DOUGLAS WALTON

| HOME | PAPERS | BOOKS | BIO | CV | LINKS | TALKS |

PAPERS
Please note: you will need the "Free" Acrobat Reader to read these papers.

 

On a Razor's Edge: Evaluating Arguments from Expert Opinion
Argument and Computation, 5(2-3), 2014, 139-159 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Argument and Computation. new

Baseballs and Arguments from Fairness
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 22(4), 2014, 423-449 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Publisher's Website new

A Dialectical Analysis of the Ad Baculum Fallacy
Informal Logic, 34(3), 2014, 276-310 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Informal Logic.new

Combining Explanation and Argumentation in Dialogue
F. Bex and D. Walton, Selected Papers from the 2011-2013 Workshops on Computational Models of Natural Argument, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (CMNA), to appear [uncorrected preprint posted].

Two Kinds of Arguments from Authority in the Ad Verecundiam Fallacy
D. Walton and M. Koszowy, Proceedings of ISSA 2014 [uncorrected preprint posted]. new

Argumentation Schemes for Argument from Analogy
Systematic Approaches to Argument by Analogy, ed. H. J. Ribeiro, Heidelberg, Springer, 2014, 23-40 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Springer.

Applying Recent Argumentation Methods to Some Ancient Examples of Plausible Reasoning
D. Walton, C. W. Tindale and T. F. Gordon, Argumentation, 28(1), 2014, 85-119 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Springer Link

Speech Acts and Indirect Threats in Ad Baculum Arguments: A Reply to Budzynska and Witek
Argumentation, 28(3), 2014, 317-324 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Springer Link

Argument from Analogy in Legal Rhetoric
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 21(3), 2013, 279-302 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Artificial Intelligence and Law.

Arguments from Fairness and Misplaced Priorities in Political Argumentation
D. Walton and H. V. Hansen, Journal of Politics and Law, 6(3), 2013, 78-94.

An Argumentation Model of Forensic Evidence in Fine Art Attribution [uncorrected preprint]. Published Version: Springer Link
AI and Society, 28(4), 2013, 509-530.

Implicatures as Forms of Argument [uncorrected preprint]. Published Version: Springer Link
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Perspectives on Pragmatics and Philosophy, ed. A. Capone et al. Berlin: Springer, 2013, 203-224.

How to Formalize Informal Logic [uncorrected preprint]. D. Walton and T. F. Gordon, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argument (OSSA), ed. D. Mohammed and M. Lewinski, Windsor, Ontario, OSSA, 2013, 1-13.

Teleological Justification of Argumentation Schemes
D. Walton and G. Sartor, Argumentation, 27(2), 2013, 111-142 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Springer Link

Value-Based Practical Reasoning
From Knowledge Representation to Argumentation in AI, Law and Policy Making: a Festschrift in Honour of Trevor Bench-Capon, ed. K. Atkinson, H. Prakken and A. Wyner. London: College Publications, 2013, 259-282 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: College Publications

Distinctive Features of Persuasion and Deliberation Dialogues
K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon and D. Walton, Argument and Computation, 4(2), 2013, 105-127 [abstract]. Published Version: Argument & Computation

The Epistemology of Scientific Evidence
D. Walton and N. Zhang, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 21(2), 2013, 173-219 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Artificial Intelligence and Law.

Argument Kinds and Argument Roles in the Ontario Provincial Election
H. V. Hansen and D. Walton, Journal of Argumentation in Context, 2(2), 2013, 226-258 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Argumentation in Context.

Burdens and Standards of Proof for Inference to the Best Explanation: Three Case Studies
F. J. Bex and D. Walton, Law, Probability and Risk, 11(2-3), 2012, 113-133 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Access from Publisher's Website

Character Attacks as Complex Strategies of Legal Argumentation
F. Macagno and D. Walton, International Journal of Law, Language and Discourse, 2(3), 2012, 59-117.

Using Argumentation Schemes for Argument Extraction: A Bottom-Up Method
International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence, 6(3), 2012, 33-61 [uncorrected preprint posted] . For published version see IJCINI

The Carneades Model of Argument Invention
D. Walton and T. F. Gordon, Pragmatics & Cognition, 20(1), 2012, 1-31 [preprint posted]. Published Version: Pragmatics & Cognition

Argument from Fairness in Judicial Reasoning
Argumentation 2012: International Conference on Alternative Methods of Argumentation in Law, ed. Michal Araszkiewicz et al., Brno: 2012, 103-118 [preprint posted].

