View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

How persuaded are you? A typology of responses.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: How persuaded are you? A typology of responses.
Authors: Inglis, Matthew1 (AUTHOR), Mejia-Ramos, Juan Pablo2 (AUTHOR) j.p.mejia@warwick.edu
Source: Research in Mathematics Education. 2008, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p119-133. 15p. 3 Diagrams, 1 Chart.
Subject Terms: *Mathematics education, *Students, *Mathematical ability, *Classification, Persuasion (Rhetoric), Evidence, Debate, Mathematicians, Mathematical analysis
Abstract: Several recent studies have suggested that there are two different ways in which a person can proceed when assessing the persuasiveness of a mathematical argument: by evaluating whether it is personally convincing, or by evaluating whether it is publicly acceptable. In this paper, using Toulmin's (1958) argumentation scheme, we produce a more detailed theoretical classification of the ways in which participants can interpret a request to assess the persuasiveness of an argument. We suggest that there are (at least) five ways in which such a question can be interpreted. The classification is illustrated with data from a study that asked undergraduate students and research-active mathematicians to rate how persuasive they found a given argument. We conclude by arguing that researchers interested in mathematical conviction and proof validation need to be aware of the different ways in which participants can interpret questions about the persuasiveness of arguments, and that they must carefully control for these variations during their studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Research in Mathematics Education is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: ehh
DbLabel: Education Research Complete
An: 33563436
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: How persuaded are you? A typology of responses.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Inglis%2C+Matthew%22">Inglis, Matthew</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mejia-Ramos%2C+Juan+Pablo%22">Mejia-Ramos, Juan Pablo</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> j.p.mejia@warwick.edu</i>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Research+in+Mathematics+Education%22">Research in Mathematics Education</searchLink>. 2008, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p119-133. 15p. 3 Diagrams, 1 Chart.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subject Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mathematics+education%22">Mathematics education</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students%22">Students</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mathematical+ability%22">Mathematical ability</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Classification%22">Classification</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Persuasion+%28Rhetoric%29%22">Persuasion (Rhetoric)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evidence%22">Evidence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Debate%22">Debate</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mathematicians%22">Mathematicians</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mathematical+analysis%22">Mathematical analysis</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Several recent studies have suggested that there are two different ways in which a person can proceed when assessing the persuasiveness of a mathematical argument: by evaluating whether it is personally convincing, or by evaluating whether it is publicly acceptable. In this paper, using Toulmin's (1958) argumentation scheme, we produce a more detailed theoretical classification of the ways in which participants can interpret a request to assess the persuasiveness of an argument. We suggest that there are (at least) five ways in which such a question can be interpreted. The classification is illustrated with data from a study that asked undergraduate students and research-active mathematicians to rate how persuasive they found a given argument. We conclude by arguing that researchers interested in mathematical conviction and proof validation need to be aware of the different ways in which participants can interpret questions about the persuasiveness of arguments, and that they must carefully control for these variations during their studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Research in Mathematics Education is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=33563436
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/14794800802233647
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 15
        StartPage: 119
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Mathematics education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mathematical ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Classification
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Persuasion (Rhetoric)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evidence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Debate
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mathematicians
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mathematical analysis
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: How persuaded are you? A typology of responses.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Inglis, Matthew
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mejia-Ramos, Juan Pablo
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Text: 2008
              Type: published
              Y: 2008
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 14794802
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 10
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Research in Mathematics Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1