ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Argumentative Reasoning: Development, Training, and Relevance to Academic Outcomes.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Argumentative reasoning (AR) refers to the kind of reasoning used when individuals engage in argument about a disputed claim or proposed action. In its mature, most proficient form, AR involves several reasoning skills such as providing effective justification for one's claims, anticipating and defending against challenges to those claims, and critiquing the position and reasoning of one's opponent in the argument. Mature AR also involves an idealized understanding of argument as a rule-governed, rational process in which arguers seek to persuade one another through reasons, rather than through force or emotion. WE There is compelling evidence that proficiency in AR, resulting from natural development or from targeted educational experiences and training, is associated with better academic outcomes in middle childhood, adolescence, and emerging adulthood. These outcomes include greater depth and breadth of learning in specific content areas (e.g., science), more effective written communication, and higher order critical thinking. This article begins with a discussion of the nature and significance of AR, followed by an account of the link between AR and academic achievement in primary and secondary school. In the principal sections of the article, the development of AR skills is discussed along with the results of explicit efforts to train AR. The section on training effects includes a discussion of how motivation, culture, and gender influence student engagement in argument-based classroom activities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.