A History of AI and Law in 50 Papers: 25 Years of the International Conference on AI and Law
T. Bench-Capon, M. Araszkiewicz, K. Ashley, K. Atkinson, F. Bex, F. Borges, D. Bourcier, D. Bourgine, J. G. Conrad, E. Francesconi, T. F. Gordon, G. Governatori, J. L. Leidner, D. D. Lewis, R. P. Loui, L. T. McCarty, H. Prakken, F. Schilder, E. Schweighofer, P. Thompson, A. Tyrrell, B. Verheij, D. N. Walton and A. Z. Wyner. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 20(3), 215-319. [preprint posted].

Argumentation Schemes for Statutory Interpretation
F. Macagno, D. Walton and G. Sartor, Argumentation 2012: International Conference on Alternative Methods of Argumentation in Law, ed. Michal Araszkiewicz et al., Brno: 2012, 61-75 [preprint posted].

Presumptions in Legal Argumentation
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Ratio Juris, 25(3), 2012, 271-300 [preprint posted]. Published Version: Ratio Juris

Argument and Explanation in the Context of Dialogue
F. Bex, K. Budzynska and D. Walton, Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Explanation-aware Computing (ExaCt 2012), ed. T. Roth-Berghofer, D. B. Leake and J. Cassens, 6-10.

Story Similarity in Arguments from Analogy
Informal Logic, 32(2), 2012, 190-218. [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Informal Logic

Building a System of Finding Objections to an Argument
Argumentation, 26(3), 2012, 369-391 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Springer Link

A Carneades Reconstruction of Popov v Hayashi
T. F. Gordon and D. Walton, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 20(1), 2012, 37-56 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Springer Link

Telological Argumentation to and from Motives
Law, Probability and Risk, 10, 2011, 203-223 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: OxfordLink

How to Refute an Argument Using Artificial Intelligence
Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 23(36), 2011, 123-154 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Preprint: SLGRLink

Reasoning About Knowledge Using Defeasible Logic
Argument and Computation 2(2-3), 2011, 131-155 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Argument and Computation

Formal Dialectical Systems and their Uses in the Study of Argumentation
E. C. W. Krabbe and D. Walton, Keeping in Touch with Pragma-Dialectics and Computation, ed. E. Feteris, B. Garssen and F. Snoeck Henkemans. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 2011, 245-263 [postprint]. Published Version: John Benjamins

Burden of Proof in a Modified Hamblin Dialogue System
Informal Logic, 31(4), 2011, 279-304 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Informal Logic

Modeling Critical Questions as Additional Premises
D. Walton and T. F. Gordon, Argument Cultures: Proceedings of the 8th International OSSA Conference , ed. F. Zenker, Windsor, 2011, [preprint posted].

Finding the Logic in Argumentation
Inside Arguments: Logic and the Study of Argumentation, ed. H. Ribeiro, Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2012, 37-55 [preprint posted].

Conductive Arguments in Ethical Deliberation
Conductive Argument: An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning, ed. J. A. Blair and R. H. Johnson, London, College Publications, 2011, 191-209 [preprint posted].

A Dialogue System Specification for Explanation
Synthese, 182(3), 2011, 349-374 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Springer Link

Reasoning from Paradigms and Negative Evidence
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Pragmatics & Cognition, 19(1), 2011, 92-116 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: Pragmatics and Cognition

An Argumentation Model of Deliberative Decision-Making
Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making, ed. J. Yearwood and A. Stranieri. Hershey, Pa.: IGI Global, 2011, 1-17.

Defeasible Reasoning and Informal Fallacies
Synthese, 179(3), 2011, 377-407 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version: Springer Link

Argument Mining by Applying Argumentation Schemes
Studies in Logic, 4(1), 2011, 38-64 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: Studies in Logic

Quotations and Presumptions: Dialogical Effects of Misquotations
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Informal Logic, 31, 2011, 26-54 [preprint posted]. Informal Logic

A Formal Model of Legal Proof Standards and Burdens
T. F. Gordon and D. Walton, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, ed. Frans H. van Eemeren et al., Amsterdam, SicSat, 2011, 644-655.

Computational Dialectic and Rhetorical Invention
AI and Society, 26(1), 2011, 3-17 [uncorrected preprint posted]. For published version see SpringerLink.

Burdens of Persuasion and Proof in Everyday Argumenation
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, ed. F. H. van Eemeren et al., Amsterdam, SicSat, 2011, 1940-1950.

