reasoning essay definition

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Definition of reasoning

• intellection
• ratiocination

Examples of reasoning in a Sentence

These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'reasoning.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.

Word History

14th century, in the meaning defined at sense 1

Phrases Containing reasoning

• line of reasoning

Dictionary Entries Near reasoning

reasonable part

Cite this Entry

“Reasoning.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reasoning. Accessed 15 Aug. 2024.

Kids Definition

Kids definition of reasoning, more from merriam-webster on reasoning.

Nglish: Translation of reasoning for Spanish Speakers

Britannica English: Translation of reasoning for Arabic Speakers

Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article about reasoning

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

Plural and possessive names: a guide, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, how to use accents and diacritical marks, popular in wordplay, 8 words for lesser-known musical instruments, it's a scorcher words for the summer heat, 7 shakespearean insults to make life more interesting, 10 words from taylor swift songs (merriam's version), 9 superb owl words, games & quizzes.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• How to write an argumentative essay | Examples & tips

How to Write an Argumentative Essay | Examples & Tips

Published on July 24, 2020 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on July 23, 2023.

An argumentative essay expresses an extended argument for a particular thesis statement . The author takes a clearly defined stance on their subject and builds up an evidence-based case for it.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

When do you write an argumentative essay, approaches to argumentative essays, introducing your argument, the body: developing your argument, concluding your argument, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about argumentative essays.

You might be assigned an argumentative essay as a writing exercise in high school or in a composition class. The prompt will often ask you to argue for one of two positions, and may include terms like “argue” or “argument.” It will frequently take the form of a question.

The prompt may also be more open-ended in terms of the possible arguments you could make.

Argumentative writing at college level

At university, the vast majority of essays or papers you write will involve some form of argumentation. For example, both rhetorical analysis and literary analysis essays involve making arguments about texts.

In this context, you won’t necessarily be told to write an argumentative essay—but making an evidence-based argument is an essential goal of most academic writing, and this should be your default approach unless you’re told otherwise.

Examples of argumentative essay prompts

At a university level, all the prompts below imply an argumentative essay as the appropriate response.

Your research should lead you to develop a specific position on the topic. The essay then argues for that position and aims to convince the reader by presenting your evidence, evaluation and analysis.

• Don’t just list all the effects you can think of.
• Do develop a focused argument about the overall effect and why it matters, backed up by evidence from sources.
• Don’t just provide a selection of data on the measures’ effectiveness.
• Do build up your own argument about which kinds of measures have been most or least effective, and why.
• Don’t just analyze a random selection of doppelgänger characters.
• Do form an argument about specific texts, comparing and contrasting how they express their thematic concerns through doppelgänger characters.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

An argumentative essay should be objective in its approach; your arguments should rely on logic and evidence, not on exaggeration or appeals to emotion.

There are many possible approaches to argumentative essays, but there are two common models that can help you start outlining your arguments: The Toulmin model and the Rogerian model.

Toulmin arguments

The Toulmin model consists of four steps, which may be repeated as many times as necessary for the argument:

• Make a claim
• Provide the grounds (evidence) for the claim
• Explain the warrant (how the grounds support the claim)
• Discuss possible rebuttals to the claim, identifying the limits of the argument and showing that you have considered alternative perspectives

The Toulmin model is a common approach in academic essays. You don’t have to use these specific terms (grounds, warrants, rebuttals), but establishing a clear connection between your claims and the evidence supporting them is crucial in an argumentative essay.

Say you’re making an argument about the effectiveness of workplace anti-discrimination measures. You might:

• Claim that unconscious bias training does not have the desired results, and resources would be better spent on other approaches
• Cite data to support your claim
• Explain how the data indicates that the method is ineffective
• Anticipate objections to your claim based on other data, indicating whether these objections are valid, and if not, why not.

Rogerian arguments

The Rogerian model also consists of four steps you might repeat throughout your essay:

• Discuss what the opposing position gets right and why people might hold this position
• Highlight the problems with this position
• Present your own position , showing how it addresses these problems
• Suggest a possible compromise —what elements of your position would proponents of the opposing position benefit from adopting?

This model builds up a clear picture of both sides of an argument and seeks a compromise. It is particularly useful when people tend to disagree strongly on the issue discussed, allowing you to approach opposing arguments in good faith.

Say you want to argue that the internet has had a positive impact on education. You might:

• Acknowledge that students rely too much on websites like Wikipedia
• Argue that teachers view Wikipedia as more unreliable than it really is
• Suggest that Wikipedia’s system of citations can actually teach students about referencing
• Suggest critical engagement with Wikipedia as a possible assignment for teachers who are skeptical of its usefulness.

You don’t necessarily have to pick one of these models—you may even use elements of both in different parts of your essay—but it’s worth considering them if you struggle to structure your arguments.

Regardless of which approach you take, your essay should always be structured using an introduction , a body , and a conclusion .

Like other academic essays, an argumentative essay begins with an introduction . The introduction serves to capture the reader’s interest, provide background information, present your thesis statement , and (in longer essays) to summarize the structure of the body.

Hover over different parts of the example below to see how a typical introduction works.

The spread of the internet has had a world-changing effect, not least on the world of education. The use of the internet in academic contexts is on the rise, and its role in learning is hotly debated. For many teachers who did not grow up with this technology, its effects seem alarming and potentially harmful. This concern, while understandable, is misguided. The negatives of internet use are outweighed by its critical benefits for students and educators—as a uniquely comprehensive and accessible information source; a means of exposure to and engagement with different perspectives; and a highly flexible learning environment.

The body of an argumentative essay is where you develop your arguments in detail. Here you’ll present evidence, analysis, and reasoning to convince the reader that your thesis statement is true.

In the standard five-paragraph format for short essays, the body takes up three of your five paragraphs. In longer essays, it will be more paragraphs, and might be divided into sections with headings.

Each paragraph covers its own topic, introduced with a topic sentence . Each of these topics must contribute to your overall argument; don’t include irrelevant information.

This example paragraph takes a Rogerian approach: It first acknowledges the merits of the opposing position and then highlights problems with that position.

Hover over different parts of the example to see how a body paragraph is constructed.

A common frustration for teachers is students’ use of Wikipedia as a source in their writing. Its prevalence among students is not exaggerated; a survey found that the vast majority of the students surveyed used Wikipedia (Head & Eisenberg, 2010). An article in The Guardian stresses a common objection to its use: “a reliance on Wikipedia can discourage students from engaging with genuine academic writing” (Coomer, 2013). Teachers are clearly not mistaken in viewing Wikipedia usage as ubiquitous among their students; but the claim that it discourages engagement with academic sources requires further investigation. This point is treated as self-evident by many teachers, but Wikipedia itself explicitly encourages students to look into other sources. Its articles often provide references to academic publications and include warning notes where citations are missing; the site’s own guidelines for research make clear that it should be used as a starting point, emphasizing that users should always “read the references and check whether they really do support what the article says” (“Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia,” 2020). Indeed, for many students, Wikipedia is their first encounter with the concepts of citation and referencing. The use of Wikipedia therefore has a positive side that merits deeper consideration than it often receives.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

An argumentative essay ends with a conclusion that summarizes and reflects on the arguments made in the body.

No new arguments or evidence appear here, but in longer essays you may discuss the strengths and weaknesses of your argument and suggest topics for future research. In all conclusions, you should stress the relevance and importance of your argument.

Hover over the following example to see the typical elements of a conclusion.

The internet has had a major positive impact on the world of education; occasional pitfalls aside, its value is evident in numerous applications. The future of teaching lies in the possibilities the internet opens up for communication, research, and interactivity. As the popularity of distance learning shows, students value the flexibility and accessibility offered by digital education, and educators should fully embrace these advantages. The internet’s dangers, real and imaginary, have been documented exhaustively by skeptics, but the internet is here to stay; it is time to focus seriously on its potential for good.

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

• Choosing Essay Topic
• Write a College Essay
• Write a Diversity Essay
• College Essay Format & Structure
• Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

An argumentative essay tends to be a longer essay involving independent research, and aims to make an original argument about a topic. Its thesis statement makes a contentious claim that must be supported in an objective, evidence-based way.

An expository essay also aims to be objective, but it doesn’t have to make an original argument. Rather, it aims to explain something (e.g., a process or idea) in a clear, concise way. Expository essays are often shorter assignments and rely less on research.

At college level, you must properly cite your sources in all essays , research papers , and other academic texts (except exams and in-class exercises).

Add a citation whenever you quote , paraphrase , or summarize information or ideas from a source. You should also give full source details in a bibliography or reference list at the end of your text.

The exact format of your citations depends on which citation style you are instructed to use. The most common styles are APA , MLA , and Chicago .

The majority of the essays written at university are some sort of argumentative essay . Unless otherwise specified, you can assume that the goal of any essay you’re asked to write is argumentative: To convince the reader of your position using evidence and reasoning.

In composition classes you might be given assignments that specifically test your ability to write an argumentative essay. Look out for prompts including instructions like “argue,” “assess,” or “discuss” to see if this is the goal.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, July 23). How to Write an Argumentative Essay | Examples & Tips. Scribbr. Retrieved August 15, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/argumentative-essay/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, how to write a thesis statement | 4 steps & examples, how to write topic sentences | 4 steps, examples & purpose, how to write an expository essay, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

• Academic Writing / Online Writing Instruction

Inductive vs. Deductive Writing

by Purdue Global Academic Success Center and Writing Center · Published February 25, 2015 · Updated February 24, 2015

Dr. Tamara Fudge, Kaplan University professor in the School of Business and IT

There are several ways to present information when writing, including those that employ inductive and deductive reasoning . The difference can be stated simply:

• Inductive reasoning presents facts and then wraps them up with a conclusion .
• Deductive reasoning presents a thesis statement and then provides supportive facts or examples.

Which should the writer use? It depends on content, the intended audience , and your overall purpose .

If you want your audience to discover new things with you , then inductive writing might make sense.   Here is n example:

My dog Max wants to chase every non-human living creature he sees, whether it is the cats in the house or rabbits and squirrels in the backyard. Sources indicate that this is a behavior typical of Jack Russell terriers. While Max is a mixed breed dog, he is approximately the same size and has many of the typical markings of a Jack Russell. From these facts along with his behaviors, we surmise that Max is indeed at least part Jack Russell terrier.

Within that short paragraph, you learned about Max’s manners and a little about what he might look like, and then the concluding sentence connected these ideas together. This kind of writing often keeps the reader’s attention, as he or she must read all the pieces of the puzzle before they are connected.

Purposes for this kind of writing include creative writing and perhaps some persuasive essays, although much academic work is done in deductive form.

If your audience is not likely going to read the entire written piece, then deductive reasoning might make more sense, as the reader can look for what he or she wants by quickly scanning first sentences of each paragraph. Here is an example:

My backyard is in dire need of cleaning and new landscaping. The Kentucky bluegrass that was planted there five years ago has been all but replaced by Creeping Charlie, a particularly invasive weed. The stone steps leading to the house are in some disrepair, and there are some slats missing from the fence. Perennials were planted three years ago, but the moles and rabbits destroyed many of the bulbs, so we no longer have flowers in the spring.

The reader knows from the very first sentence that the backyard is a mess! This paragraph could have ended with a clarifying conclusion sentence; while it might be considered redundant to do so, the scientific community tends to work through deductive reasoning by providing (1) a premise or argument – which could also be called a thesis statement, (2) then evidence to support the premise, and (3) finally the conclusion.

Purposes for this kind of writing include business letters and project documents, where the client is more likely to skim the work for generalities or to hunt for only the parts that are important to him or her. Again, scientific writing tends to follow this format as well, and research papers greatly benefit from deductive writing.

Whether one method or another is chosen, there are some other important considerations. First, it is important that the facts/evidence be true. Perform research carefully and from appropriate sources; make sure ideas are cited properly. You might need to avoid absolute words such as “always,” “never,” and “only,” because they exclude any anomalies. Try not to write questions: the writer’s job is to provide answers instead. Lastly, avoid quotes in thesis statements or conclusions, because they are not your own words – and thus undermine your authority as the paper writer.

Share this:

• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

Tags: Critical thinking Reasoning

• Next story  Winter Reading for Online Faculty
• Previous story  Your Students are 13 Minutes Away From Avoiding Plagiarism

You may also like...

Brexit voters broke it and now regret it-part i: establishing the importance of teaching and learning in developing an educated, global electorate.

October 26, 2016

 by Purdue Global Academic Success Center and Writing Center · Published October 26, 2016 · Last modified April 8, 2020

The Big Misconception about Writing to Learn

June 10, 2015

 by Purdue Global Academic Success Center and Writing Center · Published June 10, 2015

Why Not Finally Answer “Why?”

April 29, 2015

 by Purdue Global Academic Success Center and Writing Center · Published April 29, 2015 · Last modified April 28, 2015

11 Responses

• Pingbacks 2

thanks for this article because I can improve our reading skills

Thank you. The article very interesting and I can learn to improve our English skill in here.

Study is good for get science t

I want sudy feends

Helpful Thanks

Great article! This was helpful and provided great information.

Very helpful

very helpful . thank you

Very helpful.

[…] + Read More Here […]

[…] begin with alarming statistics and the urgency of action. However, articles often transition into inductive storytelling by featuring firsthand accounts of climate-related events or interviews with affected communities. […]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

What is an Argumentative Essay? How to Write It (With Examples)

We define an argumentative essay as a type of essay that presents arguments about both sides of an issue. The purpose is to convince the reader to accept a particular viewpoint or action. In an argumentative essay, the writer takes a stance on a controversial or debatable topic and supports their position with evidence, reasoning, and examples. The essay should also address counterarguments, demonstrating a thorough understanding of the topic.

Table of Contents

What is an argumentative essay  .

• Argumentative essay structure 
• Argumentative essay outline 
• Types of argument claims 

How to write an argumentative essay?

• Argumentative essay writing tips 
• Good argumentative essay example 

How to write a good thesis

• How to Write an Argumentative Essay with Paperpal? 

Frequently Asked Questions

An argumentative essay is a type of writing that presents a coherent and logical analysis of a specific topic. 1 The goal is to convince the reader to accept the writer’s point of view or opinion on a particular issue. Here are the key elements of an argumentative essay: 

• Thesis Statement : The central claim or argument that the essay aims to prove. 
• Introduction : Provides background information and introduces the thesis statement. 
• Body Paragraphs : Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the argument, presents evidence, and may include counter arguments.  Articulate your thesis statement better with Paperpal. Start writing now!
• Evidence : Supports the main argument with relevant facts, examples, statistics, or expert opinions.
• Counterarguments : Anticipates and addresses opposing viewpoints to strengthen the overall argument.
• Conclusion : Summarizes the main points, reinforces the thesis, and may suggest implications or actions. 

