Coordinación de Evidencias, Explicaciones y Objetivos Pragmáticos en la Argumentación

this study explores the effects of prior training in argumentation and of the pragmatic goals of an argumentative dialogue on the way people evaluate the evidence and explanations presented in the dialogue. 122 university students, divided into two groups, participated in the study: a high training group (n=43) composed by senior students that had taken courses in logic and science, and a low training group (n=79) composed by first year students. the participants read three argumentative dialogues and rated the quality of the final argument of each dialogue. results showed that the participants with a high training level evaluated arguments according to the pragmatic characteristics of the dialogue. specifically, in situations where there was disagreement, these participants evaluated evidence better than they did explanations.