Representing and Classifying Arguments on the Semantic Web
I. Rahwan, B. Banihashemi, C. Reed, D. Walton and S. Abdallah, The Knowledge Engineering Review, 26(4), 2011, 487-511 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: Cambridge University Press.

Burdens and Standards of Proof for Inference to the Best Explanation
F. J. Bex and D. Walton, Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: Proceedings of JURIX 2010, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2010, 37-46 [preprint posted].

Similarity, Precedent and Argument from Analogy
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 18 (3), 2010, 217-246 [preprint posted].Published Version: Springer Link

The Argumentative Uses of Emotive Language
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentacion, 1(1), 2010, 1-33 [preprint posted]. Published Version: Revista Iberamericano de Argumentacion

The Structure of Argumentation in Health Product Messages
Argument and Computation 1(3), 179-198, 2010 [uncorrected preprint posted] Published version: Informaworld

Types of Dialogue and Burdens of Proof
Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, ed. P. Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin and G. R. Simari, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2010, 13-24.

Probabilistic Semantics for the Carneades Argument Model Using Bayesian Networks
M. Grabmair, T. F. Gordon and D. Walton, Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, ed. Pietro Baroni, Frederico Cerutti, Massimilano Giacomin and Guillermo R. Simari, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2010, 255-266.

Why Fallacies Appear to be Better Arguments Than They Are
Informal Logic, 30(2), 2010, 159-184 [uncorrected preprint posted] Published version: Informal Logic

A Dialogue Model of Belief
Argument and Computation, 1(1), 2010, 23-46 [uncorrected preprint posted] Published version: Argument and Computation

Argumentation in the Framework of Deliberation Dialogue
D. Walton, K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, A. Wyner and D. Cartwright, Arguing Global Governance, ed. Corneliu Bjola and Markus Kornprobst, London, Routledge, 2010, 210-230. Published version: Routledge

Recent Trends in Evidence Law in China and the New Evidence Scholarship
N. Zhang and D. Walton, Law, Probability and Risk, 9(2), 2010, 103-129 [uncorrected preprint posted] Published version: doi: 10.1093/pr/mgq001

Wrenching from Context: The Manipulation of Commitments
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Argumentation, 24(3), 2010, 283-317 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: Springer Link.

What We Hide in Words: Emotive Words and Persuasive Definitions
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2010, 1997-2013 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Science Direct

Formalization of the Ad Hominem Argumentation Scheme
Journal of Applied Logic, 8, 2010, 1-21 [uncorrected preprint posted] doi:10.1016/j.jal.2008.07.002

Dichotomies and Oppositions in Legal Argumentation
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Ratio Juris, 23, 2010, 229-257 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published Version (Wiley)

Burden of Proof in Deliberation Dialogs
Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, ed. P. McBurney, I. Rahwan, S. Parsons and N. Maudet, Berlin, Springer, 2010, 1-22 [uncorrected preprint posted].

Defeasible Classifications and Inferences from Definitions
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Informal Logic, 30(1), 2010, 34-61 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic

Argument Visualization Tools for Corroborative Evidence
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science, Institute of Evidence Law and Forensic Science, Beijing, 2009, 32-49.

Classification and Ambiguity: The Role of Definition in a Conceptual System
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 16(29), 2009, 245-264.

Enthymemes and Argumentation Schemes in Health Product Ads
Proceedings of the Workshop W5: Computational Models of Natural Argument, Twenty-First International Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence, Pasadena, 2009, 49-56.

Explanations and Arguments Based on Practical Reasoning
Proceedings of Workshop W10: Explanation-Aware Computing, Twenty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Pasadena, 2009, 72-83.

Legal Reasoning with Argumentation Schemes
T. F. Gordon and D. Walton, 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ed. Carole D. Hafner, New York, Association for Computing Machinery, 2009, 137-146.

Dialectical Shifts Underlying Arguments from Consequences
Informal Logic, 29, 2009, 54-83 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.informallogic.ca

An Overview of the Use of Argumentation Schemes in Case Modeling
Modelling Legal Cases: Workshop Co-located with the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ed. Katie Atkinson, Barcelona, Huygens Editorial, 2009, 77-90 [uncorrected preprint posted].

Jumping to a Conclusion: Fallacies and Standards of Proof
D. Walton and T. F. Gordon, Informal Logic, 29, 2009, 215-243 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.informallogic.ca

Reasoning from Classifications and Definitions
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Argumentation, 23, 2009, 81-107 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/k1341517262861h7/

Enthymemes, Argumentation Schemes and Topics
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Logique et Analyse, 205, 2009, 39-56 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: Logique et Analyse

Objections, Rebuttals and Refutations
Argument Cultures: Proceedings of the 8th OSSA Conference, ed. Juho Ritola, CD-ROM, OSSA, Windsor, Ontario, 2009, 1-10.

