An introduction to reasoning

By S. Toulmin, Richard D. Rieke, A. Janik. 1979

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. David H. Jonassen
2. Charles B. Haley
3. Kyoo-Lak Cho
4. Bobi Ivanov
5. Robin C. Laney
6. Jeanetta Sims
7. Jonathan D. Moffett
8. Michel M. Haigh

Citations in the corpus

• The Nature of Theory in Information Systems (2006, methodology): “More precision could be attempted by specifying the components in terms of symbolic logic or by structuring each type according to Toulmin’s model of argumentation (Toulmin et al. 1979), which contains very similar constructs and gives a useful model of everyday reasoning.”
• The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving (2002, methodology): “The individual written reports were scored by two assessors without knowing the identity of the participant, using the scoring rubric in Table 1 in order to determine the quality of argumentation based on Toulmin’s model of argument ( Toulmin et al., 1984 ).”
• Inoculation and Mental Processing: The Instrumental Role of Associative Networks in the Process of Resistance to Counterattitudinal Influence (2005, methodology): “Toulmin's method of diagnosing arguments identifies the primary components of arguments as: claim, an assertion; data or grounds, which provide support or factual foundation for a claim; and warrant, which signifies reasons or justification that connects claims and data/grounds (Toulmin, 1958 ; Tou”
• Security Requirements Engineering: A Framework for Representation and Analysis (2008, background): “Toulmin et al. [ 78 ] describe arguments as consisting of six parts, and propose a diagrammatic form for their arguments, shown in Fig. 3. The six parts are:”
• The Effects of Goal Instructions and Text on the Generation of Counterarguments During Writing. (2005, background): “Organizing text as arguments is central to a number of writing genres, including academic, business, expository, and persuasive writing (Gilbert, 1997; Rottenberg, 1988; Toulmin, Rieke, & Janik, 1979).”
• The Nature and Development of Scientific Reasoning: A Synthetic View (2004, unknown): “Theory testing requires a similar HD reasoning pattern but is often complicated by the fact that theories typically include the postulation of nonperceptible entities, thus require an additional argument, sometimes called a theoretical rationale (Lawson, 2003a), or warrant (Toulmin, 1958; Toulman, ”
• An Intercultural Approach to English Language Teaching (2003, background): “Since the late 1950s ‘new rhetoricians’ have sought to account for the persuasive quality of argumentative texts by drawing on ‘recent studies in the psychology and sociology of communication’ (Fogarty, 1959: 130) as well as linguistic observation of how knowledge claims were justified and supported”