Topic
Toulmin method
About: Toulmin method is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 110 publications have been published within this topic receiving 8194 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
TL;DR: Examining the effects of trustassuring arguments on consumer trust in Internet stores finds that statements offering support for a claim made by an Internet store to address trust related issues help build consumer trust.
Abstract: A trust-assuring argument refers to “a claim and its supporting statements used in an Internet store to address trust-related issues.” Although trust-assuring arguments often appear in Internet stores, little research has been conducted to understand their effects on consumer trust in an Internet store. The goals of this study are (1) to investigate whether or not the provision of trust-assuring arguments on the website of an Internet store increase consumer trust in that Internet store and (2) to identify the most effective form of trust-assuring arguments to provide guidelines for their implementation.
Toulmin's (1958) model of argumentation is proposed as a basis to identify the elements of an argument and to strengthen the effects of trust-assuring arguments on consumer trust in an Internet store. Based on Toulmin's (1958) model of argumentation, three elements of arguments that commonly appear in daily communication; namely, claim, data, and backing, are identified. Data refers to the grounds for a claim, while backing is used for providing reasons for why the data should be accepted. By combining these three elements, three forms of trust-assuring arguments (claim only, claim plus data, and claim plus data and backing) are developed. The effects of these three forms of trust-assuring arguments on consumer trust in an Internet store are tested by comparing them to a no trust-assuring argument condition in a laboratory experiment with 112 participants.
The results indicate (1) providing trust-assuring arguments that consist of claim plus data or claim plus data and backing increases consumers' trusting belief but displaying arguments that contain claim only does not and (2) trust-assuring arguments that include claim plus data and backing lead to the highest level of trusting belief among the three forms of arguments examined in this study. Based on the results, we argue that Toulmin's (1958) model of argumentation is an effective basis for website designers to develop convincing trust-assuring arguments and to improve existing trust-assuring arguments in Internet stores.
245 citations
TL;DR: Toulmin on argument: An interpretation and application as discussed by the authors, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 44-53, is a good starting point for this paper.
Abstract: (1960). Toulmin on argument: An interpretation and application. Quarterly Journal of Speech: Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 44-53.
187 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a formal elaboration of Toulmin's scheme for the layout of arguments is presented, along with a treatment of the formal evaluation of argument-style arguments.
Abstract: Toulmin’s scheme for the layout of arguments (1958, The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) represents an influential tool for the analysis of arguments. The scheme enriches the traditional premises-conclusion model of arguments by distinguishing additional elements, like warrant, backing and rebuttal. The present paper contains a formal elaboration of Toulmin’s scheme, and extends it with a treatment of the formal evaluation of Toulmin-style arguments, which Toulmin did not discuss at all. Arguments are evaluated in terms of a so-called dialectical interpretation of their assumptions. In such an interpretation, an argument’s assumptions can be evaluated as defeated, e.g., when there is a defeating reason against the assumption. The present work builds on recent research on defeasible argumentation (cf. e.g. the work of Pollock, Reiter, Loui, Vreeswijk, Prakken, Hage and Dung). More specifically, the author’s work on the dialectical logic DEFLOG and the argumentation tool ARGUMED serve as starting points.
118 citations
TL;DR: Toulmin’s (1958) model of argument was employed in the analysis of verbal protocols obtained during the solving of ill-structured problems, resulting in an integrated problem-solving – argumentation structure depicting how reasoning is used in relation to particular task goals.
Abstract: Toulmin’s (1958) model of argument was employed in the analysis of verbal protocols obtained during the solving of ill-structured problems. The participants were experts in the domain under study. For the analysis the Toulmin model was extended in order to enable description of lines of argument found in protocols as long as 10 paragraphs. Results included: (1) That while the protocol was comprised of a large number of specific arguments, the analysis provided for tracing a solver’s line of argument. (2) On occasion datum and backing were difficult to distinguish. (3) Warrants essentially were not stated, although substantial backing was provided. However, as perhaps would be expected, the Toulmin model did not provide for delineation of components of the problem-solving process. A second analysis assuming a “higher level” problem-solving structure and a “lower level” argument structure produced an integrated problem-solving – argumentation structure depicting how reasoning is used in relation to particular task goals. Finally, at a more general level, problem solving was considered as a classical rhetorical structure.
91 citations
1 Jan 1998
TL;DR: This paper uses the experiences with argument representation to examine some of the issues affecting the design of representational schemes, and focuses on how well a particular scheme, Toulmin structures, maps into the domain of argumentative discourse and captures and highlights various phenomena the authors consider central to argumentation.
Abstract: Many researchers have proposed representational schemes to capture complex reasoned discourses. In this paper, we use our experiences with argument representation to examine some of the issues affecting the design of these representational schemes. Our discussions focus on how well a particular scheme, Toulmin structures, maps into the domain of argumentative discourse and captures and highlights various phenomena we consider central to argumentation. We then use this analysis to explore several complementary representational schemes. Finally, we discuss some relatively unexplored factors that influence the usability of these schemes.
85 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2017 | 3 |
| 2016 | 3 |
| 2015 | 6 |
| 2014 | 4 |
| 2013 | 2 |
| 2012 | 4 |