Argumentative essay structure  

Aristotelian, Rogerian, and Toulmin are three distinct approaches to argumentative essay structures, each with its principles and methods. 2 The choice depends on the purpose and nature of the topic. Here’s an overview of each type of argumentative essay format.

Have a looming deadline for your argumentative essay? Write 2x faster with Paperpal – Start now!  

Argumentative essay outline  

An argumentative essay presents a specific claim or argument and supports it with evidence and reasoning. Here’s an outline for an argumentative essay, along with examples for each section: 3  

1.  Introduction : 

• Hook : Start with a compelling statement, question, or anecdote to grab the reader’s attention. 

Example: “Did you know that plastic pollution is threatening marine life at an alarming rate?” 

• Background information : Provide brief context about the issue. 

Example: “Plastic pollution has become a global environmental concern, with millions of tons of plastic waste entering our oceans yearly.” 

• Thesis statement : Clearly state your main argument or position. 

Example: “We must take immediate action to reduce plastic usage and implement more sustainable alternatives to protect our marine ecosystem.” 

2.  Body Paragraphs : 

• Topic sentence : Introduce the main idea of each paragraph. 

Example: “The first step towards addressing the plastic pollution crisis is reducing single-use plastic consumption.” 

• Evidence/Support : Provide evidence, facts, statistics, or examples that support your argument. 

Example: “Research shows that plastic straws alone contribute to millions of tons of plastic waste annually, and many marine animals suffer from ingestion or entanglement.” 

• Counterargument/Refutation : Acknowledge and refute opposing viewpoints. 

Example: “Some argue that banning plastic straws is inconvenient for consumers, but the long-term environmental benefits far outweigh the temporary inconvenience.” 

• Transition : Connect each paragraph to the next. 

Example: “Having addressed the issue of single-use plastics, the focus must now shift to promoting sustainable alternatives.” 

3.  Counterargument Paragraph : 

• Acknowledgement of opposing views : Recognize alternative perspectives on the issue. 

Example: “While some may argue that individual actions cannot significantly impact global plastic pollution, the cumulative effect of collective efforts must be considered.” 

• Counterargument and rebuttal : Present and refute the main counterargument. 

Example: “However, individual actions, when multiplied across millions of people, can substantially reduce plastic waste. Small changes in behavior, such as using reusable bags and containers, can have a significant positive impact.” 

4.  Conclusion : 

• Restatement of thesis : Summarize your main argument. 

Example: “In conclusion, adopting sustainable practices and reducing single-use plastic is crucial for preserving our oceans and marine life.” 

• Call to action : Encourage the reader to take specific steps or consider the argument’s implications. 

Example: “It is our responsibility to make environmentally conscious choices and advocate for policies that prioritize the health of our planet. By collectively embracing sustainable alternatives, we can contribute to a cleaner and healthier future.” 

Types of argument claims  

A claim is a statement or proposition a writer puts forward with evidence to persuade the reader. 4 Here are some common types of argument claims, along with examples: 

• Fact Claims : These claims assert that something is true or false and can often be verified through evidence.  Example: “Water boils at 100°C at sea level.”
• Value Claims : Value claims express judgments about the worth or morality of something, often based on personal beliefs or societal values. Example: “Organic farming is more ethical than conventional farming.” 
• Policy Claims : Policy claims propose a course of action or argue for a specific policy, law, or regulation change.  Example: “Schools should adopt a year-round education system to improve student learning outcomes.” 
• Cause and Effect Claims : These claims argue that one event or condition leads to another, establishing a cause-and-effect relationship.  Example: “Excessive use of social media is a leading cause of increased feelings of loneliness among young adults.” 
• Definition Claims : Definition claims assert the meaning or classification of a concept or term.  Example: “Artificial intelligence can be defined as machines exhibiting human-like cognitive functions.” 
• Comparative Claims : Comparative claims assert that one thing is better or worse than another in certain respects.  Example: “Online education is more cost-effective than traditional classroom learning.” 
• Evaluation Claims : Evaluation claims assess the quality, significance, or effectiveness of something based on specific criteria.  Example: “The new healthcare policy is more effective in providing affordable healthcare to all citizens.” 

Understanding these argument claims can help writers construct more persuasive and well-supported arguments tailored to the specific nature of the claim.  

If you’re wondering how to start an argumentative essay, here’s a step-by-step guide to help you with the argumentative essay format and writing process.

• Choose a Topic: Select a topic that you are passionate about or interested in. Ensure that the topic is debatable and has two or more sides.
• Define Your Position: Clearly state your stance on the issue. Consider opposing viewpoints and be ready to counter them.
• Conduct Research: Gather relevant information from credible sources, such as books, articles, and academic journals. Take notes on key points and supporting evidence.
• Create a Thesis Statement: Develop a concise and clear thesis statement that outlines your main argument. Convey your position on the issue and provide a roadmap for the essay.
• Outline Your Argumentative Essay: Organize your ideas logically by creating an outline. Include an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Each body paragraph should focus on a single point that supports your thesis.
• Write the Introduction: Start with a hook to grab the reader’s attention (a quote, a question, a surprising fact). Provide background information on the topic. Present your thesis statement at the end of the introduction.
• Develop Body Paragraphs: Begin each paragraph with a clear topic sentence that relates to the thesis. Support your points with evidence and examples. Address counterarguments and refute them to strengthen your position. Ensure smooth transitions between paragraphs.
• Address Counterarguments: Acknowledge and respond to opposing viewpoints. Anticipate objections and provide evidence to counter them.
• Write the Conclusion: Summarize the main points of your argumentative essay. Reinforce the significance of your argument. End with a call to action, a prediction, or a thought-provoking statement.
• Revise, Edit, and Share: Review your essay for clarity, coherence, and consistency. Check for grammatical and spelling errors. Share your essay with peers, friends, or instructors for constructive feedback.
• Finalize Your Argumentative Essay: Make final edits based on feedback received. Ensure that your essay follows the required formatting and citation style.

Struggling to start your argumentative essay? Paperpal can help – try now!   

Argumentative essay writing tips  

Here are eight strategies to craft a compelling argumentative essay: 

• Choose a Clear and Controversial Topic : Select a topic that sparks debate and has opposing viewpoints. A clear and controversial issue provides a solid foundation for a strong argument. 
• Conduct Thorough Research : Gather relevant information from reputable sources to support your argument. Use a variety of sources, such as academic journals, books, reputable websites, and expert opinions, to strengthen your position. 
• Create a Strong Thesis Statement : Clearly articulate your main argument in a concise thesis statement. Your thesis should convey your stance on the issue and provide a roadmap for the reader to follow your argument. 
• Develop a Logical Structure : Organize your essay with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. Each paragraph should focus on a specific point of evidence that contributes to your overall argument. Ensure a logical flow from one point to the next. 
• Provide Strong Evidence : Support your claims with solid evidence. Use facts, statistics, examples, and expert opinions to support your arguments. Be sure to cite your sources appropriately to maintain credibility. 
• Address Counterarguments : Acknowledge opposing viewpoints and counterarguments. Addressing and refuting alternative perspectives strengthens your essay and demonstrates a thorough understanding of the issue. Be mindful of maintaining a respectful tone even when discussing opposing views. 
• Use Persuasive Language : Employ persuasive language to make your points effectively. Avoid emotional appeals without supporting evidence and strive for a respectful and professional tone. 
• Craft a Compelling Conclusion : Summarize your main points, restate your thesis, and leave a lasting impression in your conclusion. Encourage readers to consider the implications of your argument and potentially take action. 

Good argumentative essay example  

Let’s consider a sample of argumentative essay on how social media enhances connectivity:

In the digital age, social media has emerged as a powerful tool that transcends geographical boundaries, connecting individuals from diverse backgrounds and providing a platform for an array of voices to be heard. While critics argue that social media fosters division and amplifies negativity, it is essential to recognize the positive aspects of this digital revolution and how it enhances connectivity by providing a platform for diverse voices to flourish. One of the primary benefits of social media is its ability to facilitate instant communication and connection across the globe. Platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram break down geographical barriers, enabling people to establish and maintain relationships regardless of physical location and fostering a sense of global community. Furthermore, social media has transformed how people stay connected with friends and family. Whether separated by miles or time zones, social media ensures that relationships remain dynamic and relevant, contributing to a more interconnected world. Moreover, social media has played a pivotal role in giving voice to social justice movements and marginalized communities. Movements such as #BlackLivesMatter, #MeToo, and #ClimateStrike have gained momentum through social media, allowing individuals to share their stories and advocate for change on a global scale. This digital activism can shape public opinion and hold institutions accountable. Social media platforms provide a dynamic space for open dialogue and discourse. Users can engage in discussions, share information, and challenge each other’s perspectives, fostering a culture of critical thinking. This open exchange of ideas contributes to a more informed and enlightened society where individuals can broaden their horizons and develop a nuanced understanding of complex issues. While criticisms of social media abound, it is crucial to recognize its positive impact on connectivity and the amplification of diverse voices. Social media transcends physical and cultural barriers, connecting people across the globe and providing a platform for marginalized voices to be heard. By fostering open dialogue and facilitating the exchange of ideas, social media contributes to a more interconnected and empowered society. Embracing the positive aspects of social media allows us to harness its potential for positive change and collective growth.

• Clearly Define Your Thesis Statement:   Your thesis statement is the core of your argumentative essay. Clearly articulate your main argument or position on the issue. Avoid vague or general statements.  
• Provide Strong Supporting Evidence:   Back up your thesis with solid evidence from reliable sources and examples. This can include facts, statistics, expert opinions, anecdotes, or real-life examples. Make sure your evidence is relevant to your argument, as it impacts the overall persuasiveness of your thesis.  
• Anticipate Counterarguments and Address Them:   Acknowledge and address opposing viewpoints to strengthen credibility. This also shows that you engage critically with the topic rather than presenting a one-sided argument. 

How to Write an Argumentative Essay with Paperpal?  

Writing a winning argumentative essay not only showcases your ability to critically analyze a topic but also demonstrates your skill in persuasively presenting your stance backed by evidence. Achieving this level of writing excellence can be time-consuming. This is where Paperpal, your AI academic writing assistant, steps in to revolutionize the way you approach argumentative essays. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to use Paperpal to write your essay: 

• Sign Up or Log In: Begin by creating an account or logging into paperpal.com .  
• Navigate to Paperpal Copilot: Once logged in, proceed to the Templates section from the side navigation bar.  
• Generate an essay outline: Under Templates, click on the ‘Outline’ tab and choose ‘Essay’ from the options and provide your topic to generate an outline.  
• Develop your essay: Use this structured outline as a guide to flesh out your essay. If you encounter any roadblocks, click on Brainstorm and get subject-specific assistance, ensuring you stay on track. 
• Refine your writing: To elevate the academic tone of your essay, select a paragraph and use the ‘Make Academic’ feature under the ‘Rewrite’ tab, ensuring your argumentative essay resonates with an academic audience. 
• Final Touches: Make your argumentative essay submission ready with Paperpal’s language, grammar, consistency and plagiarism checks, and improve your chances of acceptance.  

Paperpal not only simplifies the essay writing process but also ensures your argumentative essay is persuasive, well-structured, and academically rigorous. Sign up today and transform how you write argumentative essays. 

The length of an argumentative essay can vary, but it typically falls within the range of 1,000 to 2,500 words. However, the specific requirements may depend on the guidelines provided.

You might write an argumentative essay when:  1. You want to convince others of the validity of your position.  2. There is a controversial or debatable issue that requires discussion.  3. You need to present evidence and logical reasoning to support your claims.  4. You want to explore and critically analyze different perspectives on a topic. 

Argumentative Essay:  Purpose : An argumentative essay aims to persuade the reader to accept or agree with a specific point of view or argument.  Structure : It follows a clear structure with an introduction, thesis statement, body paragraphs presenting arguments and evidence, counterarguments and refutations, and a conclusion.  Tone : The tone is formal and relies on logical reasoning, evidence, and critical analysis.    Narrative/Descriptive Essay:  Purpose : These aim to tell a story or describe an experience, while a descriptive essay focuses on creating a vivid picture of a person, place, or thing.  Structure : They may have a more flexible structure. They often include an engaging introduction, a well-developed body that builds the story or description, and a conclusion.  Tone : The tone is more personal and expressive to evoke emotions or provide sensory details. 

• Gladd, J. (2020). Tips for Writing Academic Persuasive Essays.  Write What Matters . 
• Nimehchisalem, V. (2018). Pyramid of argumentation: Towards an integrated model for teaching and assessing ESL writing.  Language & Communication ,  5 (2), 185-200. 
• Press, B. (2022).  Argumentative Essays: A Step-by-Step Guide . Broadview Press. 
• Rieke, R. D., Sillars, M. O., & Peterson, T. R. (2005).  Argumentation and critical decision making . Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. 

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)
• What is a Narrative Essay? How to Write It (with Examples)

Make Your Research Paper Error-Free with Paperpal’s Online Spell Checker 

The do’s & don’ts of using generative ai tools ethically in academia, you may also like, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , how to write a research proposal: (with examples..., how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers....

What this handout is about

This handout will define what an argument is and explain why you need one in most of your academic essays.

Arguments are everywhere

You may be surprised to hear that the word “argument” does not have to be written anywhere in your assignment for it to be an important part of your task. In fact, making an argument—expressing a point of view on a subject and supporting it with evidence—is often the aim of academic writing. Your instructors may assume that you know this and thus may not explain the importance of arguments in class.

Most material you learn in college is or has been debated by someone, somewhere, at some time. Even when the material you read or hear is presented as a simple fact, it may actually be one person’s interpretation of a set of information. Instructors may call on you to examine that interpretation and defend it, refute it, or offer some new view of your own. In writing assignments, you will almost always need to do more than just summarize information that you have gathered or regurgitate facts that have been discussed in class. You will need to develop a point of view on or interpretation of that material and provide evidence for your position.

Consider an example. For nearly 2000 years, educated people in many Western cultures believed that bloodletting—deliberately causing a sick person to lose blood—was the most effective treatment for a variety of illnesses. The claim that bloodletting is beneficial to human health was not widely questioned until the 1800s, and some physicians continued to recommend bloodletting as late as the 1920s. Medical practices have now changed because some people began to doubt the effectiveness of bloodletting; these people argued against it and provided convincing evidence. Human knowledge grows out of such differences of opinion, and scholars like your instructors spend their lives engaged in debate over what claims may be counted as accurate in their fields. In their courses, they want you to engage in similar kinds of critical thinking and debate.

Argumentation is not just what your instructors do. We all use argumentation on a daily basis, and you probably already have some skill at crafting an argument. The more you improve your skills in this area, the better you will be at thinking critically, reasoning, making choices, and weighing evidence.

