Explanation and evidence in informal argument

Sarah K. Brem, Lance J. Rips

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

119 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A substantial body of evidence shows that people tend to rely too heavily on explanations when trying to justify an opinion. Some research suggests these errors may arise from an inability to distinguish between explanations and the evidence that bears upon them. We examine an alternative account, that many people do distinguish between explanations and evidence, but rely more heavily on unsubstantiated explanations when evidence is scarce or absent. We examine the philosophical and psychological distinctions between explanation and evidence, and show that participants use explanations as a substitute for missing evidence. Experiment 1 replicates the results of other researchers, but further shows that participants generate more evidence when they are not constrained by their lack of data. Merely mentioning a source of data can alter both their evaluation (Experiment 2) and their production (Experiment 3) of explanations and evidence. In Experiment 4, we show that participants can explicitly consider the availability of evidence and other pragmatic factors when evaluating arguments. Finally, we consider the implications of using explanations to replace missing evidence as a strategy in argument.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)573-604
Number of pages32
JournalCognitive Science
Volume24
Issue number4
StatePublished - Oct 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Information Storage and Retrieval
Research Personnel
Psychology
Research
evidence
Experiments
experiment
Availability
pragmatics
Experiment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Human Factors and Ergonomics
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Brem, S. K., & Rips, L. J. (2000). Explanation and evidence in informal argument. Cognitive Science, 24(4), 573-604.

Explanation and evidence in informal argument. / Brem, Sarah K.; Rips, Lance J.

In: Cognitive Science, Vol. 24, No. 4, 10.2000, p. 573-604.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Brem, SK & Rips, LJ 2000, 'Explanation and evidence in informal argument', Cognitive Science, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 573-604.
Brem SK, Rips LJ. Explanation and evidence in informal argument. Cognitive Science. 2000 Oct;24(4):573-604.
Brem, Sarah K. ; Rips, Lance J. / Explanation and evidence in informal argument. In: Cognitive Science. 2000 ; Vol. 24, No. 4. pp. 573-604.
@article{210cb8de063e4c79bea36cd38c7e75cb,
title = "Explanation and evidence in informal argument",
abstract = "A substantial body of evidence shows that people tend to rely too heavily on explanations when trying to justify an opinion. Some research suggests these errors may arise from an inability to distinguish between explanations and the evidence that bears upon them. We examine an alternative account, that many people do distinguish between explanations and evidence, but rely more heavily on unsubstantiated explanations when evidence is scarce or absent. We examine the philosophical and psychological distinctions between explanation and evidence, and show that participants use explanations as a substitute for missing evidence. Experiment 1 replicates the results of other researchers, but further shows that participants generate more evidence when they are not constrained by their lack of data. Merely mentioning a source of data can alter both their evaluation (Experiment 2) and their production (Experiment 3) of explanations and evidence. In Experiment 4, we show that participants can explicitly consider the availability of evidence and other pragmatic factors when evaluating arguments. Finally, we consider the implications of using explanations to replace missing evidence as a strategy in argument.",
author = "Brem, {Sarah K.} and Rips, {Lance J.}",
year = "2000",
month = "10",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "573--604",
journal = "Cognitive Science",
issn = "0364-0213",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Explanation and evidence in informal argument

AU - Brem, Sarah K.

AU - Rips, Lance J.

PY - 2000/10

Y1 - 2000/10

N2 - A substantial body of evidence shows that people tend to rely too heavily on explanations when trying to justify an opinion. Some research suggests these errors may arise from an inability to distinguish between explanations and the evidence that bears upon them. We examine an alternative account, that many people do distinguish between explanations and evidence, but rely more heavily on unsubstantiated explanations when evidence is scarce or absent. We examine the philosophical and psychological distinctions between explanation and evidence, and show that participants use explanations as a substitute for missing evidence. Experiment 1 replicates the results of other researchers, but further shows that participants generate more evidence when they are not constrained by their lack of data. Merely mentioning a source of data can alter both their evaluation (Experiment 2) and their production (Experiment 3) of explanations and evidence. In Experiment 4, we show that participants can explicitly consider the availability of evidence and other pragmatic factors when evaluating arguments. Finally, we consider the implications of using explanations to replace missing evidence as a strategy in argument.

AB - A substantial body of evidence shows that people tend to rely too heavily on explanations when trying to justify an opinion. Some research suggests these errors may arise from an inability to distinguish between explanations and the evidence that bears upon them. We examine an alternative account, that many people do distinguish between explanations and evidence, but rely more heavily on unsubstantiated explanations when evidence is scarce or absent. We examine the philosophical and psychological distinctions between explanation and evidence, and show that participants use explanations as a substitute for missing evidence. Experiment 1 replicates the results of other researchers, but further shows that participants generate more evidence when they are not constrained by their lack of data. Merely mentioning a source of data can alter both their evaluation (Experiment 2) and their production (Experiment 3) of explanations and evidence. In Experiment 4, we show that participants can explicitly consider the availability of evidence and other pragmatic factors when evaluating arguments. Finally, we consider the implications of using explanations to replace missing evidence as a strategy in argument.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0000007578&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0000007578&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 573

EP - 604

JO - Cognitive Science

JF - Cognitive Science

SN - 0364-0213

IS - 4

ER -