Argument Quality Research Articles

The Influence of Argument Quality and Information Richness on Trust in Halal Cosmetic Reviews

In the digital age, halal cosmetic products are becoming increasingly popular. Online reviews play an important role in consumers' purchasing decisions, as they cannot see and check the quality of the products directly, but only through the screens of their gadgets. Under Islamic law, the consumption of halal cosmetics is not only obligatory but also a lifestyle choice. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of argument quality and information richness on perceptions of information quality and trustworthiness of halal product reviews on the Shopee platform. We utilized a survey design involving 120 participants and applied ANOVA with a regression approach for analysis. Our results show that argument quality and information richness have a positive impact on perceived information quality. Furthermore, perceived information quality positively affects trust in halal product reviews. The results highlight the importance of providing high quality arguments and information in online reviews to increase consumer trust in halal cosmetic products. Furthermore, this study highlights the role of the Shopee platform in shaping consumer perceptions of online reviews, especially in the context of halal cosmetics. Marketers can use these findings to enhance their brand credibility and increase consumer trust through high-quality online product reviews. This study is useful for muslim marketers so that they can increase sales by motivating consumers to provide quality reviews that can be adopted by other consumers.

The Dual Roles of Trust and Risk in Sport Consumer Decision-Making in Social Commerce: An Information Adoption Model

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to understand consumers’ decision-making process based on the information adoption model (IAM). In addition, the trust-risk perspective was incorporated into the IAM to establish a more comprehensive framework to explore consumers’ purchase intention. The results found that consumers’ intention to purchase sporting goods was significantly predicted by the IAM and perceptions of trust and risk. Specifically, the relationships within the IAM were positive and significant, and both argument quality and source credibility affected information usefulness, which further led to information adoption. Moreover, information adoption had a positive influence on purchase intention. In addition, perceived trust and risk played different roles in consumers’ information adoption process and purchase intention. This study initially explores sport consumers’ decision-making in social commerce. Integrating the IAM and trust-risk perspective provides insights into the consumers’ information adoption process and purchase intention of sporting goods.

Validation of a methodology to evaluate the argumentative quality of judicial decisions in Ecuador

Validation of a methodology to evaluate the argumentative quality of judicial decisions in Ecuador

TOWARDS STANDARDIZED REGULATIONS FOR BLOCK CHAIN SMART CONTRACTS: INSIGHTS FROM DELPHI AND SWARA ANALYSIS

The rise of digital currency and the public ledger Block Chain has led to the development of a new type of electronic contract known as "smart contracts." For these contracts to be considered valid, they must adhere to traditional contract rules and be concluded without any impediments. Once written, encrypted, and signed, smart contracts are recorded in the Block Chain Ledger, providing transparent and secure record-keeping. Smart contracts offer several benefits, including their ability to execute automatically without requiring human intervention, their provision of public visibility of contract provisions on the Block Chain, their avoidance of financial crimes like Money Laundering, and their prevention of contract abuses. However, disputes arising from smart contracts still require human intervention, presenting unique challenges in enforcing these contracts, such as evidentiary issues, enforceability of waivers of defenses, and jurisdictional and choice-of-law considerations. Due to the novel nature of smart contracts, there are currently no standardized regulations that apply to them. Countries that have approved them have turned to customary law to legitimize their use. The Delphi method was used to identify critical success factors for applying blockchain transactions in a manufacturing company. Stepwise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis (SWARA) was then utilized to determine the most influential factors. The proposed methodology was implemented, and results show that the most influential factors for the successful application of blockchain transactions as smart contracts in a manufacturing company are: turnover, the counter argument, vision, components for building, and system outcome quality. Conversely, connections with government entities and subcontractors, and the guarantee of quality have the least influence on successful implementation. These findings can contribute to the development of a legal framework for smart contracts in a manufacturing company.