Argumentation Theory: A Very Short Introduction
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, ed. Iyad Rahwan and Guillermo Simari,Berlin, Springer, 2009, 1-24 [book flyer] .

Proof Burdens and Standards
T. F. Gordon and D. Walton, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, ed. Iyad Rahwan and Guillermo Simari,Berlin, Springer, 2009, 239-260 [book flyer] .

Argument from Analogy in Law, the Classical Tradition, and Recent Theories
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Philosophy & Rhetoric, 42, 2009, 154-182 [uncorrected preprint posted].

Arguing from Definition to Verbal Classification: The Case of Redefining 'Planet' to Exclude Pluto
Informal Logic, 28, 2008, 129-154. Published version: http://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojsleddy/index.php/informal_logic/issue/view/77

Anticipating Objections in Argumentation
Rhetoric and Argumentation in the Beginning of the XXIst Century, ed Henrique Jales Ribeiro,University of Coimbra Press, Coimbra, Portugal, 2009, 87-109 [uncorrected preprint posted] .

Evaluating Corroborative Evidence
D. Walton and C. Reed, Argumentation, 22, 2008, 531-553 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/327683g16l362v8u/

A Dialogical Theory of Presumption
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 16, 2008, 209-243 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/u7q8068584113483/

Defeasibility in Judicial Opinion: Logical or Procedural?
D. M. Godden and D. Walton, Informal Logic, 28, 2008, 6-19.

Presumption, Burden of Proof and Lack of Evidence
L'Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria, 16, 2008, 49-71 [uncorrected version posted].

The Argumentative Structure of Persuasive Definitions
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 11, 2008, 525-549 [preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/fk1jx3v4k382x2hx/

The Three Bases for the Enthymeme: A Dialogical Theory
Journal of Applied Logic, 6, 2008, 361-379 [uncorrected version posted]. Published version available at ScienceDirect.

Proleptic Argumentation
Argumentation & Advocacy, 44, 2008, 143-154 [uncorrected preprint posted].

Persuasive Definitions, Values, Meanings and Implicit Disagreements
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Informal Logic, 28, 2008, 203--228.

Can Argumentation Help AI to Understand Explanation?
Kunstliche Intelligenz, 22 (2), 2008, 8--12 .

The Speech Act of Clarification in a Dialogue Model
Studies in Communication Sciences, 7, 2007, 127-159 [preprint posted].

Informal Logic and the Dialectical Approach to Argument
D. Walton and D. M. Godden, Reason Reclaimed, ed. H. V. Hansen and R. C. Pinto, Newport News, Virginia, Vale Press, 2007, 3-17.

Visualization Tools, Argumentation Schemes and Expert Opinion Evidence in Law
Law, Probability and Risk, 6, 2007, 119-140. Publisher's Website

Types of Dialogue, Dialectical Relevance and Textual Congruity
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Anthropology & Philosophy: International Multidisciplinary Journal, 8, 2007, 101-119 [uncorrected preprint posted].

Advances in the Theory of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions
D. M. Godden and D. Walton, Informal Logic, 27, 2007, 267-292 [preprint posted].

Metadialogues for Resolving Burden of Proof Disputes
Argumentation, 21, 2007, 291-316 [preprint posted].

Redefining Knowledge in a Way Suitable for Argumentation Theory
D. Walton and D. M. Godden, Dissensus & the Search for Common Ground: Proceedings of OSSA June 2007, Windsor, CD-ROM, 2007, 1-13.

Argumentation Schemes in Dialogue
C. Reed and D. Walton, Dissensus & the Search for Common Ground: Proceedings of OSSA, June 2007, Windsor, Ontario, CD-ROM, 2007, 1-11.

The Fallaciousness of Threats: Character and Ad Baculum
D. Walton and F. Macagno. Argumentation, 21, 2007, 63-81.

The Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof
T. F. Gordon, H. Prakken and D. Walton. Artificial Intelligence, 171, 2007, 875-896.

Identifying and Analyzing Arguments in a Text
Invited paper read at the Argumentation in (Con)Text Conference in Bergen, Norway, Jan. 4, 2007 [uncorrected preprint].

Dialogical Models of Explanation
Explanation-Aware Computing: Papers from the 2007 AAAI Workshop, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Technical Report WS-07-06, Menlo Park California, AAAI Press, 2007, 1-9 [uncorrected version posted].