Making a claim

What is an argument? In academic writing, an argument is usually a main idea, often called a “claim” or “thesis statement,” backed up with evidence that supports the idea. In the majority of college papers, you will need to make some sort of claim and use evidence to support it, and your ability to do this well will separate your papers from those of students who see assignments as mere accumulations of fact and detail. In other words, gone are the happy days of being given a “topic” about which you can write anything. It is time to stake out a position and prove why it is a good position for a thinking person to hold. See our handout on thesis statements .

Claims can be as simple as “Protons are positively charged and electrons are negatively charged,” with evidence such as, “In this experiment, protons and electrons acted in such and such a way.” Claims can also be as complex as “Genre is the most important element to the contract of expectations between filmmaker and audience,” using reasoning and evidence such as, “defying genre expectations can create a complete apocalypse of story form and content, leaving us stranded in a sort of genre-less abyss.” In either case, the rest of your paper will detail the reasoning and evidence that have led you to believe that your position is best.

When beginning to write a paper, ask yourself, “What is my point?” For example, the point of this handout is to help you become a better writer, and we are arguing that an important step in the process of writing effective arguments is understanding the concept of argumentation. If your papers do not have a main point, they cannot be arguing for anything. Asking yourself what your point is can help you avoid a mere “information dump.” Consider this: your instructors probably know a lot more than you do about your subject matter. Why, then, would you want to provide them with material they already know? Instructors are usually looking for two things:

• Proof that you understand the material
• A demonstration of your ability to use or apply the material in ways that go beyond what you have read or heard.

This second part can be done in many ways: you can critique the material, apply it to something else, or even just explain it in a different way. In order to succeed at this second step, though, you must have a particular point to argue.

Arguments in academic writing are usually complex and take time to develop. Your argument will need to be more than a simple or obvious statement such as “Frank Lloyd Wright was a great architect.” Such a statement might capture your initial impressions of Wright as you have studied him in class; however, you need to look deeper and express specifically what caused that “greatness.” Your instructor will probably expect something more complicated, such as “Frank Lloyd Wright’s architecture combines elements of European modernism, Asian aesthetic form, and locally found materials to create a unique new style,” or “There are many strong similarities between Wright’s building designs and those of his mother, which suggests that he may have borrowed some of her ideas.” To develop your argument, you would then define your terms and prove your claim with evidence from Wright’s drawings and buildings and those of the other architects you mentioned.

Do not stop with having a point. You have to back up your point with evidence. The strength of your evidence, and your use of it, can make or break your argument. See our handout on evidence . You already have the natural inclination for this type of thinking, if not in an academic setting. Think about how you talked your parents into letting you borrow the family car. Did you present them with lots of instances of your past trustworthiness? Did you make them feel guilty because your friends’ parents all let them drive? Did you whine until they just wanted you to shut up? Did you look up statistics on teen driving and use them to show how you didn’t fit the dangerous-driver profile? These are all types of argumentation, and they exist in academia in similar forms.

Every field has slightly different requirements for acceptable evidence, so familiarize yourself with some arguments from within that field instead of just applying whatever evidence you like best. Pay attention to your textbooks and your instructor’s lectures. What types of argument and evidence are they using? The type of evidence that sways an English instructor may not work to convince a sociology instructor. Find out what counts as proof that something is true in that field. Is it statistics, a logical development of points, something from the object being discussed (art work, text, culture, or atom), the way something works, or some combination of more than one of these things?

Be consistent with your evidence. Unlike negotiating for the use of your parents’ car, a college paper is not the place for an all-out blitz of every type of argument. You can often use more than one type of evidence within a paper, but make sure that within each section you are providing the reader with evidence appropriate to each claim. So, if you start a paragraph or section with a statement like “Putting the student seating area closer to the basketball court will raise player performance,” do not follow with your evidence on how much more money the university could raise by letting more students go to games for free. Information about how fan support raises player morale, which then results in better play, would be a better follow-up. Your next section could offer clear reasons why undergraduates have as much or more right to attend an undergraduate event as wealthy alumni—but this information would not go in the same section as the fan support stuff. You cannot convince a confused person, so keep things tidy and ordered.

Counterargument

One way to strengthen your argument and show that you have a deep understanding of the issue you are discussing is to anticipate and address counterarguments or objections. By considering what someone who disagrees with your position might have to say about your argument, you show that you have thought things through, and you dispose of some of the reasons your audience might have for not accepting your argument. Recall our discussion of student seating in the Dean Dome. To make the most effective argument possible, you should consider not only what students would say about seating but also what alumni who have paid a lot to get good seats might say.

You can generate counterarguments by asking yourself how someone who disagrees with you might respond to each of the points you’ve made or your position as a whole. If you can’t immediately imagine another position, here are some strategies to try:

• Do some research. It may seem to you that no one could possibly disagree with the position you are arguing, but someone probably has. For example, some people argue that a hotdog is a sandwich. If you are making an argument concerning, for example, the characteristics of an exceptional sandwich, you might want to see what some of these people have to say.
• Talk with a friend or with your teacher. Another person may be able to imagine counterarguments that haven’t occurred to you.
• Consider your conclusion or claim and the premises of your argument and imagine someone who denies each of them. For example, if you argued, “Cats make the best pets. This is because they are clean and independent,” you might imagine someone saying, “Cats do not make the best pets. They are dirty and needy.”

Once you have thought up some counterarguments, consider how you will respond to them—will you concede that your opponent has a point but explain why your audience should nonetheless accept your argument? Will you reject the counterargument and explain why it is mistaken? Either way, you will want to leave your reader with a sense that your argument is stronger than opposing arguments.

When you are summarizing opposing arguments, be charitable. Present each argument fairly and objectively, rather than trying to make it look foolish. You want to show that you have considered the many sides of the issue. If you simply attack or caricature your opponent (also referred to as presenting a “straw man”), you suggest that your argument is only capable of defeating an extremely weak adversary, which may undermine your argument rather than enhance it.

It is usually better to consider one or two serious counterarguments in some depth, rather than to give a long but superficial list of many different counterarguments and replies.

Be sure that your reply is consistent with your original argument. If considering a counterargument changes your position, you will need to go back and revise your original argument accordingly.

Audience is a very important consideration in argument. Take a look at our handout on audience . A lifetime of dealing with your family members has helped you figure out which arguments work best to persuade each of them. Maybe whining works with one parent, but the other will only accept cold, hard statistics. Your kid brother may listen only to the sound of money in his palm. It’s usually wise to think of your audience in an academic setting as someone who is perfectly smart but who doesn’t necessarily agree with you. You are not just expressing your opinion in an argument (“It’s true because I said so”), and in most cases your audience will know something about the subject at hand—so you will need sturdy proof. At the same time, do not think of your audience as capable of reading your mind. You have to come out and state both your claim and your evidence clearly. Do not assume that because the instructor knows the material, he or she understands what part of it you are using, what you think about it, and why you have taken the position you’ve chosen.

Critical reading

Critical reading is a big part of understanding argument. Although some of the material you read will be very persuasive, do not fall under the spell of the printed word as authority. Very few of your instructors think of the texts they assign as the last word on the subject. Remember that the author of every text has an agenda, something that he or she wants you to believe. This is OK—everything is written from someone’s perspective—but it’s a good thing to be aware of. For more information on objectivity and bias and on reading sources carefully, read our handouts on evaluating print sources and reading to write .

Take notes either in the margins of your source (if you are using a photocopy or your own book) or on a separate sheet as you read. Put away that highlighter! Simply highlighting a text is good for memorizing the main ideas in that text—it does not encourage critical reading. Part of your goal as a reader should be to put the author’s ideas in your own words. Then you can stop thinking of these ideas as facts and start thinking of them as arguments.

When you read, ask yourself questions like “What is the author trying to prove?” and “What is the author assuming I will agree with?” Do you agree with the author? Does the author adequately defend her argument? What kind of proof does she use? Is there something she leaves out that you would put in? Does putting it in hurt her argument? As you get used to reading critically, you will start to see the sometimes hidden agendas of other writers, and you can use this skill to improve your own ability to craft effective arguments.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Anson, Chris M., and Robert A. Schwegler. 2010. The Longman Handbook for Writers and Readers , 6th ed. New York: Longman.

Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, Joseph Bizup, and William T. FitzGerald. 2016. The Craft of Research , 4th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ede, Lisa. 2004. Work in Progress: A Guide to Academic Writing and Revising , 6th ed. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s.

Gage, John T. 2005. The Shape of Reason: Argumentative Writing in College , 4th ed. New York: Longman.

Lunsford, Andrea A., and John J. Ruszkiewicz. 2016. Everything’s an Argument , 7th ed. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s.

Rosen, Leonard J., and Laurence Behrens. 2003. The Allyn & Bacon Handbook , 5th ed. New York: Longman.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Argumentative Essays

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

What is an argumentative essay?

The argumentative essay is a genre of writing that requires the student to investigate a topic; collect, generate, and evaluate evidence; and establish a position on the topic in a concise manner.

Please note : Some confusion may occur between the argumentative essay and the expository essay. These two genres are similar, but the argumentative essay differs from the expository essay in the amount of pre-writing (invention) and research involved. The argumentative essay is commonly assigned as a capstone or final project in first year writing or advanced composition courses and involves lengthy, detailed research. Expository essays involve less research and are shorter in length. Expository essays are often used for in-class writing exercises or tests, such as the GED or GRE.

Argumentative essay assignments generally call for extensive research of literature or previously published material. Argumentative assignments may also require empirical research where the student collects data through interviews, surveys, observations, or experiments. Detailed research allows the student to learn about the topic and to understand different points of view regarding the topic so that she/he may choose a position and support it with the evidence collected during research. Regardless of the amount or type of research involved, argumentative essays must establish a clear thesis and follow sound reasoning.

The structure of the argumentative essay is held together by the following.

• A clear, concise, and defined thesis statement that occurs in the first paragraph of the essay.

In the first paragraph of an argument essay, students should set the context by reviewing the topic in a general way. Next the author should explain why the topic is important ( exigence ) or why readers should care about the issue. Lastly, students should present the thesis statement. It is essential that this thesis statement be appropriately narrowed to follow the guidelines set forth in the assignment. If the student does not master this portion of the essay, it will be quite difficult to compose an effective or persuasive essay.

• Clear and logical transitions between the introduction, body, and conclusion.

Transitions are the mortar that holds the foundation of the essay together. Without logical progression of thought, the reader is unable to follow the essay’s argument, and the structure will collapse. Transitions should wrap up the idea from the previous section and introduce the idea that is to follow in the next section.

• Body paragraphs that include evidential support.

Each paragraph should be limited to the discussion of one general idea. This will allow for clarity and direction throughout the essay. In addition, such conciseness creates an ease of readability for one’s audience. It is important to note that each paragraph in the body of the essay must have some logical connection to the thesis statement in the opening paragraph. Some paragraphs will directly support the thesis statement with evidence collected during research. It is also important to explain how and why the evidence supports the thesis ( warrant ).

However, argumentative essays should also consider and explain differing points of view regarding the topic. Depending on the length of the assignment, students should dedicate one or two paragraphs of an argumentative essay to discussing conflicting opinions on the topic. Rather than explaining how these differing opinions are wrong outright, students should note how opinions that do not align with their thesis might not be well informed or how they might be out of date.

• Evidential support (whether factual, logical, statistical, or anecdotal).

The argumentative essay requires well-researched, accurate, detailed, and current information to support the thesis statement and consider other points of view. Some factual, logical, statistical, or anecdotal evidence should support the thesis. However, students must consider multiple points of view when collecting evidence. As noted in the paragraph above, a successful and well-rounded argumentative essay will also discuss opinions not aligning with the thesis. It is unethical to exclude evidence that may not support the thesis. It is not the student’s job to point out how other positions are wrong outright, but rather to explain how other positions may not be well informed or up to date on the topic.

• A conclusion that does not simply restate the thesis, but readdresses it in light of the evidence provided.

It is at this point of the essay that students may begin to struggle. This is the portion of the essay that will leave the most immediate impression on the mind of the reader. Therefore, it must be effective and logical. Do not introduce any new information into the conclusion; rather, synthesize the information presented in the body of the essay. Restate why the topic is important, review the main points, and review your thesis. You may also want to include a short discussion of more research that should be completed in light of your work.

A complete argument

Perhaps it is helpful to think of an essay in terms of a conversation or debate with a classmate. If I were to discuss the cause of World War II and its current effect on those who lived through the tumultuous time, there would be a beginning, middle, and end to the conversation. In fact, if I were to end the argument in the middle of my second point, questions would arise concerning the current effects on those who lived through the conflict. Therefore, the argumentative essay must be complete, and logically so, leaving no doubt as to its intent or argument.

The five-paragraph essay

A common method for writing an argumentative essay is the five-paragraph approach. This is, however, by no means the only formula for writing such essays. If it sounds straightforward, that is because it is; in fact, the method consists of (a) an introductory paragraph (b) three evidentiary body paragraphs that may include discussion of opposing views and (c) a conclusion.

Longer argumentative essays

Complex issues and detailed research call for complex and detailed essays. Argumentative essays discussing a number of research sources or empirical research will most certainly be longer than five paragraphs. Authors may have to discuss the context surrounding the topic, sources of information and their credibility, as well as a number of different opinions on the issue before concluding the essay. Many of these factors will be determined by the assignment.

8 Effective Strategies to Write Argumentative Essays

In a bustling university town, there lived a student named Alex. Popular for creativity and wit, one challenge seemed insurmountable for Alex– the dreaded argumentative essay!

One gloomy afternoon, as the rain tapped against the window pane, Alex sat at his cluttered desk, staring at a blank document on the computer screen. The assignment loomed large: a 350-600-word argumentative essay on a topic of their choice . With a sigh, he decided to seek help of mentor, Professor Mitchell, who was known for his passion for writing.

Entering Professor Mitchell’s office was like stepping into a treasure of knowledge. Bookshelves lined every wall, faint aroma of old manuscripts in the air and sticky notes over the wall. Alex took a deep breath and knocked on his door.

“Ah, Alex,” Professor Mitchell greeted with a warm smile. “What brings you here today?”

Alex confessed his struggles with the argumentative essay. After hearing his concerns, Professor Mitchell said, “Ah, the argumentative essay! Don’t worry, Let’s take a look at it together.” As he guided Alex to the corner shelf, Alex asked,

Table of Contents

“What is an Argumentative Essay?”

The professor replied, “An argumentative essay is a type of academic writing that presents a clear argument or a firm position on a contentious issue. Unlike other forms of essays, such as descriptive or narrative essays, these essays require you to take a stance, present evidence, and convince your audience of the validity of your viewpoint with supporting evidence. A well-crafted argumentative essay relies on concrete facts and supporting evidence rather than merely expressing the author’s personal opinions . Furthermore, these essays demand comprehensive research on the chosen topic and typically follows a structured format consisting of three primary sections: an introductory paragraph, three body paragraphs, and a concluding paragraph.”