TOWARDS STANDARDIZED REGULATIONS FOR BLOCK CHAIN SMART CONTRACTS: INSIGHTS FROM DELPHI AND SWARA ANALYSIS

The rise of digital currency and the public ledger Block Chain has led to the development of a new type of electronic contract known as "smart contracts." For these contracts to be considered valid, they must adhere to traditional contract rules and be concluded without any impediments. Once written, encrypted, and signed, smart contracts are recorded in the Block Chain Ledger, providing transparent and secure record-keeping. Smart contracts offer several benefits, including their ability to execute automatically without requiring human intervention, their provision of public visibility of contract provisions on the Block Chain, their avoidance of financial crimes like Money Laundering, and their prevention of contract abuses. However, disputes arising from smart contracts still require human intervention, presenting unique challenges in enforcing these contracts, such as evidentiary issues, enforceability of waivers of defenses, and jurisdictional and choice-of-law considerations. Due to the novel nature of smart contracts, there are currently no standardized regulations that apply to them. Countries that have approved them have turned to customary law to legitimize their use. The Delphi method was used to identify critical success factors for applying blockchain transactions in a manufacturing company. Stepwise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis (SWARA) was then utilized to determine the most influential factors. The proposed methodology was implemented, and results show that the most influential factors for the successful application of blockchain transactions as smart contracts in a manufacturing company are: turnover, the counter argument, vision, components for building, and system outcome quality. Conversely, connections with government entities and subcontractors, and the guarantee of quality have the least influence on successful implementation. These findings can contribute to the development of a legal framework for smart contracts in a manufacturing company.

TOWARDS STANDARDIZED REGULATIONS FOR BLOCK CHAIN SMART CONTRACTS: INSIGHTS FROM DELPHI AND SWARA ANALYSIS

The rise of digital currency and the public ledger Block Chain has led to the development of a new type of electronic contract known as "smart contracts." For these contracts to be considered valid, they must adhere to traditional contract rules and be concluded without any impediments. Once written, encrypted, and signed, smart contracts are recorded in the Block Chain Ledger, providing transparent and secure record-keeping. Smart contracts offer several benefits, including their ability to execute automatically without requiring human intervention, their provision of public visibility of contract provisions on the Block Chain, their avoidance of financial crimes like Money Laundering, and their prevention of contract abuses. However, disputes arising from smart contracts still require human intervention, presenting unique challenges in enforcing these contracts, such as evidentiary issues, enforceability of waivers of defenses, and jurisdictional and choice-of-law considerations. Due to the novel nature of smart contracts, there are currently no standardized regulations that apply to them. Countries that have approved them have turned to customary law to legitimize their use. The Delphi method was used to identify critical success factors for applying blockchain transactions in a manufacturing company. Stepwise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis (SWARA) was then utilized to determine the most influential factors. The proposed methodology was implemented, and results show that the most influential factors for the successful application of blockchain transactions as smart contracts in a manufacturing company are: turnover, the counter argument, vision, components for building, and system outcome quality. Conversely, connections with government entities and subcontractors, and the guarantee of quality have the least influence on successful implementation. These findings can contribute to the development of a legal framework for smart contracts in a manufacturing company.

The relationship between theory of mind and multiple-document comprehension in university students: preliminary research findings

The demands of learning in the twenty-first century require being skilled in the use and comprehension of multiple documents. Some individual factors such as the metacognitive skill of theory of mind (ToM) are related to this ability. This study investigated the relationship between university students’ ability to comprehend multiple documents, measured through an argumentative essay task, and their ToM. The participants were 84 undergraduates. We assessed their ToM (using the strange stories task) and their mental state talk (using a think-aloud protocol during the reading of multiple documents—MSTR—and through the content of their subsequent written essays—MSTW). The relation between students’ ToM and their MSTW was mediated through MSTR. In addition, students’ ToM was significantly associated with the quality of the essays, through MSTR, and the relation between MSTR and the argumentative quality was mediated through MSTW. MSTW was the only significant predictor of the quality of the essays. The involvement of ToM in multiple-document comprehension suggests, from an educational perspective, the possibility to support multiple-document comprehension by scaffolding mental state talk.

Instruction in creative and argumentative writing: transfer and crossover effects on writing process and text quality

AbstractTo investigate whether a creative writing unit in upper secondary education would improve students’ creative as well as argumentative text quality and to examine whether it would change students’ writing behavior, we tested a creative writing unit based on encouraging writing in flow by using divergent thinking tasks. Four classes (Grade 10) participated in a switching replications design. Students received either creative writing instruction (CWI) or argumentative writing instruction (AWI). Key stroke logging software recorded students’ writing processes, their Creative Self-Concept (CSC) was measured, and text quality was rated holistically. Students were positive about the design of the creative writing unit and the lessons. The effects varied per panel. The first panel showed that CWI had an effect on creative text quality compared to AWI, while AWI had no effect on argumentative text quality, compared to CWI. This pattern indicates a transfer effect of creative writing instruction on argumentative text quality. The transfer effect was moderated by CSC, with larger effects for relatively high CSC-participants. The second panel did not replicate this pattern. Instead, a crossover effect was observed of CWI in panel 1 on the effect of participating in the unit on argumentative writing in panel 2, most pronounced in high CSC-participants. Students’ creative writing speed decreased in the first panel, except for students with a relatively high Creative Self-Concept, and then increased in the second panel. Our findings may guide decisions on incorporating creative writing in the curriculum.

Order effects and oral argument at the US Supreme Court

AbstractObjectiveFor years, scholars have employed Justice Harry Blackmun's private grades of attorneys to measure attorney oral argument quality. Using archival data, I analyze whether Justice Blackmun experienced order effects.MethodsI estimate numerous ordinary least squares regression models on private archival data.ResultsBlackmun's respondent grades appear to have been influenced by his perceptions of how the petitioners performed. This finding holds across a series of checks, including those that examine whether some cases simply attract better or worse attorneys.ConclusionThe results suggest that scholars should not use the Blackmun grades as “point estimates” but, instead, as rankings. They also suggest that previous findings may have overstated the influence of oral argument. The fact that one justice displayed evidence of a cognitive illusion also suggests that such effects may exist in various aspects of decision making.

How to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination in the Digital Media Age: The Persuasive Effects of News Frames and Argument Quality

Vaccination-related information is important for the public to increase vaccine acceptance intention, while the guidance and persuasion effects of information are influenced by approaches to information presentation. Thus, this study has focused on news media, an important source of vaccination-related dissemination, and aimed to investigate how different presentations of news influence an individual’s COVID-19 vaccine intention. Moreover, whether the cultural values individuals possess would influence the persuasive effects of news information was also considered in our study. A web-based experiment among 310 participants employing 2 (news framing: rights frame vs. obligation frame) × 2 (argument quality: high argument quality vs. low argument quality) × 2 (individual–collective orientation: individualism vs. collectivism) design was conducted in this study. Data were analyzed through a series of analyses of variance (ANOVAs) in SPSS 26. The results show that argument quality had a significant positive impact on individuals’ psychological acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine. The results also show that the rights framework was significantly more persuasive than the obligation framework. Furthermore, for individualistic individuals, news information with high argument quality and a rights frame was the most persuasive. These findings may help guide the writing of news, thereby improving vaccine uptake, enhancing the public’s health literacy, and facilitating the implementation of vaccination policies during and after a pandemic.

Critical Reading of Informational Texts (CRIT) Scaffold: Evaluating the efficacy of an instructional scaffold for reading multiple scientific texts

Developing critical processing of online information is one important mission of schooling in the 21st century. However, science teachers often lack an instructional tool they can integrate into existing curricula to support students’ information processing. This study aims to examine the efficacy of the Critical Reading of Informational Texts (CRIT) scaffold on students’ critical integrative argumentation - the dialogic process of weighing, evaluating, and integrating scientific claims. The present study documented the design of the CRIT scaffold to support both critical evaluation and integration of online scientific information. Initial efficacy evidence from a cluster-randomized control group study demonstrated that students who used the scaffold produced written task products that had higher overall argumentative quality and were more likely to support evidence-based conclusions about Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), weigh claims using source and evidence quality, and engage in refutation by countering specific claims based on why they are flawed.

Impact of social media influencers on consumers' well-being and purchase intention: a TikTok perspective

PurposeExtending the elaboration likelihood model (ELM), this study investigates the impact of social media influencers (SMI) on consumer well-being (CW) as well as the influence of CW on purchase intention.Design/methodology/approachA between-subjects experiment (macro- vs mega-influencer) was conducted to assess the proposed hypotheses. A total of 190 consumers participated in the experiment, and SmartPLS 3.3 was used for multigroup analyses.FindingsOverall, argument quality (AQ), source's credibility (SC) and influencer's kindness positively predict CW, and CW predicts purchase intention. It was also found that SC is more important when information comes from a mega-influencer, whilst kindness is essential for a macro-influencer.Practical implicationsThe results of this study imply that CW should be an essential component of influencer marketing strategy. Marketing managers should hire credible and kind influencers who can produce quality arguments. Additionally, the selection of SMI (macro- vs mega-influencer) should be aligned with the marketing objective and type of persuasion required.Originality/valueThis is one of the early attempts to extend ELM by introducing influencer kindness as a peripheral cue. Moreover, the study offers novelty by examining the effects of influencer characteristics (AQ, SC and kindness) on CW and comparing these effects across macro- and mega-influencers.

Understanding online reviews adoption in social network communities: an extension of the information adoption model

PurposeOnline reviews derived from peer communications have been increasingly viewed as an important approach for consumers to gather pre-purchase information. This study aims to examine factors affecting online reviews adoption in social network communities and then indicates the underlying mechanism of this process based on an extended information adoption model (IAM).Design/methodology/approachUsing the data collected from 242 users of a social network community via an online survey, the proposed model is empirically assessed by partial least squares-based structural equation model (PLS-SEM).FindingsThe results show that both perceived diagnosticity and perceived serendipity are drivers of online reviews adoption in social network communities. Meanwhile, community identification is not only an antecedent of diagnosticity and serendipity perceived by community members, but also motivates source credibility which, in turn, positively influences argument quality. Finally, the importance of argument quality and source credibility in reviews adoption process is also presented.Originality/valueThis study extends the IAM and enriches the literature regarding online reviews adoption. It deepens the understanding of serendipitous experiences and community identification in social networking context by addressing their important roles in the authors' extended IAM.

INVESTIGATING CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS THROUGH DEBATE IN EFL CLASSROOM

Critical thinking is considered a comprehensive cognitive skill in problem solving and argumentation that needs to be possessed by students in the twenty-first century. This study mainly aims at investigating a teacher’s way of employing debate activities as an effective way to promote students’ critical thinking ability in EFL classroom, the type of CT skills manifested through the debating activity, and students’ perceptions toward the implementation of debate activities as a technique that can help them to think critically. The data were obtained through semi-interviews, classroom observations, and documents. One English teacher and the total of 12 students of high and low achievers in speaking performance were involved. The results revealed that Parliamentary Debate system employed happened to be exceptionally helpful to EFL teachers who intend to promote students’ critical thinking ability as students are constantly trained to construct arguments and strengthen their claim. However, the students admitted that having limited experience in debate practice is a major obstacle. Thus, more lessons and practices in constructing a good argument are needed. Furthermore, the quality of argumentation constructed by learners should be evaluated to prevent students from fallacies.

How the credibility of places affects the processing of advertising claims: A partial test of the B2B communication effects model

Using an economic development context, this study tests a portion of the revised B2B communication effects model, which added source credibility as an antecedent to message processing. This exploratory study examines how the perceived credibility of a nation brand influences message persuasiveness under varying levels of argument quality and issue involvement. Applying dimensions of source credibility to place advertising, the research uses an online, between-subjects experiment with a sample of site-selection managers to measure their responses to foreign direct investment seeking advertisements. In nearly all conditions, results suggest source credibility by itself has a stronger influence over message persuasiveness than either argument quality or involvement.

Effects of the Triple Q Intervention on Argument Writing: Findings from a Small-Scale Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

We examined the effects of a text-based argument writing intervention, Triple Q, on argument writing skills in a cluster-randomized trial where groups of middle schools were assigned to conditions within school-level SES blocks. The intervention comprised three 15-day units. Students read and discussed argument texts representing different positions on a policy-related question; examined the features and quality of arguments within and across texts; provided feedback on peers’ arguments; and drafted and revised their own arguments. The study was conducted in 27 sixth- and seventh-grade classrooms (k = 12 intervention) in 13 schools with 494 students (n = 220 intervention) in the southeastern United States. Results from differences-in-differences analyses showed that intervention students improved in overall argument writing quality compared to the control condition on a far transfer measure (ES = .44). To further explore the impact on specific dimensions of argumentation, we examined binary outcomes of conceptually robust indicators of argument writing skill. Results indicated greater increases in intervention students’ likelihood of incorporating some dimensions of argumentation, such as supporting reasons with evidence and citing sources of evidence with specificity.

Resistance strategies and attitude certainty in persuasion: bolstering vs. counterarguing.

Although resistance to persuasion has been of interest in psychology, relatively little research has examined how different resistance strategies can affect the strength-related features of attitudes. The current research presents a metacognitive account of two resistance strategies and their effect on attitude certainty and intentions. Specifically, we examine how the strategies of counterarguing and bolstering can differentially affect attitude certainty and intentions to act on the attitude under attack. In two experiments, we implemented a 2(Perceived Thought Type: bolster vs. counterargue) x 2(Perceived Argument Quality: weak vs. strong) between-participants design. Participants read weak or strong arguments about a counterattitudinal topic. After reporting their thoughts in response to the message topic, participants received bogus feedback regarding the nature of their thoughts (i.e., bolstering or counterarguing). Following the feedback, participants reported their attitudes and attitude certainty. In Experiment 1 (N =241), participants' thoughts perceived as counterarguments elicited attitude certainty that was more sensitive to the quality of the attacking information than when thoughts were perceived as bolstering one's opinion. Experiment 2 (N = 287) replicated the effect with a different topic and demonstrated a similar pattern on intentions to act on the attacked attitude. The research demonstrates that two relatively thoughtful strategies, bolstering and counterarguing, can play an important role in attitude certainty and intentions following a persuasion attempt.

The use of intellectual standards to assess the quality of students’ argumentative writings

To comprehensively examine the quality of argumentative writing, it is important to integrate the aspects of structure and substance. This study seeks to foreground the application of Intellectual Standards (IS) as a core component of the argumentative writing process. The research aims to determine the quality of argumentation in terms of structure using the TAP Toulmin concept and substance using IS. The research participants were 80 high school students in Central Java, Indonesia. A mixed method approach with an exploratory sequential QUAL-quan design is adopted. The results show that the quality of the arguments in terms of structure and substance is in the low category. Structurally, 97.5% of students' written arguments ranged from 1.1 to 2.0 on a scale of 0.0-5.0. In substance, 81.25% of students' argumentation ability scores are in the range of 04.9 - 09.6 on a scale of 0.00-24.00. In addition, the findings show that the completeness of the structure influences the substance score. Furthermore, the results of this study can be used as a reference for teachers in teaching argument texts. Elements of warrant, backing, modal qualifier, and rebuttal must be emphasized in preparing argumentative texts.Keywords: Argumentative Texts, Structure and Substance of Arguments, Toulmin, Intellectual Standards

A Design Theory for Certification Presentations

Prior information system research remains inconsistent of the effects of system certifications. In their current use, certifications are often reduced to graphical seals. This approach fails to incorporate detailed assurance information emanating from the certification process. To address this gap, we adopt a design science approach and deploy a four-phase research design to clarify how to design impactful IS certification presentations. First, we identify sources of users' limited understanding of seals and formulate a design proposal for a certification presentation by drawing upon the elaboration likelihood model. In the second phase, we formulate and validate a set of design meta-requirements and guidelines to improve certification presentation, using cognitive load theory and Toulmin's model of argumentation as kernel theories. In the third phase, new certification presentations that comply with the proposed guidelines are developed and evaluated for their effectiveness. We show that presentations that augment seal-based certification presentations with richer assurance information improve certification effectiveness. This increases users' assurance and trust perceptions when the presentations align with the users' cognitive information processing needs in ways that reduce their cognitive load and enhance argument quality of assurance information.

Rage of righteousness: Anger's role in promoting debunking effects during the COVID-19 pandemic

The concerning proliferation of misinformation and its adverse consequences have spurred considerable effort among scholars and practitioners to debunk misinformation. Nevertheless, few studies have investigated how emotions influence the effectiveness of debunking. In our study, following the cognitive functional model, we analyzed 441 short videos on Douyin and their 8315 comments to examine how videos that debunk misinformation with punishment-focused frames improve the effectiveness of debunking. Our results demonstrate that the audience's anger, which we characterize as righteous anger, can be induced by video content that primes a preference for the punishment of creators and spreaders of misinformation. Moreover, when anger facilitates the audience's trust in debunking, message involvement and argument quality can intensify their anger.