Part of
Controversy and Confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theoryEdited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen
[Controversies 6] 2008
► pp. 27–49
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen
[Controversies 6] 2008
► pp. 27–49
Dichotomies and types of debate
Cited by (38)
Cited by 38 other publications
Bates, Carolina Figueras
2024. The Effect of Empathic Mediation in Conflict Resolution. In Accessing the Public Sphere, ► pp. 113 ff. 
FUCHS‐GALLEZOT, Magali & Corinne FORTIN
2024. The Current “Synthesis versus Extended Theory of Evolution” Controversy. In The Evolution of Life: Teaching, Learning and Training, ► pp. 117 ff.
Foderaro, Antonella & David Gunnarsson Lorentzen
2023. Argumentative practices and patterns in debating climate change on Twitter. Aslib Journal of Information Management 75:1 ► pp. 131 ff.
Almeida Rodrigues Lima, Cecília
2021. Telenovela e controvérsias. Tríade: Comunicação, Cultura e Mídia 9:21 ► pp. 168 ff.
Greco, Sara & Chiara Jermini-Martinez Soria
2021. Mediators’ reframing as a constitutive element of a reconciliatory argumentative style. Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:1 ► pp. 73 ff.
Ilie, Cornelia
2021. Discussion, dispute or controversy?. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 9:2 ► pp. 237 ff.
Abrantes, Paulo C.
Greco, Roberto
2020. The role and the impact of interdisciplinarity on the relational models of intervention in the doctor-patient communication. In Controversies and interdisciplinarity [Controversies, 16], ► pp. 217 ff.
Lorentzen, David Gunnarsson
2020. Bridging polarised Twitter discussions: the interactions of the users in the middle. Aslib Journal of Information Management 73:2 ► pp. 129 ff.
Malloy, Jacquelynn A., Kelly N. Tracy, Roya Q. Scales, Kristin Menickelli & W. David Scales
2020. It’s Not About Being Right: Developing Argument Through Debate. Journal of Literacy Research 52:1 ► pp. 79 ff.
Renaut, Laurène & Laura Ascone
2019. Contre-discours au discours de haine djihadiste : de l’expression de la conflictualité à la fabrique du doute. Semen :47
Shoham, Kuti
2019. Locke’s and Leibniz’s virtual debate over Of our knowledge of the existence of God
. In Controversies in the Contemporary World [Controversies, 15], ► pp. 29 ff.
Van Herzele, Ann & Noelle Aarts
2019. Arguing Along Fault-lines: A Rhetorical Analysis of Public Divides over Wildlife Comeback. Conservation and Society 17:4 ► pp. 343 ff.
David, Joseph E.
2017. DIVINITY, LAW, AND THE LEGAL TURN IN THE STUDY OF RELIGIONS. Journal of Law and Religion 32:1 ► pp. 172 ff.
Chateauraynaud, Francis
2016. Pragmatique des transformations et sociologie des controverses. In Histoires pragmatiques, ► pp. 349 ff.
Jakaza, Ernest & Marianna Visser
2016. ‘Subjectivity’ in newspaper reports on ‘controversial’ and ‘emotional’ debates: An appraisal and controversy analysis. Language Matters 47:1 ► pp. 3 ff.
Rennes, Juliette
2016. Les controverses politiques et leurs frontières. Études de communication :47 ► pp. 21 ff.
Sariel, Aviram
Scarafile, Giovanni
Uzelgun, Mehmet ali, Marcin Lewiński & Paula Castro
2016. Favorite Battlegrounds of Climate Action. Science Communication 38:6 ► pp. 699 ff.
Alexis, Lucie & Jérôme Ravat
2015. Désactiver la violence verbale : pacification et disqualification au moyen de la politesse dans Ce soir (ou jamais !). Semen :40
Lewiński, Marcin
2015. Debating multiple positions in multi-party online deliberation. In Argumentation in Political Deliberation [Benjamins Current Topics, 76], ► pp. 151 ff.
Lewiński, Marcin
2016. Shale gas debate in Europe: Pro-and-con dialectics and argumentative polylogues. Discourse & Communication 10:6 ► pp. 553 ff.
Oger, Claire
2015. « La polémique est un mode de gestion socio-discursif du conflit dans les sociétés démocratiques ». Mots :108 ► pp. 155 ff.
Van Herzele, Ann, Noelle Aarts & Jim Casaer
2015. Wildlife comeback in Flanders: tracing the fault lines and dynamics of public debate. European Journal of Wildlife Research 61:4 ► pp. 539 ff.
Lewiński, Marcin & Mark Aakhus
2014. Argumentative Polylogues in a Dialectical Framework: A Methodological Inquiry. Argumentation 28:2 ► pp. 161 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
2013. Research in Related Disciplines and Non-Anglophone Areas. In Handbook of Argumentation Theory, ► pp. 1 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
2014. Research in Related Disciplines and Non-Anglophone Areas. In Handbook of Argumentation Theory, ► pp. 677 ff.
van Laar, Jan Albert & Erik C. W. Krabbe
2013. The Burden of Criticism: Consequences of Taking a Critical Stance. Argumentation 27:2 ► pp. 201 ff.
van Laar, Jan Albert & Erik C.W. Krabbe
2016. Fair and unfair strategies in public controversies. Journal of Argumentation in Context 5:3 ► pp. 315 ff.
Dascal, Marcelo
2012. Is There a Controversy Concerning the Morality of the Occupation and Its Implications?1. In The Impacts of Lasting Occupation, ► pp. 61 ff.
Dascal, Marcelo
2014. Dialogue of Rationalities: A Case Study. In Interdisciplinary Works in Logic, Epistemology, Psychology and Linguistics [Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning, 3], ► pp. 219 ff.
Spranzi, Marta
2012. The Nature and Purpose of Aristotelian Dialectic Revisited: Argumentation Theory, Scientific Controversies and Epistemology. In Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory [Argumentation Library, 22], ► pp. 163 ff.
Amossy, Ruth
2011. La coexistence dans le dissensus. Semen :31 ► pp. 25 ff.
Amossy, Ruth
2015. Quelle vocation empirique pour l’argumentation dans le discours ?. Argumentation et analyse du discours 15
Amossy, Ruth
2021. Public Controversy and Polemics: Some Attempts at Definitions. In In Defense of Polemics [Argumentation Library, 42], ► pp. 27 ff.
Amossy, Ruth
2021. Managing Disagreement in Democracies: Towards a Rhetoric of Dissensus. In In Defense of Polemics [Argumentation Library, 42], ► pp. 9 ff.
Amossy, Ruth & Marcel Burger
2011. Introduction : la polémique médiatisée. Semen :31 ► pp. 7 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 january 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.