studies
Pike, G. (2013) · Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s11162-012-9279-y · Cited by 103
Re-thinking scientific literacy out-of-school: Arguing science issues in a niche Facebook application
Greenhow, C. M., Gibbins, T., & Menzer, M. M. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.031 · Cited by 91
Group emotions: the social and cognitive functions of emotions in argumentation
Polo, C., Lund, K., Plantin, C., & Niccolai, G. P. (2016) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-016-9232-8 · Cited by 85
ChatGPT-supported collaborative argumentation: Integrating collaboration script and argument mapping to enhance EFL students’ argumentation skills
Darmawansah, D., Rachman, D., Febiyani, F., & Hwang, G. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12986-4 · Cited by 96
Language Learning Online: Theory and Practice in the Esl and L2 Computer Classroom
Swaffar, J. K. (1998) · Cited by 82
Development Communication and Participation: Applying Habermas to a Case Study of Population Programs in Nepal
Jacobson, T. L., & Storey, J. D. (2004) · Communication Theory · doi:10.1093/ct/14.2.99 · Cited by 82
The Rhetoric of Rights and Needs: Moral Discourse in the Reform of Child Custody and Child Support Laws
Coltrane, S., & Hickman, N. (1992) · Social Problems · doi:10.2307/3097018 · Cited by 79
Prudent semantics for argumentation frameworks
Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., & Marquis, P. (2005) · IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI) · doi:10.1109/ictai.2005.103 · Cited by 82
The social confrontation episode
Newell, S. E., & Stutman, R. K. (1988) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637758809376172 · Cited by 82
Goals in Argumentation: A Proposal for the Analysis and Evaluation of Public Political Arguments
Mohammed, D. (2015) · Argumentation · doi:10.1007/s10503-015-9370-6 · Cited by 81
(Supra)National Identity and Language: Rethinking National and European Migration Policies and the Linguistic Integration of Migrants
Wodak, R., & Boukala, S. (2015) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190514000294 · Cited by 82
The Brexit referendum: how trade and immigration in the discourses of the official campaigns have legitimised a toxic (inter)national logic
Zappettini, F. (2019) · Critical Discourse Studies · doi:10.1080/17405904.2019.1593206 · Cited by 81
Varieties of modal (classificatory) and comparative probability
Walley, P., & Fine, T. L. (1979) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/bf00869449 · Cited by 81
Argumentation in Science Education: A Model-based Framework
Böttcher, F., & Meisert, A. (2010) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-010-9304-5 · Cited by 86
Effects of Pre‐structuring Discussion Threads on Group Interaction and Group Performance in Computer‐supported Collaborative Argumentation
Brooks, C. D., & Jeong, A. C. (2006) · Distance Education · doi:10.1080/01587910600940448 · Cited by 81
The Construction of Knowledge in Organizations: Asking the Right Questions about the Challenger
Winsor, D. A. (1990) · Journal of Business and Technical Communication · doi:10.1177/105065199000400201 · Cited by 81
Argumentation Machines
Reed, C., & Norman, T. J. (2004) · Argumentation library · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-0431-1 · Cited by 155

Authors: Toulmin, S. E.
Affiliations: University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author: Toulmin, Stephen E.
Venue: Cambridge University Press eBooks
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Published: 2003-07-07
DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511840005
OpenAlex: W1997210479
Cited by: 7,101
References: 3
Citations by year: 2026: 202 · 2025: 197 · 2024: 170 · 2023: 162 · 2022: 156 · 2021: 271 · 2020: 306 · 2019: 294 · 2018: 260 · 2017: 298 · 2016: 283 · 2015: 304 · 2014: 356 · 2013: 333 · 2012: 304
FWCI: 324.88
Type: book
Language: en
Open access: closed
Licence: www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 3256 d)
Locations: Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics: Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Logic and Philosophy of Science
Keywords: Stephen Toulmin, argumentation theory, rational justification, opinion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

The Uses of Argument

Abstract

Overview

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks