Argument Mapping Research Articles

Why the Shroud of Turin is not a Medieval Work?

The Shroud of Turin is an old linen fabric imprinted with the image of a tortured man who lies prone with his hands crossed before him. Since for many it is related to Jesus of Nazareth, this cloth is among the most studied, controversial and enigmatic of all archaeological and religious objects. Since its radiocarbon dating at the end of the eighties of the last century, it is considered by many to be an object made in the Middle Ages. The controversy is due to the fact that there are other scientific and artistic evidences that place this object outside the medieval sphere. An argument map is a critical thinking way of representing the relationships between evidences and arguments, and is used here to represent the sequences of argumentation that defend that the Shroud of Turin is not a medieval object.

Influence of Teaching Strategies in Developing Critical Thinking Skills: A Review

This study aimed to review existing primary and secondary resources to make all stakeholders aware of the influence of different teaching strategies on fostering critical thinking in students. A specific criterion was set out by the researcher like the scope of the study, language, year of publication, nature of the journal, etc. The researcher searched out articles that duly fulfill the required criteria. After a review of those articles, findings explored multiple teaching strategies that may have a positive influence on students in making them critical thinkers. From this review, the most effective teaching strategies include the use of fairy tales, problem-based approach, collaborative learning, Socratic questioning, inquiry-based learning, and argument mapping, etc. The researcher suggested adopting multiple teaching strategies to enhance critical thinking skills in students.

One intervention, several benefits: Deliberate computer‐assisted argument mapping practices in an online teacher education course

One intervention, several benefits: Deliberate computer‐assisted argument mapping practices in an online teacher education course

Teaching Critical Thinking With Argument Mapping

Critical thinking is the cornerstone of any undergraduate education. One technique for helping students develop critical thinking skills is argument mapping. Argument mapping involves diagraming the arguments for and against a proposition. The map also includes each piece of evidence used to support these arguments. Argument mapping can help students avoid confirmation bias by bringing attention to arguments and evidence which may run counter to their prior beliefs. It also prompts consideration of the strength of arguments and the quality of evidence. We describe how argument mapping can be incorporated in an undergraduate class and then present an example of a classroom exercise. The exercise involves mapping the arguments in a speech by American Secretary of State Colin Powell justifying the use of military force in Iraq before the United Nations Security Council in February 2013.

The Semantics of Stative Locative Events in Vietnamese: A Spatial Exploration

This study utilizes mathematical formalism and Figure-Ground argument mapping to categorize stative locative events in Vietnamese as surjective or bijective. Bijective events exhibit a one-to-one mapping of Figures and Grounds, while surjectives allow a single Figure to map onto multiple Grounds. Through analysis of Vietnamese sentences, the paper demonstrates how bijective and surjective locatives encode deterministic and ambiguous spatial relations between Figures and Grounds, respectively. This novel distinction aids in enhancing the understanding of locative event typologies and provides an explanatory model for cross-linguistic analysis. The proposed integrated formal framework combines predicate logic, set theory, and lexical semantics to account for complex locative meanings, with significant applications in computational and theoretical linguistics, as well as cognitive science.

Integrating dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping to support students’ dialectical thinking, oral and dialogical argumentation complexity

Integrating dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping to support students’ dialectical thinking, oral and dialogical argumentation complexity

Strengthening collaborative argumentation with interactive guidance: a dialogic peer feedback approach based on the six thinking hats strategy

ABSTRACT Collaborative argumentation supported by argumentation mapping is important for developing college students’ argumentation ability. However, in conventional argumentation mapping-supported collaborative argumentation (AM-CA) activities, learners tend to quickly reach consensus without sufficient discussion and negotiation, or fail to spontaneously assess and integrate the group’s ideas, thus failing to develop more comprehensive and in-depth arguments. Therefore, this study proposed a six thinking hats strategy-based dialogic peer feedback approach to support AM-CA activities, which was expected to support students’ iterative negotiation and deeper interactions through dialogic peer feedback, thus enhancing the quality of argumentation. To show the effectiveness of the proposed approach, this study used a quasi-experimental method to test the proposed strategy in a freshman seminar class at a university. The control group (22 students) used the conventional AM-CA (C-AM-CA) approach, while the experimental group (22 students) used the six thinking hats strategy-based AM-CA (STH-AM-CA) approach. The findings showed that STH-AM-CA improved the quality of argumentation mapping compared to C-AM-CA, but it also significantly increased the learners’ cognitive load. In addition, a thematic inductive qualitative analysis of the interview data demonstrated the strengths and weaknesses of each strategy.

Empowering collaborative knowledge construction through the implementation of a collaborative argument map tool

Collaborative knowledge construction has been used in higher education to support student groups' collaborative learning activities through students' exchange, negotiation, and reflection of perspectives through peer communications. To support this process, collaborative learning analytics tools have been designed to collect and analyze collaborative process and performance data with a goal to provide actionable feedback and improve learning quality. However, few tools have demonstrated the mechanism and details about how students develop their perspectives during the collaborative knowledge construction process in higher education. To fill this gap, this research proposed a tool named Collaborative Argument Map (CAM) that creatively visualized different types of perspectives students proposed from the individual, peer, and group levels. This tool was further implemented in a graduate-level course in online collaborative writing activities in China's higher education, with a goal to support students' knowledge construction with peers. The summative and process-oriented learning analytics approaches were conducted to reveal the effects of CAM on students' collaborative perceptions, processes, and final products. Results showed that most students made substantive use of the CAM tool and reported positive perceptions of the tool. Further examinations verified the tool's positive effects on improving the students' cognitive engagement levels and the quality of their final collaborative writing products. This research provided practical implications for future CLA tool design and instructional implications for using this type of tool in collaborative learning in higher education.

Exploring college students’ depth and processing patterns of critical thinking skills and their perception in argument map(AM)-supported online group debate activities

Although argument maps (AM) have been proven to be an effective tool for visually presenting arguments and enhancing students’ critical thinking skills, the time available for argumentation in traditional face-to-face environments is often limited. Additionally, AMs are typically created by group members from the same side, with few conflicting views. In this study, 17 sophomores majoring in education were divided into four groups, with each group consisting of pros and cons. These groups participated in debates centred around analysing scientific papers. Using a collaborative online platform called ‘ZJUYuQue’, all the groups engaged in six online group debate activities, anonymously and simultaneously creating AMs. To examine the depth and processing patterns of college students’ critical thinking skills in these activities, both content analysis and lag sequence analysis (LSA) were employed to analyse the quality of the debates. Additionally, interviews were conducted with eight participants to explore their perceptions of this instructional design. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the interview data. Results indicated that: first, students’ depth of critical thinking skills increased gradually across the six activities, and second that three processing patterns of critical thinking skills emerged: Recognise→Understand, Evaluate→Recognise and Create→Understand. This suggests that students typically identified certain issues with supporting facts and criticised opposing arguments, while also proposing creative ideas during the debates. Lastly, the interviews showed the AM-supported online group debates were appreciated. The online environment provided ample time for students to express their thoughts, while the AMs encouraged clear articulation of arguments. Several implications were highlighted based on these findings. Instructors should provide timely feedback during students’ debate, the number of debate topics should be appropriate, and the value of professional knowledge and debating skills should be emphasized.

Some Benefits and Limitations of Modern Argument Map Representation

Argument maps represent some arguments more effectively than others. The goal of this article is to account for that variability, so that those who wish to use argument maps can do so with more foresight. I begin by identifying four properties of argument maps that make them useful tools for evaluating arguments. Then, I discuss four types of argument that are difficult to map well: reductio ad absurdum arguments, charges of equivocation, logical analogies, and mathematical arguments. The difficulties presented by these four types appear unrelated to one another, but I show that, in each case, the difficulty can be traced back to the use of metalinguistic reasoning. The need to represent a transition between object language and metalanguage can undermine one or more of the benefits that argument map representation would otherwise confer.

Research on the Effectiveness of Project-Based Learning Promoted by the Integration of Chat GPT and Argument Mapping

Research on the Effectiveness of Project-Based Learning Promoted by the Integration of Chat GPT and Argument Mapping

Ripensare le mappe argomentative nei nuovi contesti multimodali: una revisione narrativa della letteratura

With the emergence of medial and dynamic contexts, influenced by the invisible presence of the post-digital, the need for digital and transmedial literacy is arising, necessarily challenging education and training. It is essential to explore teaching strategies to support critical understanding beyond the static information. The argument maps, originally developed and tested in static information contexts, can be thought of as effective in emerging dynamic textual forms. Based on these premises, a narrative review of the literature was conducted. Three conceptual nodes have been identified, developed in specific essays and related bibliographies: a) the first relating to the educational concern on argumentative logic, from oral to written argumentation; b) the second relating to the argumentative maps, as a tool to support argumentative skills; c) the third focused on an ontological problematic in defining the argumentative text, from analog to multimodal. Starting from these three conceptual nodes, an initial conceptual response to the following research question was made: Can argumentative maps be applied in new media contexts (digital, transmedial, data literacy)? The interconnection between the three nodes highlighted the relevance of argumentation in the new media society and suggested an empirical investigation into the use of argumentative maps for digital literacy.

The Potential of Personality Tests in the Candidate Selection Process: A Critical Analysis Using Argument Mapping

Psychological testing – including personality tests – is one of the methods used by contemporary organisations for selection of candidates. This article provides a systematic analysis of arguments concerning the validity of this selection method using the argument mapping technique. The study highlights doubts regarding the validity of assessing a candidate’s potential on the basis of such tests due to the significant potential for result manipulation by the candidate. The primary conclusion drawn from this analysis is that personality tests should only be used as a complementary instrument alongside other selection techniques. Test‑based assessment methods should be used optionally, while adhering to appropriate standards for conducting such tests. The study also suggests a shift away from self‑report tests and entrusting their execution and interpretation to individuals with relevant qualifications.

Development of higher-order thinking in health profession education: A comprehensive toolkit for medical educators.

Higher-order thinking (HOT) is widely recognized as an essential objective of health profession education (HPE). Based on Lipman's three-dimensional model of thinking, we investigated strategies for the development of HOT including critical thinking (CT), creative thinking, and caring thinking in HPE in three consecutive studies. Fostering students' CT is regarded as an outcome of HPE. However, there is the limited level of consensus on educational interventions for CT development. In view of some of the controversies surrounding the development of CT skills and dispositions in HPE, the aim of this study was to determine educational interventions affecting CT development in HPE. This study employed the best-fit framework synthesis design. The frameworks recommended by Abrami et al. were used as a basis for the synthesis. The priori themes were extracted from the selected best-fit frameworks. Then, Google Scholar, PubMed, SID, and ProQuest databases were searched for the literature related to the development of CT skills and dispositions in HPE students. Derived data from the HPE literature were coded against the priori themes, extracted from the best-fit frameworks. Interpretation and restructuring of the new themes derived from HPE literature, and the preexisting priori themes resulted in the final framework of the interventions affecting CT development in HPE students. The themes extracted from the HPE studies (including reflection, discussion, simulation, role-playing, questioning, and explicit expression of CT goals in curriculum) were similar to the a priori themes derived from the studies by Abrami et al. The new themes of experiential learning, art-based learning, argument mapping, concept mapping, and creating appropriate educational atmosphere were obtained by constant comparison of the data among the studies. The comprehensive framework of CT development methods provides a toolkit for medical educators. According to the results of the current study, the mixed approach, where CT is taught as an independent track, along with the discipline-specific CT development, seems to be more effective, compared to the immersion approach. Creating learning moments in the context of practice through experiential learning is noteworthy in the development of CT skills and dispositions. Further research is needed to evaluate the efficacy of the newly developed strategies, such as art-based learning and concept mapping.

Argument mapping as a pre-writing activity: Does it promote writing skills of EFL learners?

Argument mapping as a pre-writing activity: Does it promote writing skills of EFL learners?

Predicting the realised host-range of Leptinotarsa texana with open-field experiments

ABSTRACT The leaf beetle Leptinotarsa texana is a potential biological control agent for silverleaf nightshade Solanum elaeagnifolium in Australia. However, previous research has shown that L. texana can develop on the non-target crop eggplant Solanum melongena in quarantine cage experiments. We used open-field experiments in the agent's native range of Texas, USA, to clarify the realised host-range of L. texana in relation to S. melongena. We conducted five replicated field experiments to investigate: (1) the extent that L. texana would show a preference for oviposition when presented with both S. elaeagnifolium and S. melongena in an open-field context, and (2) the extent that larvae would move from defoliated S. elaeagnifolium onto either nearby S. melongena plants, or bypass S. melongena in search of S. elaeagnifolium. We found, in the open-field experiments, that adult females prefer S. elaeagnifolium over S. melongena plants for settling and oviposition and, in fact, observed no oviposition on S. melongena in any experiment. However, the low levels of oviposition observed in the S. elaeagnifolium experimental plants (the control) was insufficient to conclusively demonstrate that S. melongena is not within the realised host-range of L. texana adults. We also found evidence that L. texana larvae can cause spill-over damage to S. melongena in situations where co-occurring S. elaeagnifolium is defoliated. Finally, we demonstrate the use of an argument map to visually represent the contributions of multiple, sometimes conflicting, field and laboratory experiments to biological control agent risk analysis.

Implicit Values in the Recent Carbon Nanotube Debate

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are one of the first examples of nanotechnology, with a history of promising uses and high expectations. This paper uses the recent debate over their future to explore both ethical and value-laden statements which unsettle the notion of CNTs as a value-free nanotechnology and their regulation as purely a technical affair. A point of departure is made with the inclusion of CNTs on the Substitute-It-Now list by the Swedish NGO ChemSec, an assessment process that anticipates and complements the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation in Europe. An argument map is constructed to illustrate the core contention in the debate—should CNTs be substituted or not—which follows from a systematic literature review and content analysis of sampled journal articles. Nine arguments are articulated that bolster one of two camps: the pro-substitution camp or the contra-substitution camp. Beneath these arguments are a set of three implicit values that animate these two camps in prescribing competing interventions to resolve the dispute: (i) environmental protection and human safety, (ii) good science, and (iii) technological progress. This leads to a discussion around the regulatory problem of safeguarding conflicting values in decision-making under sustained scientific uncertainty. Finally, the study suggests further empirical work on specific nanomaterials in a pivot away from the abstract, promissory nature of nanotechnology and other emerging technologies in science, technology, and innovation policy. The examination of ethics and values is useful for mapping controversies in science and technology studies of regulation, even amongst experts in cognate research fields like nanomedicine and nanotoxicology.

Analyzing the philosophy of travel with Schopenhauerian argument maps

AbstractEmily Thomas's seminal book The Meaning of Travel has brought the philosophy of travel back into the public eye in recent years. Thomas has shown that the topic of travel can be approached from numerous different perspectives, ranging from the historical to the conceptual‐analytical, to the political or even social‐philosophical perspectives. This article introduces another perspective, which Thomas only indirectly addresses, namely the argumentation‐theoretical perspective. It is notable that contemporary philosophy of travel lacks the nineteenth‐century approach of using diagrams and maps to examine arguments for and against travel. Since this approach starts with Schopenhauer, we first introduce his argument maps, discuss their advantages and disadvantages, and argue that a modified version is suitable to visualize and analyze arguments for and against traveling as presented in Thomas's work.

How can management of uncertainty in sustainable diversion limits be advanced in the review of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan?

ABSTRACT This paper explores how scientific uncertainty was addressed in the Australian Government’s decision-making process leading to the establishment of the ‘sustainable diversion limit’ (SDL) for the Murray-Darling Basin Plan in 2012. Our research draws on a systematic document analysis to generate an argument map representing the reasoning presented in government reports and legislation, as well as interviews with current and former public servants and researchers who have knowledge of the decision-making process. Looking towards the review of the Basin Plan, this analysis provides additional evidence for a number of areas to be discussed to advance the management of uncertainty in the associated decision-making. First, there is a need to address the challenges to adaptive management, as adaptive management delegates much of the uncertainty to future changes in policy as improved knowledge is gained. Second, there is a need to generate and use new knowledge for the review since the legislative mandate to use the ‘best available science’ enabled the use of pre-existing models and historical climate data. Third, there is a need for dialogue on handling of trade-offs between objectives given that uncertainty creates space for political pressures from interest groups. Fourth, there should be wider transparency about uncertainty in decision-making processes.

A virtual reality-based collaborative argument mapping approach in the EFL classroom

ABSTRACT In language learning, it is important to foster students’ computational thinking and improve their skills of building arguments and dialectical structure, teamwork, and decision accuracy. This is especially so in English language courses which aim to promote students’ cultural learning interest, creative thinking, and oral presentation. Collaborative argument mapping is an appropriate strategy to elicit those objectives. However, in the emergency distance learning (EDL) context, when online instruction lacks real-world learning and face-to-face interaction, it is challenging to teach units on cultural issues in authentic contexts. Therefore, in this study, the virtual reality-based collaborative argument mapping approach was developed to address this problem. A quasi-experiment was designed with a total of 45 EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students. The experimental result showed that the virtual reality-based collaborative argument mapping approach (VR-CAM) improved the students’ English oral presentation more than did the non-virtual reality-based collaborative argument mapping approach (non-VR-CAM). Although the VR-CAM group scored higher than the non-VR-CAM group on cultural learning interest, the two groups did not significantly differ. Furthermore, in the computational and creative thinking aspects, students who learned with VR-CAM performed significantly better than those who learned with non-VR-CAM over time.