ABSTRACT

Empirical research has shown that high-quality arguments according to criteria from argumentation theory lead to higher claim acceptance than low-quality arguments. However, this relationship was not observed in some cultural settings. This leads to the question whether criteria for high-quality arguments are culturally variable or universal. Therefore, adding to existing research on sensitivity to quality criteria for the argument from authority and the argument from generalization conducted mainly in Western cultural contexts, an experiment was run in Turkey (N = 307). Results showed that Turkish participants were sensitive to the quality of arguments: claim acceptance was higher when high-quality variants were used than when low-quality variants were used. While not neglecting potential cultural variability, these data add to the findings that there might be some level of universality in sensitivity to criteria for argument quality.

摘要

实证研究表明，根据论证理论的标准，高质量的论证比低质量的论证更容易被接受。然而，在某些文化环境中没有观察到这种关系。这就引出了一个问题，即高质量论点的标准是否具有文化可变性或普遍性。因此，除了现有的主要在西方文化背景下对权威论证和概括论证的质量标准敏感性的研究之外，还在土耳其进行了一项实验（N= 307)。结果表明，土耳其参与者对论点的质量很敏感：使用高质量变体时的声明接受度高于使用低质量变体时的声明接受度。虽然没有忽略潜在的文化差异，但这些数据增加了对论证质量标准的敏感性可能存在某种程度的普遍性的发现。