He continued, “Argumentative essays are written in a wide range of subject areas, reflecting their applicability across disciplines. They are written in different subject areas like literature and philosophy, history, science and technology, political science, psychology, economics and so on.

Alex asked,

“When is an Argumentative Essay Written?”

The professor answered, “Argumentative essays are often assigned in academic settings, but they can also be written for various other purposes, such as editorials, opinion pieces, or blog posts. Some situations to write argumentative essays include:

1. Academic assignments

In school or college, teachers may assign argumentative essays as part of coursework. It help students to develop critical thinking and persuasive writing skills .

2. Debates and discussions

Argumentative essays can serve as the basis for debates or discussions in academic or competitive settings. Moreover, they provide a structured way to present and defend your viewpoint.

3. Opinion pieces

Newspapers, magazines, and online publications often feature opinion pieces that present an argument on a current issue or topic to influence public opinion.

4. Policy proposals

In government and policy-related fields, argumentative essays are used to propose and defend specific policy changes or solutions to societal problems.

5. Persuasive speeches

Before delivering a persuasive speech, it’s common to prepare an argumentative essay as a foundation for your presentation.

Regardless of the context, an argumentative essay should present a clear thesis statement , provide evidence and reasoning to support your position, address counterarguments, and conclude with a compelling summary of your main points. The goal is to persuade readers or listeners to accept your viewpoint or at least consider it seriously.”

Handing over a book, the professor continued, “Take a look on the elements or structure of an argumentative essay.”

Elements of an Argumentative Essay

An argumentative essay comprises five essential components:

Claim in argumentative writing is the central argument or viewpoint that the writer aims to establish and defend throughout the essay. A claim must assert your position on an issue and must be arguable. It can guide the entire argument.

2. Evidence

Evidence must consist of factual information, data, examples, or expert opinions that support the claim. Also, it lends credibility by strengthening the writer’s position.

3. Counterarguments

Presenting a counterclaim demonstrates fairness and awareness of alternative perspectives.

4. Rebuttal

After presenting the counterclaim, the writer refutes it by offering counterarguments or providing evidence that weakens the opposing viewpoint. It shows that the writer has considered multiple perspectives and is prepared to defend their position.

The format of an argumentative essay typically follows the structure to ensure clarity and effectiveness in presenting an argument.

How to Write An Argumentative Essay

Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to write an argumentative essay:

1. Introduction

• Begin with a compelling sentence or question to grab the reader’s attention.
• Provide context for the issue, including relevant facts, statistics, or historical background.
• Provide a concise thesis statement to present your position on the topic.

2. Body Paragraphs (usually three or more)

• Start each paragraph with a clear and focused topic sentence that relates to your thesis statement.
• Furthermore, provide evidence and explain the facts, statistics, examples, expert opinions, and quotations from credible sources that supports your thesis.
• Use transition sentences to smoothly move from one point to the next.

3. Counterargument and Rebuttal

• Acknowledge opposing viewpoints or potential objections to your argument.
• Also, address these counterarguments with evidence and explain why they do not weaken your position.

4. Conclusion

• Restate your thesis statement and summarize the key points you’ve made in the body of the essay.
• Leave the reader with a final thought, call to action, or broader implication related to the topic.

5. Citations and References

• Properly cite all the sources you use in your essay using a consistent citation style.
• Also, include a bibliography or works cited at the end of your essay.

6. Formatting and Style

• Follow any specific formatting guidelines provided by your instructor or institution.
• Use a professional and academic tone in your writing and edit your essay to avoid content, spelling and grammar mistakes .

Remember that the specific requirements for formatting an argumentative essay may vary depending on your instructor’s guidelines or the citation style you’re using (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago). Always check the assignment instructions or style guide for any additional requirements or variations in formatting.

Did you understand what Prof. Mitchell explained Alex? Check it now!

Fill the Details to Check Your Score

Prof. Mitchell continued, “An argumentative essay can adopt various approaches when dealing with opposing perspectives. It may offer a balanced presentation of both sides, providing equal weight to each, or it may advocate more strongly for one side while still acknowledging the existence of opposing views.” As Alex listened carefully to the Professor’s thoughts, his eyes fell on a page with examples of argumentative essay.

Example of an Argumentative Essay

Alex picked the book and read the example. It helped him to understand the concept. Furthermore, he could now connect better to the elements and steps of the essay which Prof. Mitchell had mentioned earlier. Aren’t you keen to know how an argumentative essay should be like? Here is an example of a well-crafted argumentative essay , which was read by Alex. After Alex finished reading the example, the professor turned the page and continued, “Check this page to know the importance of writing an argumentative essay in developing skills of an individual.”

Importance of an Argumentative Essay

After understanding the benefits, Alex was convinced by the ability of the argumentative essays in advocating one’s beliefs and favor the author’s position. Alex asked,

“How are argumentative essays different from the other types?”

Prof. Mitchell answered, “Argumentative essays differ from other types of essays primarily in their purpose, structure, and approach in presenting information. Unlike expository essays, argumentative essays persuade the reader to adopt a particular point of view or take a specific action on a controversial issue. Furthermore, they differ from descriptive essays by not focusing vividly on describing a topic. Also, they are less engaging through storytelling as compared to the narrative essays.

Alex said, “Given the direct and persuasive nature of argumentative essays, can you suggest some strategies to write an effective argumentative essay?

Turning the pages of the book, Prof. Mitchell replied, “Sure! You can check this infographic to get some tips for writing an argumentative essay.”

Effective Strategies to Write an Argumentative Essay

As days turned into weeks, Alex diligently worked on his essay. He researched, gathered evidence, and refined his thesis. It was a long and challenging journey, filled with countless drafts and revisions.

Finally, the day arrived when Alex submitted their essay. As he clicked the “Submit” button, a sense of accomplishment washed over him. He realized that the argumentative essay, while challenging, had improved his critical thinking and transformed him into a more confident writer. Furthermore, Alex received feedback from his professor, a mix of praise and constructive criticism. It was a humbling experience, a reminder that every journey has its obstacles and opportunities for growth.

Frequently Asked Questions

An argumentative essay can be written as follows- 1. Choose a Topic 2. Research and Collect Evidences 3. Develop a Clear Thesis Statement 4. Outline Your Essay- Introduction, Body Paragraphs and Conclusion 5. Revise and Edit 6. Format and Cite Sources 7. Final Review

One must choose a clear, concise and specific statement as a claim. It must be debatable and establish your position. Avoid using ambiguous or unclear while making a claim. To strengthen your claim, address potential counterarguments or opposing viewpoints. Additionally, use persuasive language and rhetoric to make your claim more compelling

Starting an argument essay effectively is crucial to engage your readers and establish the context for your argument. Here’s how you can start an argument essay are: 1. Begin With an Engaging Hook 2. Provide Background Information 3. Present Your Thesis Statement 4. Briefly Outline Your Main 5. Establish Your Credibility

The key features of an argumentative essay are: 1. Clear and Specific Thesis Statement 2. Credible Evidence 3. Counterarguments 4. Structured Body Paragraph 5. Logical Flow 6. Use of Persuasive Techniques 7. Formal Language

An argumentative essay typically consists of the following main parts or sections: 1. Introduction 2. Body Paragraphs 3. Counterargument and Rebuttal 4. Conclusion 5. References (if applicable)

The main purpose of an argumentative essay is to persuade the reader to accept or agree with a particular viewpoint or position on a controversial or debatable topic. In other words, the primary goal of an argumentative essay is to convince the audience that the author's argument or thesis statement is valid, logical, and well-supported by evidence and reasoning.

Great article! The topic is simplified well! Keep up the good work

Excellent article! provides comprehensive and practical guidance for crafting compelling arguments. The emphasis on thorough research and clear thesis statements is particularly valuable. To further enhance your strategies, consider recommending the use of a counterargument paragraph. Addressing and refuting opposing viewpoints can strengthen your position and show a well-rounded understanding of the topic. Additionally, engaging with a community like ATReads, a writers’ social media, can provide valuable feedback and support from fellow writers. Thanks for sharing these insightful tips!

wow incredible ! keep up the good work

I love it thanks for the guidelines

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Career Corner

Academic Webinars: Transforming knowledge dissemination in the digital age

Digitization has transformed several areas of our lives, including the teaching and learning process. During…

• Manuscripts & Grants
• Reporting Research

Mastering Research Grant Writing in 2024: Navigating new policies and funder demands

Entering the world of grants and government funding can leave you confused; especially when trying…

How to Create a Poster That Stands Out: Tips for a smooth poster presentation

It was the conference season. Judy was excited to present her first poster! She had…

• Diversity and Inclusion
• Industry News

6 Reasons Why There is a Decline in Higher Education Enrollment: Action plan to overcome this crisis

Over the past decade, colleges and universities across the globe have witnessed a concerning trend…

Academic Essay Writing Made Simple: 4 types and tips

The pen is mightier than the sword, they say, and nowhere is this more evident…

How to Effectively Cite a PDF (APA, MLA, AMA, and Chicago Style)

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

• Publishing Research
• AI in Academia
• Promoting Research
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer-Review Week 2023
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

64 Putting It All Together: Basic Elements of an Argument Essay

The previous chapters on argumentation offered different models for thinking about what it means to make an argument. Toulmin’s method is deeply analytical, and it requires that a student become familiar with many technical terms. The Rogerian model, on the other hand, feels very conversational, almost intuitive.

In higher education, it’s rare (but not impossible) that a student will be asked to use a single model of argumentation. Depending on the assignment, the course, and your instructor, you might be expected to deploy certain conversational techniques that feel more at home in the Rogerian model, while also defending claims and articulating warrants that rely on Toulmin’s framework. It helps to become familiar with all of them.

The purpose of this chapter is to offer a comprehensive method for developing an argument, based largely on the classical Aristotelian model, but also pulling in strategies from Toulmin, Roger, and other influences, as well as many different articles and writing textbooks. Most academic persuasive/argumentative essay assignments will expect students to include these elements, to some degree.

I. Begin with issue-based questions

Arguments begin with identifying a problem or issue that needs to be addressed, often phrased as a question. In rhetoric, we might consider the question the exigence , an issue that demands a timely response. Sometimes your instructor will give you the question; in other cases you will be expected to develop your own research question. Though vitally important, explicit research questions are sometimes not stated in essays or term papers, but they are usually stated in reports of original studies, such as theses, dissertations, and journal articles.

As  Writing Arguments   and other composition textbooks suggest, it’s important to distinguish between “information questions” (or fact-based questions) and “issue questions.” An information question  is a fact-finding mission that’s  more suitable for essay reports and other forms of expository writing. An issue question, by contrast, ultimately requires the writer to take a stance on something that can be debated.

Information question : “What’s a soda tax?”

Issue question: “In order to curb the rise in type 2 diabetes, s hould soda be taxed?”

The information question above can be quickly answered by a few google searches. The second, which includes the word  should , is open-ended and can be endlessly debated.

The distinction between open-ended and fact-based questions isn’t always so clear-cut. Sometimes a researcher will begin with an information-based question and soon discover that answering it requires so much analysis that it can be easily debated. For example, a little bit of research shows that the question “Is there a rise in type 2 diabetes in the U.S.?” has a straightforward answer (the consensus is yes), but when asking the follow-up question, “What is causing the rise in type 2 diabetes?”, you’ll find a wide variety of responses. Figuring out the cause is presumably factual, but asking questions about causation with population-level trends is going to touch on so much data and information that any cogent response will require significant prioritizing and analysis on the part of the researcher, and the results will disagree with other interpretations that chose different kinds of prioritizing and analysis. Since a response to this particular question leads to a debate, it’s suitable for argumentation.

II. Formulate strong claims

A claim is your response to the issue. Depending on the rigor of the assignment and expectations of the course, a claim can be brainstormed rather quickly, or, in research-intensive writing courses, it might require weeks or months of labor. It’s the conclusion you come to after you’ve brainstormed the issue, done the research, analyzed the data, and arrived at a conclusion. It’s a statement expressed in an assertive way.

bad example of a claim: “ In this paper, I will focus on attempts to tax soda.”

example claim: “Soda should not be taxed.”

Word like “should” often appear in claims and they indicate that the statement is open to debate. It’s not a factual claim, although it should be based on factual evidence .

III. Prove a claim with Reasoning and Evidence

Academic arguments are organized around strictly logical frameworks, which means any opinion or belief must be supported; or, in other words, it must be proved. The difference between informal debates with family, friends, and acquaintances and the more formal debates in academia is largely due to the more rigorous expectations surrounding what it means to actually prove a claim. The proof is the logical core of the argument, what most readers within your audience will likely accept as convincing.

Here, the what it means to support an argument will be broken down into two main elements: reasoning and evidence.

When staking a claim, a writer must respond to the question, “but why?” Reasons are answers to hypothetical challenges:

Debate : “Should soda be taxed?”

Claim : “Yes, soda should be taxed.”

Hypothetical challenge : “But why?”

Response to the hypothetical challenge (Reasoning) : “Well, for starters, taxing soda would reduce the amount of sugar the average citizen consumes. reason 1 Secondly, revenue from a soda tax could be used to curb the rise in type 2 diabetes.” reason 2

The last part above, the Reasoning, is often the bulk of an academic persuasive essay. It’s the writer’s attempt to prove to the reader their claim is valid. As Booth, et al explain in The Craft of Research , the main points of a persuasive academic essay can often be joined to the overarching claim with the word because :

In their chapter, “Making Good Arguments,” Booth, et al suggest it’s helpful to keep in mind that the term claim can both refer to the broader thesis statement the writer is attempting to support and any sub-claim within the essay that needs proved with additional reasoning. What makes something a reason is that it attempts to support a claim, regardless of whether that claim is the one found in the introduction or in the body of the essay. A heavily researched persuasive essay will have a single thesis statement, but many sub-claims that are in turn proved by separate reasons. This ongoing connection between claim, sub-claim, and reason is important to keep in mind when structuring your essay. A very basic assignment might expect a fairly simple proof, backed by only one reason. A more complex assignment might ask the student to generate a variety of reasons from a given set of courses. An even more complex assignment might ask a student to do original research that requires them to explore several layers of claims and sub-claims.

Simple proof

More complex proof

Complex proof, with sub-claims

The example above, concerning the soda tax debate, would be considered a fairly simple proof:

Claim : Soda should be taxed.

Reason 1 : Taxing soda would reduce the amount of sugar the average citizen consumes.

Reason 2 : Revenue from a soda tax could be used to fight the obesity epidemic.

