Computer-supported argumentation

Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. M. (2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

2010

DOI

10.1007/s11412-009-9080-x

DOI registrant

Springer Nature

Link

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9080-x

Cited by

1 citation across 1 artifact.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Domain-specific

• Toulmin Model
  • . Composition and critical-thinking pedagogy — drilled at secondary and tertiary levels as the way to identify claim/grounds/warrant in arguments read and produced, and to build complete arguments slot by slot. Policy analysis and decision memos — the six-part frame structures the construction and audit of practical-reasoning documents, with argument-mapping tools (Rationale, Argunet) implementing Toulmin-style diagrams

    This sourceA survey of software argument-diagramming tools, including Rationale and ArguNet, for supporting and teaching argumentation.

    Supported in partVerified against the source

    Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:f092e1719e8f · see in the full table