Argument Stakes: Preliminary Conceptualizations and Empirical Descriptions. (1st January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hample, Dale; Dai, Yiwen; Zhan, Mengqi
• Is Part Of: Argumentation and advocacy. Volume 52:Number 3(2016)
• Page Start: 199
• Page End: 213
• Publication Date: 2016-01-01
• Subjects: argument stakes -- ego-involvement -- goals -- interpersonal arguing; Forensics (Public speaking) -- Periodicals; Forensics (Public speaking); Periodicals; 808.5105
• DOI: 10.1080/00028533.2016.11821870
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0002-8533

Abstract

Abstract : The idea that different arguments have different stakes for the arguers is an explanatory resource med to interpret various findings, notably those involved with A. Johnson's program of research on public and personal argument topics. Although arguers' ego-involvement in their interactions has been studied, that is a limited summary of what sorts of importance an argument might have. This paper briefly explains the idea of "argument stakes, " and then moves on to what we believe is the first empirical description of it. We collected data from two samples, 290 undergraduates and 195 adult Mechanical Turk workers. We analyzed their self-descriptions of actual arguments and how these corresponded to their ratings of the argument's importance. We distinguished several potential kinds of importance, including instrumental and relationship issues. We also collected people's reports about their goals, tactics, and understandings of the arguments. The project successfully generated usable measurement procedures and produced an interesting initial sketch of how ordinary actors think about the stakes involved in their own arguments.