The first reason above, “Taxing soda would reduce the amount of sugar,” is compelling only if the audience also accepts the unstated belief that it’s fair to achieve lower levels in a somewhat brute force manner (in contrast to, for example, relying entirely on educating people about health). Focusing on unstated beliefs or implied premises is what Toulmin terms a warrant . Articulating warrants help the writer practice analysis, which is a separate section touched on below.

If reasoning  proves a claim, then evidence proves the reasoning. The evidence provides the foundation upon which the entire argument rests. This is why it’s sometimes called the  ground in classical rhetoric (in Toulmin’s scheme, it’s termed backing ). Since the role of evidence is to put all questions to rest, it’s often something concrete, such as facts or data that most readers would find convincing. In a criminal case, for example, a prosecutor might point to fingerprints as proof (as evidence) that the defendant can be placed at the crime scene (support/reason), and this presence at the crime scene supports the broader conclusion that the defendant is guilty of the crime (claim). For the case to be successfully prosecuted, the prosecutor needs enough forensics.

When constructing arguments from research in an academic situation, it’s unlikely a writer will rely on literal forensic evidence to support the reasoning and claim. Instead, academic writers tend to use a variety of research methods to persuade their audience. Let’s look at an example:

Issue/debate : How should local governments respond to the rising obesity epidemic? Some advocate taxing sugary drinks, especially sodas; but consumer advocates argue a tax would infringe on the rights of consumers and corporations.

Claim : In response to the obesity epidemic, municipal governments should tax sodas.

Support (Reasoning with Evidence) : Taxing soda would reduce the amount of sugar consumed by the average citizen. reason A prime example of this can be seen in a case study from 2016 that showed a city in California successfully reduced the average sugar consumption of each citizen after implementing a soda tax. evidence

The evidence for the reason above gives something to satisfy the reader’s skepticism. This particular evidence is a case study, an experiment conducted by researches to test a hypothesis, then published in an peer-reviewed journal. Research like this is often treated as a persuasive form of evidence in academic communities.

What counts as evidence will vary depending on the discipline and situation. In a literature course, passages from a novel are usually key evidence. In a psychology class, on the other hand, case studies are typically evidence. As you develop your research-supported essay, consider not only what types of evidence might support your ideas but also what types of evidence will be considered valid or credible according to the academic discipline or academic audience for which you are writing.

Evidence in the Humanities: Literature, Art, Film, Music, Philosophy

• Scholarly essays that analyze original works
• Details from an image, a film, or other work of art
• Passages from a musical composition
• Passages of text, including poetry

Evidence in the Humanities: History

• Primary Sources (photos, letters, maps, official documents, etc.)
• Other books or articles that interpret primary sources or other evidence.

Evidence in the Social Sciences: Psychology, Sociology, Political Science, Anthropology

• Books or articles that interpret data and results from other people’s original experiments or studies.
• Results from one’s own field research (including interviews, surveys, observations, etc.)
• Data from one’s own experiments
• Statistics derived from large studies

Evidence in the Sciences: Biology, Chemistry, Physics

• Data from the author of the paper’s own experiments

What remains consistent no matter the discipline in which you are writing, however, is that “evidence” never speaks for itself—you must integrate it into your own argument or claim and demonstrate that the evidence supports your thesis. In addition, be alert to evidence that seems to contradict your claims or offers a counterargument to it: rebutting that counterargument can be powerful evidence for your claim. You can also make evidence that isn’t there an integral part of your argument, too. If you can’t find the evidence you think you need, ask yourself why it seems to be lacking, or if its absence adds a new dimension to your thinking about the topic. Remember, evidence is not the piling up of facts or quotes: evidence is only one component of a strong, well supported, well argued, and well written composition. For more tips with integration information in a research-based persuasive essay, see the section, “Writing With Sources.”

Failures in evidence occur when a reader says, “I do not accept your evidence.” Here is why that might happen:

• The evidence that you have provided is  inaccurate : You’ve misread information or misquoted; you are not interpreting the quoted material in an accurate manner
• The evidence that you have provided is  insufficient : You are using just a small piece of evidence to support your reasoning. You need more. You probably have a “generalization” fallacy.
• The evidence that you have provided is  unrelated to the reason : Your evidence does not clearly or directly relate to the point that you are trying to make.
• The evidence that you have provided is  incomplete or too narrowly chosen : You have “cherry picked” certain examples or pieces of information to the exclusion of others, so while you do have evidence to support your point, you are also neglecting a lot of other information
• The evidence that you have provided is  old : The information that you are citing is not relevant anymore. It is outdated!
• The evidence that you have provided does not come from an  authoritative source : The source of your evidence is not credible; the person being cited is not an authority on the topic.

IV. Analyze and discuss the evidence

Composition students often get feedback that includes phrases like, “more analysis!”, or “discuss the evidence!”. These comments are sometimes confusing for students who initially assume that simply presenting enough reasoning and evidence is enough to prove a claim. It’s often unclear what the term analysis actually refers to.

Let’s look again at one of the examples above, concerning the soda tax debate:

Reason : Taxing soda would reduce the amount of sugar the average citizen consumes.

Evidence (Grounds) : A prime example of this can be seen in a case study from 2016 that showed a city in California successfully reduced the average sugar consumption of each citizen after implementing a soda tax.

This structure has the core elements of an argument: a strong and assertive  claim , followed by  reasoning , which in turn is grounded in specific  evidence . Each element seems fairly straightforward. What more is there to discuss?

Discuss the warrant

One area that’s ripe for the discussion is the extent to which the reasoning takes for granted certain values. Rather than simply educating the citizenry in the risks associated with consuming a lot of sugar, a sugar tax moves beyond that step and expects consumers to either reduce their consumption or pay the price. It adds a penalty to a certain behavior, and this kind of policy-enforcement might be interpreted as paternalistic by someone who’s concerned about the encroachment of “big government.” With this skeptical reader in mind, the writer might slow down when proving their point in order to articulate the implied premise, or warrant , that using tax policy to encourage healthier habits is ethically and political sound.

Here’s another version of the proof above, now with the warrant expressed:

Warrant : It’s justifiable to use tax policy to encourage healthy eating habits.

Bringing the warrant to the surface is considered one form of analysis because it closely interrogates a piece of the argument, uncovering another potential layer of discussion. If the writer thinks the audience will readily accept the belief (that it’s ok to use tax policies in this way), they can move forward. However, anticipating objections from the audience is a sign of self-awareness and critical thinking, a type of ethos , so articulating and discussing warrants can have a two-fold effect: making your case more solid (logos)  and  convincing the reader you’re a careful thinker (ethos).

Add backing to the warrant

Depending on how controversial or complex the warrant is, it might be helpful to spend some time making your case that the warrant is actually valid. When proving a warrant, use the same strategies as you would for any other point in the essay—offer reasoning and evidence.

In the soda tax example, one way to back the warrant is by pointing out that local and federal governments in the U.S. have long used tax policy to encourage healthy behaviors. Formerly known as “sin taxes,” these tax policies leverage the power of governments to make certain items more expensive (through taxes) to encourage the behavior most of its citizens want for themselves. An alcohol tax was first introduced in the 1790s; then, more recently, tobacco has been heavily taxed in order to bring down cancer rates.

Backing for the warrant : “Sin taxes” have been used throughout U.S. history to encourage healthy behavior.

This process of tracking down implied beliefs and then backing them can go on endlessly. That’s part of the reason why some topics deserve 20-30 page articles, or even book-length critical engagement. When do you know when to stop? Warrants and backing for them should be supplied for the audience. As the writer anticipates objections to their reasoning, warrants will come to the surface; but, as you interrogate them closely, it’s important to also think and write with the audience in mind, and also to look for feedback from peers. Many (in fact most) beliefs don’t need to be stated or backed, depending on how knowledgeable, specialized, and formal the intended audience is.

Make connections

Another way to analyze and discuss evidence is by connecting it with other pieces of evidence. If evidence never speaks for itself, it is also rarely isolated. The most convincing grounds or backing have layers of example.

Connecting evidence with concrete examples, especially personal ones, is an especially powerful way to bring home a point. When an evidence-based point (logos) is clearly illustrated with something personal and relatable, the writer/speaker can tap into the emotional reservoirs of their audience (pathos).

Justify your evidence

Yet another way to discuss evidence is to use “meta” language that explains to a skeptical reader why your evidence is actually valid. Case studies have different methodologies, for example, and a skeptical reader might wonder about the sample size. A keen writer could anticipate these attempts to undermine evidence by discussing whether a source is convincing or authoritative. This kind of discussion surrounding the authority and trustworthiness of the writer’s sources also helps establish  ethos .

Paraphrase!

Sometimes, simply paraphrasing key ideas and points from a source can serve as a form of discussion. Rephrasing important ideas  in your own words is also an important integration technique, and it contributes to the cohesive feel of your essay. After including key quotes from an expert, for example, you can follow up with: “In other words…,” or “What this means is…”

V. Offer counterarguments and rebuttals

The section on  warrants , mentioned above, suggests that anticipating the reader’s objections shapes how certain parts of the essay are written. Part of what separates academic essays from more informal persuasive situations is how intensely writers are expected to consider other arguments and probable objections. As the Rogerian model from the previous chapter shows, academic argumentation is fundamentally conversational.

The conversation can begin with the introduction. Do any of your sources not agree with your thesis? Does any of the research disagree with any of the supporting claims (the reasoning)? Opening with an ongoing conversation can also help provide context for the claim, which is covered below. 

When supporting your thesis, put yourself in your readers’ shoes. What might they not find logical in your argument? Toulmin’s terminology (claim, grounds, warrant, backing) can be helpful for critically analyzing your own ideas, as the section on warrants above shows. 

How solid is the evidence? Would some readers poke holes in it?

One of the following chapters in this Part will offer more suggestions for how to craft counterarguments and rebuttals. In addition, it will be helpful to review the section, Writing With Sources.

VI. Provide context and define key terms

When defending your claim, you will need to place your topic (and argument) in context by including relevant background material. Remember, your audience is relying on you for vital information, such as definitions, historical placement, and controversial positions. This background material might appear in either your introductory paragraph/s or your body paragraphs. How and where to incorporate background material depends a lot upon your topic, assignment, evidence, and audience.

Kairotic appeals

One reason context is so important is that it helps persuade the reader your claim is timely and appropriate to a present matter of concern. The timelines of an argument is its  kairos . Providing sufficient background information that pinpoints an urgent issue and conversation adds  kairotic appeal . This kind of context should appear before introducing your claim—whenever possible, the claim should sound like it’s deeply enmeshed in the moment, pitched at just the right time.

Definitions

One of the most important contextual pieces of information a writer can provide is to carefully define certain terms of ideas that play a key role in the argument. Part of what makes an argument so experimental is that many of the key terms (words) a writer uses are slippery. Words like “freedom,” “progress,” and “happiness” often appear in many casual arguments, but all of those words are heatedly disputed. These linguistic disputes are why good speakers and writers take their time clarifying key terms that play an important role in their argument.

Consider the debate over free speech in higher education. Most Universities state their commitment to free speech. It’s often in the student handbook. However, many student handbooks also state their commitment to learning and providing a safe and secure environment for that to happen. This second commitment sometimes operates in tension with free speech, which doesn’t care about truth, learning, or the interests of the institution. Google “free speech in higher education” and you’ll see a ton of news articles debating this issue.

In “ Free Speech Is Not an Academic Value ,” Stanley Fish takes the controversial stance that public universities should not value free speech above all other concerns. How does he support his opinion? He points to court decisions that distinguish between “speech on a matter of public concern and speech that is personal or internal to the operations of the unit.” Fish continues, “If the speech at issue falls under the first category, it is constitutionally protected; if it falls under the second, it can be regulated in the same way any employer can regulate speech that disrupts the core business of the workplace.”

From this distinction, he suggests that free speech is protected only when it’s nonacademic. When it’s academic speech, the interests of the institution (the learning outcomes for that class, the objectives of the campus as a whole, etc.) are paramount, and the foundational principle of higher education is “free inquiry” towards the truth. In the classroom and in other academic-related activities, campuses care most about “getting a matter of fact right,” and expressing oneself is secondary to that concern. Controversial indeed! 

Notice how Fish deftly uses authoritative definitions to help move forward his argument. He mentions previous court decisions (historical evidence) in order to justify his definition of free speech vs. academic speech. This careful parsing of certain terms is crucial for Fish’s position. It allows him to make the point that arguments related to free speech in higher education must pay close attention to what “speech” actually refers to: speech related to the public interest vs. speech internal to the institution. Only after identifying the different kinds of speech can he then support his broader claim.

In academic situations, persuasive writers are upfront and transparent about their definitions. If an important term is employed throughout your essay, it’s often good practiced to define it near the beginning, or whenever that term first appears.

Write What Matters Copyright © 2020 by Joel Gladd is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Open Library Publishing Platform - Thinking, Reasoning, Relating - History of Reasoning
• Social Science LibreTexts - Reasoning
• Pressbooks - Inductive and deductive reasoning
• College of DuPage Digital Press - Introduction to Psychology - Thinking, Reasoning, and Problem-Solving
• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Reasons for Action: Justification, Motivation, Explanation
• Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Faith: Historical Perspectives

reason , in philosophy , the faculty or process of drawing logical inferences . The term “reason” is also used in several other, narrower senses. Reason is in opposition to sensation , perception , feeling, desire, as the faculty (the existence of which is denied by empiricists ) by which fundamental truths are intuitively apprehended. These fundamental truths are the causes or “reasons” of all derivative facts. According to the German philosopher Immanuel Kant , reason is the power of synthesizing into unity, by means of comprehensive principles, the concepts that are provided by the intellect. That reason which gives a priori principles Kant calls “pure reason,” as distinguished from the “practical reason,” which is specially concerned with the performance of actions. In formal logic the drawing of inferences (frequently called “ratiocination,” from Latin ratiocinari, “to use the reasoning faculty”) is classified from Aristotle on as deductive (from generals to particulars) and inductive (from particulars to generals).

(Read Steven Pinker’s Britannica entry on rationality.)

In theology , reason, as distinguished from faith , is the human intelligence exercised upon religious truth whether by way of discovery or by way of explanation . The limits within which the reason may be used have been laid down differently in different churches and periods of thought: on the whole, modern Christianity, especially in the Protestant churches, tends to allow to reason a wide field, reserving, however, as the sphere of faith the ultimate (supernatural) truths of theology .

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Meaning of reasoning in English

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

• a posteriori
• illogicality
• illogically
• inclusive disjunction
• incoherently
• non sequitur
• non-theoretical
• nonscientific
• overintellectualization
• teleological
• theoretical
• theoretically

Translations of reasoning

Get a quick, free translation!

Word of the Day

the left wing

the political left

Simply the best! (Ways to describe the best)

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists
• be no reasoning with someone
• Translations
• All translations

To add reasoning to a word list please sign up or log in.