Argument Diagramming in Logic, Law and Artificial Intelligence
C. Reed, D. Walton and F. Macagno, Knowledge Engineering Review, 22, 2007, 87-109 [uncorrected preprint]. Abstract: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1294760

Evaluating Practical Reasoning
Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Logic and Philosophy of Science, 157, 2007, 197-240.
Published version available at: http://www.springerlink.com/content/q9402gv46t415504/fulltext.pdf

A Theory of Presumption for Everyday Argumentation
D. M. Godden and D. Walton. Pragmatics & Cognition, 15:2, 2007, 313-346. [uncorrected page-proofs posted.]

How to Make and Defend a Proposal in Deliberation Dialogue
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 14, 2006, 177-239. [Preprint posted.]
Available on the Springer Web Site: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-006-9025-x

Argument from Appearance: A New Argumentation Scheme
Logique et Analyse, 195, 2006, 319-340.

Examination Dialogue: An Argumentation Framework for Critically Questioning an Expert Opinion
Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 2006, 745-777.

Poisoning the Well
Argumentation, 20, 2006, 273-307.
Available on the Publisher's Web Site: Springer Website

Argumentative Reasoning Patterns
F. Macagno and D. Walton, Proceedings of 6th CMNA (Computational Models of Natural Argument)Workshop, ECAI (European Conference on Artificial Intelligence), Rivadel Garda, Italy, August 28 - September 1, Trento, Italy, University of Trento, 2006, 48-51.

Rules for Reasoning from Knowledge and Lack of Knowledge
D. Walton, Philosophia, 34, 2006, 355-376 . Springer Link

Common Knowledge in Argumentation
D. Walton and F. Macagno, Studies in Communication Sciences, 6, 2006, 3-26 . [link to online version posted]

Arthur, George and the Mystery of the MissingMotive: Towards a Theory of Evidentiary Reasoning about Motives
D. Walton and B. Schafer, International Commentary on Evidence, 2006 Vol. 4, Issue 2, 1-47 . [link to online version posted]

Argument from Expert Opinion as Legal Evidence: Critical Questions and Admissibility Criteria of Expert Testimony in the American Legal System
D. M. Godden and D. Walton, Ratio Juris, 19, 2006, 261-286.

Epistemic and Dialectical Models of Begging the Question
Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Logic and Philosophy of Science, 152, 2006, 237-284.
Definitive version can be found at Springer Link Synthese (subscription / proxy access required).

Using Conversation Policies to Solve Problems of Ambiguity in Argumentation and Artificial Intelligence
Pragmatics and Cognition,14, 2006, 3-36 -
Definitive version can be found at IngentaConnect Pragmatics & Cognition (subscription / proxy access required)

Evaluating Corroborative Evidence
D. Walton and C. Reed, Proceedings of the Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), Amsterdam, SicSat, 2006, 881-885.

Araucaria as a Tool for Diagramming Arguments in Teaching and Studying Philosophy
G. Rowe, F. Macagno, C. Reed and D. Walton, Teaching Philosophy, 29, 2006, 111-124.

Alternatives to Suspicion and Trust as Conditions for Challenge in Argumentative Dialogues
D. Walton and D. M. Godden, Engaging Argument: Selected Papers from the 2005 NCA/AFA [Alta] Summer Conference on Argumentation, ed. Patricia Riley, Washington DC, National Communication Association, 2006, 438-444.

The Carneades Argumentation Framework: Using Presumptions and Exceptions to Model Critical Questions
T. F. Gordon and D. Walton, Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006, ed. P. E. Dunne and T. J. M. Bench-Capon, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2006, 195-207.

Pierson v. Post Revisited
T. F. Gordon and D. Walton, Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006, ed. P. E. Dunne and T. J. M. Bench-Capon, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2006, 208-219.

The Impact of Argumentation on Artificial Intelligence
D. Walton and D. M. Godden, in Considering Pragma-Dialectics, ed. Peter Houtlosser and Agnes van Rees, Mahwah, New Jersey, Erlbaum, 2006, 287-299. [uncorrected page proofs posted.]

Common Knowledge in Legal Reasoning about Evidence
D. Walton and F. Macagno, International Commentary on Evidence, 3, 2005, 1-42.

Deceptive Arguments Containing Persuasive Language and Persuasive Definitions
Argumentation, 19, 2005, 159-186.

Persuasion Dialogue in Online Dispute Resolution
D. Walton and D. M. Godden,
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 13, 2005, 273-295.

