Abstract
The relationship between perspectivism and oral argumentation is explored by observing eight triads of high school and university students discussing an environmental dilemma, with the aim of convincing their peers. No differences are appreciated between high school and university students regarding the frequency and duration of perspectivistic levels of discourse. When analysing such levels in the whole sample, significant differences are revealed in favour of the me (defence and explanation of own perspective) and other as an obstacle (demolition of others’ positions) levels, compared to the other strategy (legitimate persuasion) and us (search for agreement) levels. Therefore, argumentative discourse is anchored in a reasoned defense of one’s own perspective as well as in the attack on others, displaying a limited perspectivistic development. In relation to the interaction sequences, symmetrical responses are observed towards the me and other as obstacle levels, both in high school and university students, and also towards us in university students. The potential of perspectivism to improve expert argumentation is discussed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