Add reasoning to one of your lists below, or create a new one.

{{message}}

Something went wrong.

There was a problem sending your report.

Look up a word, learn it forever.

Other forms: reasonings; reasoningly

Reasoning is a logical, thoughtful way of thinking. When your teacher explains the reasoning behind his classroom rules, he makes it clear exactly why and how he came up with them.

Voters often want to understand the reasoning behind certain laws, and toddlers almost always want to know the reasoning behind rules about bedtime and wearing warm clothes on cold days. You can also use reasoning as an adjective, to describe someone who can think logically. A reasoning adult can make decisions for herself. The word comes from reason , which is rooted in the Old French raisoner , "discuss or argue," and the Late Latin rationare , "to discourse."

• noun thinking that is coherent and logical synonyms: abstract thought , logical thinking see more see less types: show 31 types... hide 31 types... analysis , analytic thinking the abstract separation of a whole into its constituent parts in order to study the parts and their relations argument , argumentation , line , line of reasoning , logical argument a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating a truth or falsehood; the methodical process of logical reasoning conjecture reasoning that involves the formation of conclusions from incomplete evidence deduction , deductive reasoning , synthesis reasoning from the general to the particular (or from cause to effect) illation , inference the reasoning involved in drawing a conclusion or making a logical judgment on the basis of circumstantial evidence and prior conclusions rather than on the basis of direct observation anticipation , prediction , prevision the act of predicting (as by reasoning about the future) ratiocination logical and methodical reasoning reasoning backward , regress the reasoning involved when you assume the conclusion is true and reason backward to the evidence synthesis , synthetic thinking the combination of ideas into a complex whole line of inquiry , line of questioning an ordering of questions so as to develop a particular argument projection a prediction made by extrapolating from past observations prognostication , prophecy , vaticination knowledge of the future (usually said to be obtained from a divine source) adumbration , foreshadowing , prefiguration the act of providing vague advance indications; representing beforehand syllogism deductive reasoning in which a conclusion is derived from two premises theorisation , theorization the production or use of theories supposal , supposition the cognitive process of supposing analogy an inference that if things agree in some respects they probably agree in others corollary (logic) an inference that follows directly from the proof of another proposition derivation a line of reasoning that shows how a conclusion follows logically from accepted propositions deduction , entailment , implication , inference something that is inferred (deduced or entailed or implied) extrapolation an inference about the future (or about some hypothetical situation) based on known facts and observations presumption (law) an inference of the truth of a fact from other facts proved or admitted or judicially noticed breakdown , partitioning an analysis into mutually exclusive categories cost-benefit analysis an analysis of the cost effectiveness of different alternatives in order to see whether the benefits outweigh the costs dissection a minute and critical analysis elimination , reasoning by elimination analysis of a problem into alternative possibilities followed by the systematic rejection of unacceptable alternatives reductionism the analysis of complex things into simpler constituents systems analysis analysis of all aspects of a project along with ways to collect information about the operation of its parts trend analysis analysis of changes over time casuistry argumentation that is specious or excessively subtle and intended to be misleading policy a line of argument rationalizing the course of action of a government type of: cerebration , intellection , mentation , thinking , thought , thought process the process of using your mind to consider something carefully
• adjective endowed with the capacity to reason synonyms: intelligent , thinking rational consistent with or based on or using reason

Vocabulary lists containing reasoning

Persuade yourself to study this list of words related to argumentative writing. You'll learn all about making claims, supporting arguments with evidence, and maintaining an objective tone. It's no fallacy that reviewing these words will improve your credibility as a writer.

To improve your fluency in English Language Arts and Reading (ELAR), learn this academic vocabulary list that includes words selected from the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) state standards.

Sign up now (it’s free!)

Whether you’re a teacher or a learner, vocabulary.com can put you or your class on the path to systematic vocabulary improvement..

• Type 2 Diabetes
• Heart Disease
• Digestive Health
• Multiple Sclerosis
• Diet & Nutrition
• Health Insurance
• Public Health
• Patient Rights
• Caregivers & Loved Ones
• End of Life Concerns
• Health News
• Thyroid Test Analyzer
• Doctor Discussion Guides
• Hemoglobin A1c Test Analyzer
• Lipid Test Analyzer
• Complete Blood Count (CBC) Analyzer
• What to Buy
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Medical Expert Board

What Is Developmental Psychology?

Conditions treated, training and certifications.

Developmental psychology is the study of how humans grow, change, and adapt across the course of their lives. Developmental psychologists research the stages of physical, emotional, social, and intellectual development from the prenatal stage through infancy, childhood, adolescence, and adulthood.

This article covers developmental psychology, including the definition, types, life stages, and how to seek treatment when necessary.

seksan Mongkhonkhamsao / Getty Images

Defining Developmental Psychology

According to the American Psychological Association (APA), developmental psychology is a branch of psychology that focuses on how human beings grow, change, adapt, and mature across various life stages. Developmental psychology is also known as human development or lifespan psychology.

In each of the life stages of developmental psychology, people generally meet certain physical, emotional, and social milestones. These are the major life stages, according to developmental psychologists:

• Prenatal development: Developmental psychologists are interested in diagnoses, such as Down syndrome, that might be noticed during the prenatal (before birth) stage. They also investigate how maternal behaviors (behaviors of the pregnant parent), such as nutrition and drug use, could affect the developing fetus.
• Early childhood: Developmental psychologists are interested in whether young children are meeting key milestones, such as walking, talking, and developing fine motor skills (coordination in the hands, fingers, and wrists). They might also be interested in a child’s attachment to their parents and other caregivers.
• Middle childhood: In this stage, children learn about the world and acquire knowledge through experimentation, questioning, and observation. They begin to develop logical and moral reasoning skills.
• Adolescence: Adolescence is a time of major strides in terms of personal development and identity formation. Teens and young adults might experiment with various identities, career choices, or areas of interest.
• Early adulthood: During early adulthood, most people are focused on preparing for the rest of their lives through a focus on education, career, and financial independence. Romantic relationships, marriage, family-building, setting down “roots,” and child-rearing are often a focus of this life stage.
• Middle adulthood: Middle-aged adults are often focused on helping the next generation, whether in their own family or their community. They are also often interested in the legacy they’ll leave behind.
• Older adulthood: In addition to physical health challenges, older people might face issues like dementia or cognitive decline (decline in thinking, remembering, and reasoning). Older adults also often need to reflect on their lives, tell their stories, and find meaning and peace within the aging process.

The Origins of Developmental Psychology

During its early development as a branch of psychology in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, developmental psychology focused on infant and child development. As the field grew, so did its focus. Today, developmental psychologists focus on all stages of the human lifespan.  

Theories of Developmental Psychology

As developmental psychology grew over time, various researchers proposed theories about how to understand the process of human development. Depending on their training, a developmental psychologist might focus on a specific theory or approach within the field. 

These are a few of the major branches of developmental psychology.

Psychosocial Developmental Theory

Building on Austrian neurologist and founder of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychosexual development , psychologist Erik Erikson proposed a lifespan theory that included eight stages of psychosocial development .

Each of the stages corresponds to both an age range and a core “crisis” (such as trust vs. mistrust in infancy) that must be resolved before someone can move on to the next.

Cognitive Developmental Theory

Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development focuses on how children and youth gradually become able to think logically and scientifically. Piaget proposed that cognition develops through four distinct stages of intellectual development, beginning at birth and ending at age 12.

Attachment Theory

Attachment theory , originally developed by psychoanalyst John Bowlby, establishes the importance of a supportive, steady, and loving caregiver in infant and child development. If a child doesn’t establish such a connection, or if they experience parental separation or loss, they might continue to struggle with healthy attachments as they get older.

Sociocultural Developmental Theory

While Bowlby considered the importance of the immediate family in child development, psychologist Lev Vygotsky’s sociocultural developmental theory looks at the role of society. Cultural influences and beliefs can have a profound impact on how a person views their own identity and relates to others.

Developmental psychologists can help people address developmental issues in order to reach their full potential. 

Some of the conditions a developmental psychologist might treat include:

• Learning disabilities
• Intellectual disabilities
• Developmental delays
• Motor skill delays
• Issues with social and emotional development
• Auditory processing (hearing) disorder
• Autism spectrum disorder (ASD)
• Speech and language delays
• Mental health conditions like anxiety and depression, especially related to life stages

The training required to become a developmental psychologist is similar to that in other subfields of psychology. Most developmental psychologists start with an undergraduate degree in psychology or a related field, followed by a master’s degree and a doctoral degree (PhD). 

There are many master’s, graduate certificate, and PhD programs in developmental psychology in the United States. Some focus on a certain part of a person's lifespan, such as child and adolescent development. In addition to research and teaching, graduates may participate in a practicum or internship to pursue licensing as a therapist. 

When to Seek Treatment

If you're concerned that your child is facing a developmental delay, a developmental psychologist can assess them to ensure that they are meeting their milestones. It's best to seek an assessment, diagnosis, and treatment early, so intervention can begin as soon as possible.

Examples of when to see a developmental psychologist may include:

• An infant is struggling to bond with their parents.
• A toddler is missing milestones, such as walking or developing speech.
• A school-aged child is not progressing appropriately in reading or writing.
• An adolescent is facing challenges related to social and/or emotional development.

A developmental psychologist might perform physical and/or cognitive testing to diagnose your child or refer them to another specialist, including the following:

• Physical therapist (helps people improve movement and manage pain)
• Occupational therapist (helps people adjust to everyday activities after injury, illness, or disability)
• Speech-language pathologist (treats speech, language, and social and cognitive communication)
• Psychotherapist (uses talk therapy to treat mental health conditions)
• Neurologist (medical doctor who treats disorders of the brain, spinal cord, and nerves)
• Psychiatrist (medical doctor specializing in mental health conditions)

A developmental psychologist will also likely ask you and your child questions about issues in areas of their life such as friends, behavior, or school performance.

In addition to working with infants and children, developmental psychologists can also help people at any stage of life. In particular, many older adults benefit from working with a developmental psychologist if they're experiencing symptoms of dementia, ill health, or cognitive decline.

Developmental psychology is the study of how human beings grow and change throughout their lives. Many developmental psychologists focus on the intellectual, social, emotional, and physical development of infants, children, and adolescents. Others treat and assess people of all ages. 

Developmental psychologists can treat issues such as developmental delays, intellectual disabilities, learning disabilities, speech and language delays, motor skill delays, dementia, anxiety, depression, auditory processing disorder, autism spectrum disorder, and more. They also make referrals to other specialists, such as physical therapists, psychiatrists, and speech-language pathologists. 

American Psychological Association. Developmental psychology .

Maryville University. What is human development and why is it important ?

American Psychological Association. Developmental psychology studies human development across the lifespan .

Oklahoma State University Library.  Social development: Erikson’s eight psychosocial crises .

Oklahoma State University Library. Cognitive development: the theory of Jean Piaget .

University of Illinois Psychology Department Labs. Adult attachment theory and research .

Oklahoma State University Library. Social theories of learning .

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Healthy habits: child development .

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC's developmental milestones .

By Laura Dorwart Dr. Dorwart has a Ph.D. from UC San Diego and is a health journalist interested in mental health, pregnancy, and disability rights.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

A review of the development and future challenges of case-based reasoning.

1. Introduction

2. basic framework and concept of cbr, 3. development of cbr key technologies, 3.1. case representation, 3.2. similarity measure and case retrieval, 3.2.1. similarity measure, 3.2.2. case retrieval.

• The representation of the objects.
• The case base structure.
• The similarity measure.
• The accuracy of the intended answer or solution.

3.3. Case Adaptation

• Substitutions: They replace some part of the retrieved solution by another or by several others.
• Structural transformations: They alter the structure of the solution and re-organize the solution by adding, deleting, or replacing parts of the proposed solution [ 70 ].
• Generative adaptations: They replay the method of deriving the retrieved solution on the new problem. This is the most complex form of adaptation.

3.4. Case Base Maintenance (CBM)

4. application fields of cbr, 4.1. diagnosis, 4.2. prediction, 4.3. design and planning, 4.4. decision support, 4.5. recommendation system, 4.6. other applications, 5. summary and challenge, author contributions, conflicts of interest.

