The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
They spoke in defense of themselves: On the generic criticism of apologia
Abstract
The family of apologetic speeches, composed of responses to charges made against a person's character, has yet to receive critical attention as a genre. This essay, based upon the study of apologia from different historical periods, identifies four types of rhetorical strategies commonly found in such addresses. Rhetors typically employ these strategies in combinations that produce four discernible subgenres of the apologetic form: (a) absolutive, (b) vindicative, (c) explanative, and (d) justificative. This mapping of the genre should serve as an aid in the generic criticism of apologia.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241
Toulmin, S. E. (2003) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511840005 · Cited by 7,101
The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change.
Osgood, C. E., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1955) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0048153 · Cited by 1,700
Cited by
Miller, C. R. (1984) · Quarterly Journal of Speech · doi:10.1080/00335638409383686 · Cited by 2,907
Metadata
- Authors
- Ware, B. L., & Linkugel, W. A.
- Venue
- Quarterly Journal of Speech
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1973-10
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 273-283
- ISSN
- 0033-5630 (ISSN-L)
- 1479-5779
- OpenAlex
- W2003514895
- Cited by
- 527
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 41.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: They spoke in defense of themselves: On the generic criticism of apologia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00335637309383176
- The paper
- Ware, B. L., & Linkugel, W. A. (1973). They spoke in defense of themselves: On the generic criticism of apologia. Quarterly Journal of Speech. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335637309383176
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