Practical Reasoning and Proposing: Tools for e-democracy
Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, ed. Marie-Francine Morens and Peter Spyns, Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Amsterdam IOS Press, 2005, 113-114.

How to Evaluate Argumentation Using Schemes, Diagrams, Critical Questions and Dialogues
Studies in Communication Sciences, Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction, ed. Marcelo Dascal, Frans H. van Eemeren, Eddo Rigotti, Sorin Stati and Andrea Rocci, Special Issue, June 2005, 51-74.

Dialogues about the Burden of Proof
H. Prakken, C. Reed and D. Walton, Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Held June 6-11, 2005 in Bologna, Italy, New York, The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), 2005, 115-124.

What Role Can Rational Argument Play in ADR and Online Dispute Resolution?
D. Walton and A. R. Lodder, IAAIL Workshop Series, Second International ODR Workshop, ed. John Zelzniknow and Arno R. Lodder, Nijmegen, Wolf Legal Publishers, 2005, 69-76.

Critical Questions in Computational Models of Legal Argument
D. Walton and T. F. Gordon, IAAIL Workshop Series, International Workshop on Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence and Law, ed. Paul E. Dunne and Trevor Bench-Capon, Nijmegen, Wolf Legal Publishers, 2005, 103-111.

Justification of Argumentation Schemes
The Australasian Journal of Logic, 3, 2005, 13 pages.

Argumentation Schemes and Enthymemes
D. Walton and C. Reed, Synthese, 145, 2005, 339-370.
Springer Link

Begging the Question in Arguments Based on Testimony
Argumentation, 19, 2005, 85-113.

An Automated System for Argument Invention in Law Using Argumentation and Heuristic Search Procedures
Ratio Juris, 18, 2005, 434-463.

The Nature and Status of Critical Questions in Argumentation Schemes
D. Walton and D. M. Godden,
The Uses of Argument: Proceedings of a Conference at McMaster University, 18-21 May 2005, ed. David Hitchcock, Hamilton, ON, OSSA, 2005 pp. 476-484.

Pragmatic and Idealized Models of Knowledge and Ignorance
American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 42 No.1, 2005.  pp. 59-69

Towards a Formal and Implemented Model of Argumentation Schemes in Agent Communication
C. Reed and D. Walton, Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, ed. Iyad Rahwan, Pavlos Moraitis and Chris Reed, Berlin and Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag, 2005. pp. 19-30

Denying the Antecedent as a Legitimate Argumentative Strategy: A Dialectical Model
D. M. Godden and D. Walton, Informal Logic, 24, 2004, 219-243.

Classification of Fallacies of Relevance
Informal Logic, 24, 2004, 71-103.

A New Dialectical Theory of Explanation
Philosophical Explorations, Vol. 7 No.1, 2004.  pp. 71-89

Argumentation Schemes and Burden of Proof
H. Prakken, C. Reed and D. Walton, Working Notes of the 4th International Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA2004), ed. F. Grasso, C. Reed and G. Carenini, Valencia, 2004.

Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominen Argument
Argumentation, Vol. 18, 2004.  pp. 359-368

Criteria of Rationality for Evaluating Public Rhetoric
Talking Democracy: Historical Perspectives on Rhetoric and Democracy, ed. Benedetto Fontana, Cary J. Nederman and Gary Remer, University Park, Pennsylvania. State University Press, 2004. pp. 295-330
[preprint posted]

Is there a Burden of Questioning?
Artificial Intelligence and Law, Vol. 11, 2003. pp. 1-43.

The Interrogation as a Type of Dialogue
Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 35, 2003. pp. 1771-1802

Towards a Formal Account of Reasoning About Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalizations
F. Bex, H. Prakken, C. Reed and D. Walton. From: Artificial Intelligence and Law, Vol. 11, 2003. pp. 125-165

Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations in Reasoning about Evidence
H. Prakken, C. Reed and D. Walton, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Edinburgh, 2003. New York: ACM Press 2003.  pp. 32-41

Argumentation Schemes in Argument-as-Process and Argument-as-Product
C. Reed and D. Walton, Proceedings of the Conference Celebrating Informal Logic @25, Windsor, Ontario, 2003

Argumentation Schemes: The Basis of Conditional Relevance
Michigan State Law Review, Vol. 2003(4), 2003.  pp. 1205-1242

Defining Conditional Relevance Using Linked Arguments and Argumentation Schemes: A Commentary on Professor Callen's Article Rationality and Relevancy: Conditional Relevancy and Constrained Resources
Michigan State Law Review, Vol. 2003(4), 2003.  pp. 1305-1314

Diagramming, Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions
C. Reed and D. Walton, Anyone Who Has a View: Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, ed. Frans H. van Eemeren, J. Anthony Blair, Charles A. Willard and A. Francisca Snoek Henkemans, Dordrecht, Kluwer, 2003. pp. 195-211

Are Some Modus Ponens Arguments Deductively Invalid?
Informal Logic, Vol. 22, 2002. pp. 19-46

Argumentation Schemes and Defeasible Inferences
D. Walton and C. Reed, Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, ed. Guiseppe Carenini, Floriana Grasso and Chris Reed, ECAI 2002, 15th European Conference on AI, 2002.