• Aha, D.W. The omnipresence of case-based reasoning in science and application. Knowl.-Based Syst. 1998 , 11 , 261–273. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aleven, V. Using background knowledge in case-based legal reasoning: A computational model and an intelligent learning environment. Artif. Intell. 2003 , 150 , 183–237. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ni, P.; Liu, B.; He, G. An online optimization strategy for a fluid catalytic cracking process using a case-based reasoning. RSC Adv. 2021 , 11 , 28557–28564. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Chen, Y.Y.; Zhang, L.B.; Hu, J.Q.; Liu, Z.Y.; Xu, K.K. Emergency response recommendation for long-distance oil and gas pipeline based on an accident case representation model. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2020 , 77 , 104779. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, J.H.; Jia, X.L. A multimedia case-based reasoning framework for assembly sequence planning. Assem. Autom. 2019 , 39 , 673–684. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Duan, J.L.; Lin, Z.B.; Jiao, F.; Jiang, Y.X.; Chen, K.X. A dynamic case-based reasoning system for responding to infectious disease outbreaks. Expert Syst. Appl. 2022 , 204 , 117628. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schank, R. Dynamic Memory: A Theory of Reminding and Learning in Computers and People ; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1982. [ Google Scholar ]
• Riesbeck, C.K.; Schank, R. Inside Case-Based Reasoning ; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1989. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aamodt, A.; Plaza, E. Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Commun. 1994 , 7 , 39–59. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Watson, I. Case-based reasoning is a methodology not a technology. Knowl.-Based Syst. 1999 , 12 , 303–308. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Finnie, G.; Sun, Z.H. R5 model for case-based reasoning. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2003 , 16 , 59–65. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chuang, C.L. Application of hybrid case-based reasoning for enhanced performance in bankruptcy prediction. Inf. Sci. 2013 , 236 , 174–185. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bergmann, R.; Kolodner, J.; Plaza, E. Representation in case-based reasoning. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 2005 , 20 , 209–213. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amailef, K.; Lu, J. Ontology-supported case-based reasoning approach for intelligent m-Government emergency response services. Decis. Support Syst. 2013 , 55 , 79–97. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Mantaras, R.L.; Mcsherry, D.; Bridge, D.; Leake, D.; Smyth, B.; Craw, S.; Faltings, B.; Maher, M.L.; Cox, M.T.; Forbus, K.; et al. Retrieval, reuse, revision and retention in case-based reasoning. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 2005 , 20 , 215–240. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Porter, B.W.; Bareiss, R.; Holte, R.C. Concept learning and heuristic classification in weak-theory domains. Artif. Intell. 1990 , 45 , 229–264. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Minsky, M. A Framework for Representing Knowledge. In MIT-AI Laboratory Memo ; MIT AI Lab: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974. [ Google Scholar ]
• Qian, Q.; Zhang, R.; Che, H.Y. Object-oriented case representation and its application in IDS. In Proceedings of the 8th IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Computer and Information Science, Shanghai, China, 1–3 June 2009; pp. 301–306. [ Google Scholar ]
• Neves, J.; Goncalves, N.; Oliveira, R.; Gomes, S.; Neves, J.; Macedo, J.; Abelha, A.; Analide, C.; Machado, J.; Santos, M.F.; et al. Screening a case base for stroke disease detection. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Hybrid Artificial Intelligence Systems (HAIS), Seville, Spain, 18–20 April 2016; Volume 9648, pp. 18–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zeilinger, H.; Perner, A.; Kohlhauser, S. Bionically inspired information representation module. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual International Conference on Human System Interaction (HSI), Rzeszow, Poland, 13–15 May 2010; Volume 9648, pp. 13–15. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kovacs, S. Adapting the scale and move FRI for the fuzziness interpolation of the double fuzzy point rule representation. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ), Hyderabad, India, 7–10 July 2013; pp. 7–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, C.D.; Wang, D.; Yang, W.M. Case representation and retrieval for complex product design based on case-based reasoning. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2022 , 43 , 2985–3002. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharma, A.; Sharma, A.; Deodhare, D.; Chakraborti, S.; Kumar, P.S.; Mitra, P.P. Case representation and retrieval techniques for neuroanatomical connectivity extraction from PubMed. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Atlanta, GA, USA, 31 October–2 November 2016; Volume 9969, pp. 370–386. [ Google Scholar ]
• Guo, Y.; Zhang, B.; Sun, Y.; Jiang, K.; Wu, K. Machine learning based feature selection and knowledge reasoning for CBR system under big data. Pattern Recognit. 2020 , 112 , 107805. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhu, L.N.; Ren, K.; Pu, J.Y. Framework case decision reasoning method integrating multiple information. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Electromechanical Control Technology and Transportation (ICECTT), Chongqing, China, 14–16 May 2021; Volume 12081, p. 1208143. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dong, J.W.; Jing, X.W.; Lu, X.; Liu, J.F.; Cao, X.W.; Du, C.; Li, J.; Li, L. Process knowledge graph modeling techniques and application methods for ship heterogeneous models. Sci. Rep. 2022 , 12 , 2911. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Bannour, W.; Maalel, A.; Ben Ghezala, H.H. Case-based reasoning for crisis response: Case representation and case retrieval. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2020 , 176 , 1063–1072. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• López-Sánchez, D.; Herrero, J.R.; Arrieta, A.G.; Corchado, J.M. Hybridizing metric learning and case-based reasoning for adaptable clickbait detection. Appl. Intell. 2017 , 48 , 2976–2982. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amin, K.; Stelios, K.; Althoff, K.D.; Dengel, A.; Petridis, M. Cases without borders: Automating knowledge acquisition approach using deep autoencoders and Siamese networks in case-based reasoning. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI), Portland, OR, USA, 4–6 November 2019; pp. 133–140. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leake, D.; Crandall, D. On bringing case-based reasoning methodology to deep learning. In Proceedings of the 28th Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 8–12 June 2020; Volume 12311, pp. 343–348. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bergmann, R.; Stahl, A. Similarity measures for object-oriented case representations. In Proceedings of the 4th European Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning (EWCBR), Dublin, Ireland, 23–25 September 1998; Volume 1488, pp. 25–36. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zheng, J.; Wang, Y.M.; Lin, Y. Hybrid multi-attribute case retrieval method based on intuitionistic fuzzy and evidence reasoning. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2019 , 36 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mathisen, B.M.; Aamodt, A.; Bach, K.; Langseth, H. Learning similarity measures from data. Prog. Artif. Intell. 2019 , 9 , 129–143. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yan, A.J.; Yu, H.; Wang, D.H. Case-based reasoning classifier based on learning pseudo metric retrieval. Expert Syst. Appl. 2017 , 89 , 91–98. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, H.Q.; Sun, B.B.; Shen, X.F. Hybrid similarity measure for retrieval in case-based reasoning systems and its applications for computer numerical control turret design. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 2018 , 232 , 918–927. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lin, K.S. A Case-based reasoning system for interior design using a new cosine similarity retrieval algorithm. J. Inf. Telecommun. 2020 , 4 , 91–104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dolphin, R.; Smyth, B.; Xu, Y.; Dong, R.H. Measuring financial time series similarity with a view to identifying profitable stock market opportunities. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 64–78. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kar, D.; Chakraborti, S.; Ravindran, B. Feature weighting and confidence based prediction for case based reasoning systems. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Lyon, France, 3–6 September 2012; Volume 7466, pp. 211–225. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gu, D.X.; Liang, C.H.; Zhao, H.M. A case-based reasoning system based on weighted heterogeneous value distance metric for breast cancer diagnosis. Artif. Intell. Med. 2017 , 77 , 31–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kwon, N.; Song, K.; Park, M.; Jang, Y.J.; Yoon, I.; Ahn, Y. Preliminary service life estimation model for MEP components using case-based reasoning and genetic algorithm. Sustainability 2019 , 11 , 3074. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yan, X.; Tu, N.W.; Wu, S.W.; Zhu, Y.H. Dynamic prediction of coal and gas outburst based on BPNN and case-based reasoning. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Industrial Artificial Intelligence (IAI), Shenyang, China, 23–27 July 2019; pp. 1–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ha, J.B.; Shi, S.Y.; Wang, Y.W. Application of case retrieval algorithm based on variable weighted grey relation in urban rail transit network operation pattern database. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 3rd International Conference of Safe Production and Informatization (IICSPI), Chongqing, China, 28–30 November 2020; pp. 274–277. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoffmann, M.; Malburg, L.; Klein, P.; Bergmann, R. Using siamese graph neural networks for similarity-based retrieval in process-oriented case-based reasoning. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 8–12 June 2020; Volume 12311, pp. 229–244. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, J.G.; Xu, C.J.; Zhang, T. Similarity measure of time series based on Siamese and sequential neural networks. In Proceedings of the 39th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Shenyang, China, 27–29 July 2020; Volume 2020, pp. 6408–6413. [ Google Scholar ]
• Verma, D.; Bach, K.; Mork, P.J. Similarity measure development for case-based reasoning-a data-driven approach. In Proceedings of the 3rd Nordic Artificial Intelligence Research and Development, Trondheim, Norway, 27–28 May 2019; Volume 1056, pp. 143–148. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lenz, M.; Ollinger, S.; Sahitaj, P.; Bergmann, R. Semantic textual similarity measures for case-based retrieval of argument graphs. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Trondheim, Norway, 27–28 May 2019; Voume 11680, pp. 219–234. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zeyen, C.; Bergmann, R. A*-based similarity assessment of semantic graphs. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 8–12 June 2020; Volume 12311, pp. 17–32. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu, Y.J.; Zhou, J.T. A contextual information-augmented probabilistic case-based reasoning model for knowledge graph reasoning. In Proceedings of the 31st Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Aberdeen, UK, 17–20 July 2023; Volume 14141, pp. 102–117. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kang, J.M.; Mokbel, M.F.; Shekhar, S.; Xia, T.; Zhang, D.H. Incremental and general evaluation of reverse nearest neighbors. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2010 , 22 , 983–999. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rallabandi, V.P.S.; Sett, S.K. Knowledge-based image retrieval system. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2008 , 21 , 89–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharifi, M.; Naghibzadeh, M.; Rouhani, M. Adaptive case-based reasoning using support vector regression. In Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC), Ghaziabad, India, 22–23 February 2013; pp. 1006–1010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang, S.; Wang, J.K.; Han, Y.H. Pattern matching strategy based on optimized fuzzy clustering algorithm for industrial internet. In Proceedings of the 40th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Guangzhou, China, 27–30 July 2019; Volume 2019, pp. 7005–7009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhai, Z.H.; Ortega, J.F.M.; Martinez, N.L.; Xu, H.L. An efficient case retrieval algorithm for agricultural case-based reasoning systems, with consideration of case base maintenance. Agriculture 2020 , 10 , 387. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cui, X.L.; Cai, S.Q.; Qin, Y.C. Similarity-based approach for accurately retrieving similar cases to intelligently handle online complaints. Kybernetes 2017 , 46 , 1223–1244. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, H.; Meng, X.H.; Zhu, X.Y. Improving knowledge capture and retrieval in the BIM environment: Combining case-based reasoning and natural language processing. Autom. Constr. 2022 , 139 , 104317. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mulayim, M.O.; Arcos, J.L. Fast anytime retrieval with confidence in large-scale temporal case bases. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2020 , 206 , 106374. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Portinale, L. Integrating knn retrieval with inference on graphical models in case-based reasoning. In Proceedings of the 32nd Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Merida, Mexico, 1–4 July 2024; Volume 14775, pp. 1–16. [ Google Scholar ]
• Abbas, F.; Najjar, N.; Wilson, D. The bites eclectic: Critique-based conversational recommendation for diversity-focused meal planning. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 1–16. [ Google Scholar ]
• McGinty, L.; Smyth, B. On the role of diversity in conversational recommender systems. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Trondheim, Norway, 23–26 June 2003; Volume 2689, pp. 276–290. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smyth, B.; Keane, M.T. Experiments on adaptation-guided retrieval in case-based design. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Sesimbra, Portugal, 23–26 October 1995; Volume 1010, pp. 313–324. [ Google Scholar ]
• David, L.; Ye, X.M. Harmonizing case retrieval and adaptation with alternating optimization. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 125–139. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jalali, V.; Leake, D. An ensemble approach to adaptation-guided retrieval. In Proceedings of the 27th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference (FLAIRS), Pensacola Beach, FL, USA, 21–23 May 2014; pp. 295–300. [ Google Scholar ]
• McSherry, D. Explanation in recommender systems. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2005 , 24 , 179–197. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Doyle, D.; Cunningham, P.; Bridge, D.; Rahman, Y. Explanation oriented retrieval. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 2004 , 3155 , 157–168. [ Google Scholar ]
• Darias, J.M.; Caro-Martínez, M.; Díaz-Agudo, B.; Recio-Garcia, J.A. Using case-based reasoning for capturing expert knowledge on explanation methods. In Proceedings of the 30th Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Nancy, France, 12–15 September 2022; Volume 13405, pp. 3–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chang, J.W.; Lee, M.C.; Wang, T.I. Integrating a semantic-based retrieval agent into case-based reasoning systems: A case study of an online bookstore. Comput. Ind. J. Elsevier 2016 , 78 , 29–42. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lepage, Y.; Lieber, J.; Mornard, I.; Nauer, E.; Romary, J.; Sies, R. The French correction: When retrieval is harder to specify than adaptation. In Proceedings of the 28th Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 8–12 June 2020; Volume 12311, pp. 309–324. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilkerson, Z.; Leake, D.; Crandall, D.J. On combining knowledge-engineered and network-extracted features for retrieval. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 248–262. [ Google Scholar ]
• Low, N.; Hesser, J.; Blessing, M. Multiple retrieval case-based reasoning for incomplete datasets. J. Biomed. Inform. 2019 , 92 , 103127. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kolodner, J. Case-Based Reasoning (Morgan Kaufmann Series in Representation and Reasoning) ; Morgan Kaufmann: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
• Craw, S. Introspective learning to build case-based reasoning (CBR) knowledge containers. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition (MLDM), Leipzig, Germany, 5–7 July 2003; Volume 2734, pp. 1–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shiu, S.C.K.; Yeung, D.S.; Sun, C.H.; Wang, X.Z. Transferring case knowledge to adaptation knowledge: An approach for case-base maintenance. Comput. Intell. 2001 , 17 , 295–314. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Qi, J.; Hu, J.; Peng, Y.H. A modularized case adaptation method of case-based reasoning in parametric machinery design. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2017 , 64 , 352–366. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Minor, M.; Bergmann, R.; Gorg, S. Case-based adaptation of workflows. Inf. Syst. 2014 , 40 , 142–152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leake, D.; Powell, J. Mining large-scale knowledge sources for case adaptation knowledge. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Northern Ireland, UK, 13–16 August 2007; Volume 4626, pp. 209–223. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hanney, K.; Keane, M.T. Learning adaptation rules from a case-base. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Advances in Case-Based Reasoning (EWCBR), Lausanne, Switzerland, 14–16 November 1996; Volume 1168, pp. 179–192. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jalali, V.; Leake, D.; Forouzandehmehr, N. Ensemble of adaptations for classification: Learning adaptation rules for categorical features. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Atlanta, GA, USA, 31 October–2 November 2016; Volume 9969, pp. 186–202. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liao, C.K.; Liu, A.; Chao, Y.S. A machine learning approach to case adaptation. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Knowledge Engineering (AIKE), Laguna Hills, CA, USA, 26–28 September 2018; pp. 106–109. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yan, A.J.; Zhang, K.H.; Yu, Y.H.; Wang, P. An attribute difference revision method in case-based reasoning and its application. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2017 , 65 , 212–219. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jalali, V.; Leake, D. Enhancing case-based regression with automatically-generated ensembles of adaptations. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 2016 , 46 , 237–258. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lieber, J.; Nauer, E. Adaptation knowledge discovery using positive and negative cases. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 140–155. [ Google Scholar ]
• Malburg, L.; Hotz, M.; Bergmann, R. Improving complex adaptations in process-oriented case-based reasoning by applying rule-based adaptation. In Proceedings of the 32nd Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Merida, Mexico, 1–4 July 2024; Volume 14775, pp. 50–66. [ Google Scholar ]
• Glatt, R.; Da Silva, F.L.; da Costa Bianchi, R.A.; Costa, A.H.R. DECAF: Deep case-based policy inference for knowledge transfer in reinforcement learning. Expert Syst. Appl. 2020 , 156 , 113420. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Long, X.J.; Li, H.T.; Du, Y.F.; Mao, E.R.; Tai, J.J. A knowledge-based automated design system for mechanical products based on a general knowledge framework. Expert Syst. Appl. 2021 , 178 , 114960. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leake, D.B.; Wilson, D.C. Categorizing case-base maintenance: Dimensions and directions. In Proceedings of the 4th European Workshop on Advances in Case-Based Reasoning (EWCBR), Dublin, Ireland, 23–25 September 1998; Volume 1488, pp. 196–207. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lupiani, E.; Juarez, J.M.; Palma, J. Evaluating case-base maintenance algorithms. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2014 , 67 , 180–194. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Smiti, A.; Elouedi, Z. WCOID-DG: An approach for case base maintenance based on Weighting, Clustering, Outliers, Internal Detection and Dbsan-Gmeans. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 2014 , 80 , 27–38. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nakhjiri, N.; Salamo, M.; Sanchez-marre, M. Reputation-based maintenance in case-based reasoning. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2020 , 193 , 105283. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Smyth, B.; McKenna, E. Building compact competent case-bases. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Seeon Monastery, Germany, 27–30 July 1999; Volume 1650, pp. 329–342. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhu, J.; Yang, Q. Remembering to add: Competence-preserving case-addition policies for case-base maintenance. In Proceedings of the 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Stockholm, Sweden, 31 July–6 August 1999; Volume 99, pp. 234–241. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leake, D.B.; Wilson, D.C. Remembering why to remember: Performance-guided case-base maintenance. In Proceedings of the 5rd European Workshop on Advances in Case-Based Reasoning (EWCBR), Trento, Italy, 6–9 September 2000; Volume 1898, pp. 161–172. [ Google Scholar ]
• Segata, N.; Blanzieri, E.; Cunningham, P. A scalable noise reduction technique for large case-based systems. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Seattle, WA, USA, 20–23 July 2009; Volume 5650, pp. 328–342. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chebel-Morello, B.; Haouchine, M.K.; Zerhouni, N. Case-based maintenance: Structuring and incrementing the case base. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2015 , 88 , 165–183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lu, N.; Zhang, G.Q.; Lu, J. Concept drift detection via competence models. Artif. Intell. 2014 , 209 , 11–28. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chebli, A.; Djebbar, A.; Merouani, H.F.; Lounis, H. Case-base maintenance: An approach based on active semi-supervised learning. Int. J. Pattern Recognit. Artif. Intell. 2021 , 35 , 2151011. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Smiti, A.; Elouedi, Z. Dynamic maintenance case base using knowledge discovery techniques for case based reasoning systems. Theor. Comput. Sci. 2020 , 817 , 24–32. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, S.K.; Bian, C.; Li, X.; Tan, L.; Tang, D.X. Optimized fault diagnosis based on FMEA-style CBR and BN for embedded software system. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2018 , 94 , 3441–3453. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, M.Q.; Qu, R.; Fang, W.G. Case-based reasoning system for fault diagnosis of aero-engines. Expert Syst. Appl. 2022 , 202 , 117350. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Benamina, M.; Atmani, B.; Benbelkacem, S. Diabetes diagnosis by case-based reasoning and fuzzy logic. Int. J. Interact. Multimed. Artif. Intell. 2018 , 5 , 72–80. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, L.; Qi, P.; Zhang, H. Research on auxiliary diagnosis technology of chronic disease based on case-based reasoning. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Advances in Electrical Engineering and Computer Applications (AEECA), Dalian, China, 27–28 August 2021; pp. 322–328. [ Google Scholar ]
• Feng, K.; Xu, A.J.; He, D.F.; Yang, L.Z. Case-based reasoning method based on mechanistic model correction for predicting endpoint sulphur content of molten iron in KR desulphurization. Ironmak. Steelmak. 2020 , 47 , 799–806. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yan, A.J.; Shao, H.S.; Wang, P. A soft-sensing method of dissolved oxygen concentration by groupgenetic case-based reasoning with integrating group decision making. Neurocomputing 2015 , 169 , 422–429. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bebarta, D.K.; Das, T.K.; Chowdhary, C.L.; Gao, X.Z. An intelligent hybrid system for forecasting stock and forex trading signals using optimized recurrent FLANN and case-based reasoning. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 2021 , 14 , 1763–1772. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shao, J.F.; Liang, C.Y.; Liu, Y.J.; Xu, J.; Zhao, S.P. Relief demand forecasting based on intuitionistic fuzzy case-based reasoning. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2021 , 74 , 100932. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Feely, C.; Caulfield, B.; Lawlor, A.; Smyth, B. A case-based reasoning approach to predicting and explaining running related injuries. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 79–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bai, Y.B.; Chen, D.; Zhang, Z.Y. A conditional generative adversarial networks-augmented case-based reasoning framework for crop yield predictions with time-series remote sensing data. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Merida, Mexico, 1 July 2024; Volume 3708, pp. 192–205. [ Google Scholar ]
• Grace, K.; Maher, M.L.; Wilson, D.C.; Najjar, N.A. Combining CBR and deep learning to generate surprising recipe designs. In Proceedings of the 24th Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Atlanta, GA, USA, 31 October–2 November 2016; Volume 9969, pp. 154–169. [ Google Scholar ]
• Huo, Y.L.; Liu, J.B.; Xiong, J.; Xiao, W.J.; Zhao, J.F. Machine learning and CBR integrated mechanical product design approach. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2022 , 52 , 101611. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ke, C.; Jiang, Z.G.; Zhang, H. An intelligent design for remanufacturing method based on vector space model and case-based reasoning. J. Clean. Prod. 2022 , 277 , 123269. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jiang, Z.G.; Jiang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Cao, H.J.; Tian, G.D. A hybrid approach of rough set and case-based reasoning to remanufacturing process planning. J. Intell. Manuf. 2019 , 30 , 19–32. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xie, R.; Luo, M.Q.; Chen, Z.K.; Liu, W.H. A multi-CBR algorithm based on comprehensive evaluation for operation planning of helicopter. IEEE Access 2020 , 8 , 124110. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abdelwahed, M.F.; Mohamed, A.E.; Saleh, M.A. Solving the motion planning problem using learning experience through case-based reasoning and machine learning algorithms. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2020 , 11 , 133–142. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schoenborn, J.M.; Althoff, K.D. A multi-agent case-based reasoning intrusion detection system prototype. In Proceedings of the 31st Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Aberdeen, UK, 17–20 July 2023; Volume 14141, pp. 359–374. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang, D.J.; Liu, J.W.; Lin, Q.L.; Yu, H.L. A decision-making system based on case-based reasoning for predicting stroke rehabilitation demands in heterogeneous information environment. Appl. Soft Comput. 2024 , 154 , 111358. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hamrouni, B.; Bourouis, A.; Korichi, A.; Brahmi, M. Explainable ontology-based intelligent decision support system for business model design and sustainability. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 9819. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khanmohammadi, E.; Safari, H.; Zandieh, M.; Malmir, B.; Tirkolaee, E.B. Development of dynamic balanced scorecard using case-based reasoning method and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2024 , 71 , 899–912. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ali, S.I.; Jung, S.W.; Bilal, H.S.M.; Lee, S.-H.; Hussain, J.; Afzal, M.; Hussain, M.; Ali, T.; Chung, T.; Lee, S. Clinical decision support system based on hybrid knowledge modeling: A case study of chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder treatment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022 , 19 , 226. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Amin, K.; Kapetanakis, S.; Polatidis, N.; Althoff, K.D.; Dengel, A. DeepKAF: A heterogeneous CBR and deep learning approach for NLP prototyping. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on INnovations in Intelligent SysTems and Applications (INISTA), Novi Sad, Serbia, 24–26 August 2020; pp. 1–7. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bridge, D.; Goeker, M.H.; Mcginty, L.; Smyth, B. Case-based recommender systems. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 2005 , 20 , 315–320. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Soto-Forero, D.; Ackermann, S.; Betbeder, M.L.; Henriet, J. The intelligent tutoring system AI-VT with case-based reasoning and real time recommender models. In Proceedings of the 32nd Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Merida, Mexico, 1–4 July 2024; Volume 14775, pp. 191–205. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dong, R.H.; Smyth, B. Personalized opinion-based recommendation. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Atlanta, GA, USA, 31 October–2 November 2016; Volume 9969, pp. 93–107. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, J.Y.; Wu, H.S.; Zuo, W.Y.; Tang, H.Y. Case-based reasoning for personalized recommender on user preference through dynamic clustering. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computing and Data Science (CDS), Stanford, CA, USA, 28–30 January 2021; Volume 158, pp. 1–5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Raza, B.; Aslam, A.; Sher, A.; Malik, A.K.; Faheem, M. Autonomic performance prediction framework for data warehouse queries using lazy learning approach. Appl. Soft Comput. 2020 , 91 , 106216. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yu, W.; Guo, X.T.; Chen, F.; Chang, T.; Wang, M.Z.; Wang, X.D. Similar questions correspond to similar SQL queries: A case-based reasoning approach for Text-to-SQL translation. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 294–308. [ Google Scholar ]
• Upadhyay, A.; Massie, S.; Singh, R.K.; Gupta, G.; Ojha, M. A case-based approach to Data-to-Text generation. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 232–247. [ Google Scholar ]
• Upadhyay, A.; Massie, S. CBR assisted context-aware surface realisation for data-to-text generation. In Proceedings of the 31st Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Aberdeen, UK, 17–20 July 2023; Volume 14141, pp. 34–49. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turner, J.T.; Floyd, M.W.; Gupta, K.; Oates, T. NOD-CC: A hybrid CBR-CNN architecture for novel object discovery. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Otzenhausen, Germany, 8–12 September 2019; Volume 11680, pp. 373–387. [ Google Scholar ]
• Corbat, L.; Nauval, M.; Henriet, J.; Lapayre, J.C. A fusion method based on deep learning and case-based reasoning which improves the resulting medical image segmentations. Expert Syst. Appl. 2020 , 147 , 113200. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Astier, E.; Iopeti, H.; Lieber, J.; Mathieu Steinbach, H.; Yvoz, L. Case-based cleaning of text images. In Proceedings of the 31st Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Aberdeen, UK, 17–20 July 2023; Volume 14141, pp. 344–358. [ Google Scholar ]
• Amin, K.; Kapetanakis, S.; Althoff, K.D.; Dengel, A.; Petridis, M. Answering with cases: A CBR approach to deep learning. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Stockholm, Sweden, 9–12 July 2018; Volume 11156, pp. 15–27. [ Google Scholar ]
• Confalonieri, R.; Coba, L.; Wagner, B.; Besold, T.R. A historical perspective of explainable Artificial Intelligence. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Data Min. Knowl. Discov. 2020 , 11 , e1391. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Recio-García, J.A.; Parejas-Llanovarced, H.; Orozco-del-Castillo, M.G.; Brito-Borges, E.E. A case-based approach for the selection of explanation algorithms in image classification. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 12877, pp. 186–200. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weber, R.O.; Johs, A.J.; Li, J.; Huang, K. Investigating textual case-based XAI. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Stockholm, Sweden, 9–12 July 2018; Volume 11156, pp. 431–447. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nadeem, R.; Wu, H.; Paik, H.; Wang, C. A case based deep neural network interpretability framework and its user study. In Proceedings of the Web Information Systems Engineering—WISE 2019, Hong Kong, China, 19–22 January 2020; Volume 11881, pp. 147–161. [ Google Scholar ]
• Parejas-Llanovarced, H.; Darias, J.M.; Caro-Martínez, M.; Recio-Garcia, J.A. Selecting explanation methods for intelligent iot systems: A case-based reasoning approach. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR), Aberdeen, UK, 17–20 July 2023; Volume 14141, pp. 185–199. [ Google Scholar ]
• Caro-Martínez, M.; Darias, J.M.; Díaz-Agudo, B.; Recio-García, J.A. Use case-specific reuse of XAI strategies: Design and analysis through an evaluation metrics library. In Proceedings of the 32nd Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Merida, Mexico, 1–4 July 2024; Volume 14775, pp. 81–95. [ Google Scholar ]
• Darias, J.M.; Díaz-Agudo, B.; Recio-Garcia, J.A. A systematic review on model-agnostic XAI libraries. In Proceedings of the Workshops Proceedings for the 29th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR 2021), Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2021; Volume 3017, pp. 28–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leake, D.; Wilkerson, Z.; Vats, V.; Acharya, K.; Crandall, D. Examining the impact of network architecture on extracted feature quality for CBR. In Proceedings of the 31st Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (ICCBR), Aberdeen, UK, 17–20 July 2023; Volume 14141, pp. 3–18. [ Google Scholar ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Yan, A.; Cheng, Z. A Review of the Development and Future Challenges of Case-Based Reasoning. Appl. Sci. 2024 , 14 , 7130. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167130

