OOIR: Observatory of International Research

Papers

(The TQCC of Argumentation is 1. The table below lists those papers that are above that threshold based on CrossRef citation counts [max. 250 papers]. The publications cover those that have been published in the past four years, i.e., from 2021-06-01 to 2025-06-01.)

Article	Citations
Arguing with Children: Exploring Problems of Charity and Strawmanning	14
Is Natural Selection in Trouble? When Emotions Run High in a Philosophical Debate	11
Exploring TED Speakers’ Narrative Positioning from a Strategic Maneuvering Perspective: A Single Case Study from Winch’s (2014) TED Talk	10
Representing the Structure of a Debate	10
Frans H. A. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen (Eds.): Argumentation in Actual Practice: Topical Studies About Argumentative Discourse in Context	10
“Agreement Builds and Disagreement Destroys:” How Polish Undergraduates and Graduates Understand Interpersonal Arguing	10
Consolation Through Argumentation? Prototypical and Stereotypical Argumentative Patterns in Secular Eulogies	9
Argumentation and Identity: A Normative Evaluation of the Arguments of Delegates to the COP26 UN Climate Change Conference	8
The Correlations Between Parliamentary Debate Participation, Communication Competence, Communication Apprehension, Argumentativeness, and Willingness to Communicate in a Japanese Context	6
Bramhall Versus Hobbes: The Rhetoric of Religion vs. the Rhetoric of Philosophy	5
Textbook Treatments of Fallacies	5
Secundum Quid and the Pragmatics of Arguments. The Challenges of the Dialectical Tradition	5
Teaching the Fallacies	4
‘Argumentative Disobedience’ as a Strategy to Confront Hate Speech	3
Individual Differences in Argument Strength Discrimination	3
Argumentation in Philosophical Controversies	3
Adversariality in Argumentation: Shortcomings of Minimal Adversariality and A Possible Reconstruction	2
Negotiation as Practical Argumentation	2
Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Moral Foundations in Argumentation	2
When Evaluative Adjectives Prevent Contradiction in a Debate	2
Authority Argument Schemes, Types, and Critical Questions	2
Fernando Leal and Hubert Marraud: How Philosophers Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell−Copleston Debate	2
Why Argumentation Theory? Realizing the Practical Objectives of Argumentation Theory as the Study of Effectiveness Through Reasonableness	2
Fallacies and Their Place in the Foundations of Science	2
Logic Diagrams as Argument Maps in Eristic Dialectics	2

In Defense of a Normative Concept of Argument	1
Locke and “ad”	1
Social Justice, Fallacies of Argument, and Persistent Bias	1
Norms of Public Argumentation and the Ideals of Correctness and Participation	1
Introduction to the Special Issue on Fallacies	1
Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen & Nanon Labrie: argumentation between doctors and patients: understanding clinical argumentative discourse	1
The Fallacy of Misplaced Presumption	1
On Halting Meta-argument with Para-Argument	1
High Costs and Low Benefits: Analysis and Evaluation of the “I’m Not Stupid” Argument	1
Do Arguments for Global Warming Commit a Fallacy of Composition?	1
Frans H. Van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, Sara Greco, Ton Van Haaften, Nanon Labrie, Fernando Leal, and Peng Wu. Argumentative Style. A pragma-Dialectical Study of Functional Variety in Argumentative Discou	1
From Theory of Rhetoric to the Practice of Language Use: The Case of Appeals to Ethos Elements	1
Questions, Presuppositions and Fallacies	1
Epidemiology of Fallacies	1
Against the Neutral View of Poisoning the Well	1
“Then why not Show the Evidence?” Concluding Maneuvering by Appealing to Ignorance at China’s Diplomatic Press Conferences	1
Framing to Make an Argument: The Case of the Genocide Hashtag in the Russia-Ukraine war	1
Correction: Individual Differences in Argument Strength Discrimination	1
Presuppositional Fallacies	1
The Effects of Parliamentary Debate as a Pedagogy for Argumentation in L1 and L2 Contexts	1
The Dialectical Principle of Charity: A Procedure for a Critical Discussion	1
The Recursive Argument Structure	1
Disentangling Critical Questions from Argument Schemes	1
It’s not (only) about Getting the Last Word: Rhetorical Norms of Public Argumentation and the Responsibility to Keep the Conversation Going	1