Cognitive Processing of Informal Argumentation
Summary
Informal argumentation refers to the reasoning processes by which individuals interpret, evaluate and generate arguments expressed in natural language across everyday contexts. Unlike formal logic, informal argumentation relies on rhetorical cues, prior knowledge and heuristics to assess the strength of claims, counter‐claims and evidence. Cognitive mechanisms such as source monitoring, belief updating and mental model construction play a central role in how interlocutors discern plausibility, detect fallacies and revise judgments. Dual‐route theories suggest that both fast, intuitive evaluations and slower, analytic scrutiny contribute to argument comprehension. In real‐world discourse—from social media debates to courtroom testimony—these processes shape persuasion, belief polarisation and collective decision making. Recent advances have begun to map the neural correlates of evaluative reasoning, elucidate cross‐cultural differences in argumentative norms and inform the design of educational interventions that foster critical thinking.
Research from Nature Portfolio
No recent Nature Portfolio content available.
Cognitive Processing of Informal Argumentation publication trend
The graph below shows the total number of articles in cognitive processing of informal argumentation across all publications each year (not limited to Nature Index journals).
Technical terms
Informal Argumentation: Reasoning in natural language contexts, involving everyday claims and counter‐claims rather than formal logical proofs.
Source Reliability: The perceived trustworthiness and expertise of an information provider, which modulates how arguments are evaluated.
Believability: The subjective assessment of how likely a proposition is to be true, influenced by content and source cues.
Accountability: The extent to which a speaker is held responsible for the truth or falsity of their assertion.
Explanation as Communicative Act: An utterance intended to clarify causes or reasons, affecting both message acceptance and perceptions of the explainer.
References
- The Bi-directional Relationship between Source Characteristics and Message Content. Frontiers in Psychology (2018).
- The effect of source claims on statement believability and speaker accountability. Memory & Cognition (2021).
- The impact of explanations as communicative acts on belief in a claim: The role of source reliability. Cognition (2023).
About these summaries
This Nature Research Intelligence Topic summary is created with the cited references and a large language model. We take care to ground generated text with facts, and have systems in place to gain human feedback on the overall quality of the process in line with our AI principles. We strive to create accurate and useful summaries for people unfamiliar with the research topic and that supports this goal. These pages are a beta release and will be updated as we learn how best to help people gain value from a research topic summary.
Turn complex research questions into confident strategic decisions
When you're under pressure to set direction, justify investment, or understand your competitive position, you need more than raw data — you need trusted insights you can act on.
Benchmark your performance against global peers using robust, methodologically sound analysis.
Combine quantitative metrics with qualitative expert insight to uncover strengths, gaps and emerging opportunities.
Gain tailored, decision-ready recommendations aligned to your strategic priorities.
Talk to us to learn more about our data dashboards and bespoke strategy reports.
Grow research skills, confidence and careers with training built for every stage of the research lifecycle.
Developed with Nature Portfolio journal Editors and internationally renowned experts. Discover three ways to learn:
Self-paced, online courses in convenient bite-sized units, covering key skills across scientific writing, publishing, grant writing, data analysis, and more.
Expert trainer-led workshops with hands-on exercises and real-time feedback across core research skills, delivered via interactive group sessions.
Editor-led workshops combining core principles in writing and publishing, personalised 1:1 feedback from Nature Portfolio Editors and hands-on exercises.
Explore course catalogues and workshop agendas, enquire about the options or request institutional pricing.