The Sunk Costs Fallacy or Argument From Waste
Argumentation, Vol. 16, 2002.  pp. 473-503 

Abductive, Presumptive and Plausible Arguments
Informal Logic, Vol. 21, 2001. pp. 141-169

Applications of Argument Schemes
D. Walton and C. Reed, Proceedings of the 4th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA2001), ed. H. V. Hansen, C. W. Tindale, J. A. Blair,  and R. H. Johnson, 2001, Windsor, Canada, CD ROM 

Enthymemes, Common Knowlege, and Plausible Inference
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 34, 2001. pp. 93-112

Persuasive Definitions and Public Policy Arguments
Argumentation and Advocacy, Vol. 37, 2001. pp. 117-132

Searching for the Roots of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem
Argumentation, Vol. 15, 2001. pp. 207-221

Use of Ad HominemArgument in Political Discourse
Argumentation and Advocacy, Vol. 15, 2001. pp. 207-221

Alfred Sidgwick: A Little-Known Precursor of Informal Logic and Argumentation
Argumentation, 36, 2000. pp. 179-195.

Argumentation and Theory of Evidence
New Trends in Criminal Investigation and Evidence, Vol. 2, 2000. pp. 711-732

Case Study of the Use of a Circumstantial Ad Hominem in Political Argumentation
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 33, 2000. pp. 101-115

New Dialectical Rules for Ambiguity
Informal Logic, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2000. pp. 261-274

The Place of Dialogue Theory in Logic, Computer Science and Communication Studies
Synthese: an International Journal for Epistemology, Logic and Philosophy of Science, Vol. 123, 2000. pp. 327-346

Applying Labelled Deductive Systems and Multi-Agent Systems to Source-Based Argumentation
Journal of Logic and Computation, Vol. 9, 1999. pp. 63-80

The Appeal to Ignorance, or Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 367-377

Dialectical Relevance in Persuasion Dialogue
Informal Logic, Vol. 19, 1999. pp. 119-143.

Ethotic Arguments and Fallacies : The Credibility Function in Multi-Agent Dialogue Systems
Pragmatics and Cognition, Vol. 7, 1999. pp. 177-203.

The Fallacy of Many Questions: On the Notions of Complexity, Loadedness and Unfair Entrapment in Interrogative Theory
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 379-383

Historical Origins of Argumentum ad Consequentiam
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 251-264.

The Identity Crisis of Informal Logic
Proceedings of the Fourth ISSA Conference, ed. Frans van Eemeren et al, 1999, pp. 853-857.

The New Dialectic: A Method of Evaluating an Argument Used for Some Purpose in a Given Case
ProtoSociology: An International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 70-91

Profiles of Dialogue for Evaluating Arguments from Ignorance
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 53-71.

Rethinking the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 161-182.

A Pragmatic Model of Legal Disputation
Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 73, 1998. pp. 711-735.

Actions and Inconsistency: the Closure Problem of Practical Reasoning
Contemporary Action Theory, ed. Ghita Holmstrom-Hintikka and Raimo Tuomela, Vol. 1, Dordrecht, Kluwer, 1997, 159-175.

How Can Logic Best Be Applied to Arguments?
Logic Journal of the IGPL (Interest Group on Pure and Applied Logic), vol. 5, 1997. pp. 603-614  

Judging How Heavily a Question is Loaded: A Pragmatic Method
Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, Vol. 17, 1997. pp. 53-71

What is Propaganda, and What Exactly is Wrong With It?
Public Affairs Quarterly, Vol. 11, 1997. pp. 383-413

The Argument of the Beard
Informal Logic, Vol. 18, 1996. pp. 235-259

Plausible Deniability and Evasion of Burden of Proof
Argumentation, Vol. 10, 1996. pp. 47-58

Practical Reasoning and the Structure of Fear Appeal Arguments
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 29, 1996. pp. 301-313

The Witch Hunt as a Structure of Argumentation
Argumentation, Vol. 10, 1996, pp. 389-407

New Methods for Evaluating Arguments
Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, Vol. 15, 1996. pp. 44-65

The Straw Man Fallacy
Logic and Argumentation, ed. J. van Benthem, F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst and F. Veltman. Amsterdam, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, North-Holland, 1996. pp. 115-128

Appeal to Pity: A Case Study of the Argumentum ad Misericordiam
Argumentation, Vol. 9, 1995. pp. 769-784

Begging the Question as a Pragmatic Fallacy
Synthese, Vol. 100, 1994. pp. 95-131

Alethic, Epistemic, and Dialectical Models of Argument
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 2, 1993. pp. 302-310

Commitment, Types of Dialogue, and Fallacies
Informal Logic, Vol. 14, 1993. pp. 93-103

The Speech Act of Presumption
Pragmatics and Cognition, Vol. 1, 1993. pp. 125-148

After Analytic Philosophy, What's Next? An Analytic Philosopher's Perspective
The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Vol. VI, 1992. pp. 123-142

Nonfallacious Arguments from Ignorance
American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 29, 1992. pp. 381-387

Circular Reasoning
A Companion to Epistemology, ed. Jonathan Dancy and Ernest Sosa, Oxford, Blackwell, 1992, 66.

Questionable Questions in Question Period: Prospects for an Informal Logic of Parliamentary Discourse
Logic and Political Culture, ed. E.M. Barth and E.C.W. Krabbe, Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1992, 87-95

Which of the Fallacies Are Fallacies of Relevance?
Argumentation, 6, 1992,237-250

Rules for Plausible Reasoning
Informal Logic, Vol. 14, 1992. pp. 33-51

Types of Dialogue, Dialectal Shifts and Fallacies
Argumentation Illuminated, ed. Frans H. van Eemeren et al., Amsterdam, SICSAT, 1992, 133-147

Bias, Critical Doubt, and Fallacies
Argumentation and Advocacy, Vol. 28, 1991. pp. 1-22

Critical Faults and Fallacies of Questioning
Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 15, 1991. pp. 337-366

Hamblin on the Standard Treatment of Fallacies
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 24, 1991. pp. 353-361

Ignoring Qualifications (Secundum Quid) as a Subfallacy of Hasty Generalization
Logique & Analyse, Vol. 129-130, 1990. pp. 113-154

What is Reasoning? What is an Argument?
Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 87, 1990. pp. 399-419.

Reasoned Use of Expertise in Argumentation
Argumentation, Vol. 3, 1989. pp. 59-73.

Dialogue Theory for Critical Thinking
Argumentation, Vol. 3, 1989. pp. 169-184.

Burden of Proof
Argumentation, Vol. 2, 1988. pp. 233-254.

The Ad Hominem Argument as an Informal Fallacy
Argumentation, Vol. 1, 1987, pp. 317-331

The Virtue of Courage
The World and I, Vol. 12, 1987. pp. 595-609

Are Circular Arguments Necessarily Vicious?
American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol.22, 1985. pp. 263-274

New Directions in the Logic of Dialogue
Synthese, 63, 1985, 259-274.

Pragmatic Inferences About Actions
Synthese, Vol.65, 1985. pp. 211-233

Games, Graphs and Circular Arguments
D. Walton and L. M. Batten, Logique et Analyse, 106, 1984. pp. 133-164

Enthymemes
Logique et Analyse, 103-104, 1983, 395-410.

The Ethical Force of Definitions
Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 6, 1980. pp. 16-18

Omitting, Refraining, and Letting Happen
American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 17, 1980. pp. 319-326

On the Logical Form of Some Commonplace Action Expressions
Grazer Philosophische Studien, Vol. 10, 1980. pp. 141-148

Petitio Principii and Argument Analysis
Informal Logic: The First International Symposium, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, Inverness, California, Edgepress, 1980, 41-54

Why is the Ad Populum a Fallacy?
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 13, 1980. pp. 264-278

Logical Form and Agency
Philosophical Studies, Vol. 29, 1976. pp. 75-89

A Note on Motives, Consequences, and Value
The Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. X, 1976. pp. 149-150

St. Anselm and the Logical Syntax of Agency  
Franciscan Studies, Vol. 36, 1976. pp. 298-312

Philosophical Perspectives on the Insanity Defense
The Human Context, Vol. 7, 1975. pp. 546-560

Control
Behaviorism, 2(2), 1974, 162-171.
Publisher's website: Springer Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies

back to home page