Yan A, Cheng Z. A Review of the Development and Future Challenges of Case-Based Reasoning. Applied Sciences . 2024; 14(16):7130. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167130

Yan, Aijun, and Zijun Cheng. 2024. "A Review of the Development and Future Challenges of Case-Based Reasoning" Applied Sciences 14, no. 16: 7130. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167130

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

How Christian Conservatives Are Planning for the Next Battle, on I.V.F.

Republicans may be backing away from abortion, but these activists have a strategy, with or without Trump.

By Elizabeth Dias

The pivot seems clear. The Republican Party of the post-Roe era is sidelining anti-abortion activists. Project 2025, the conservative blueprint with innovative abortion bans , has been disavowed by Donald Trump. And the new G.O.P. platform even promises to advance access to in vitro fertilization.

But as Mr. Trump distances himself from the anti-abortion revolution his own administration ushered in, a powerful battalion of conservative Christians has pushed ahead. In recent months, they have quietly laid the groundwork for their fight to restrict not only access to abortion but also to I.V.F.

They are planting seeds for their ultimate goal of ending abortion from conception, both within the Republican Party and beyond it. They face a tough political battle since their positions are largely unpopular and do not reflect majority opinion, particularly on I.V.F.

As they see it, their challenge spans generations, not simply a single political cycle. And their approach — including controlling regulatory language, state party platforms and the definition of when life begins — reflects an incremental strategy similar to the one activists used for decades to eventually overturn Roe v. Wade.

“I expect there will be steps backwards as well as what we are working toward, which are long strikes forward,” said R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., who has been newly mobilizing evangelicals against I.V.F.

The fall of Roe itself was far from linear, he noted. “It was nearly a half century of work, a half century of frustration, a half century of setbacks as well as advances,” Mr. Mohler said. “It will be a hard uphill climb, but that’s what we are called to.”

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Try AI-powered search

How AI models are getting smarter

Deep neural networks are learning diffusion and other tricks.

Your browser does not support the <audio> element.

T ype in a question to Chat GPT and an answer will materialise. Put a prompt into DALL - E 3 and an image will emerge. Click on TikTok’s “for you” page and you will be fed videos to your taste. Ask Siri for the weather and in a moment it will be spoken back to you.

All these things are powered by artificial-intelligence ( AI ) models. Most rely on a neural network, trained on massive amounts of information—text, images and the like—relevant to how it will be used. Through much trial and error the weights of connections between simulated neurons are tuned on the basis of these data, akin to adjusting billions of dials until the output for a given input is satisfactory.

There are many ways to connect and layer neurons into a network. A series of advances in these architectures has helped researchers build neural networks which can learn more efficiently and which can extract more useful findings from existing datasets, driving much of the recent progress in AI .

Most of the current excitement has been focused on two families of models: large language models ( LLM s) for text, and diffusion models for images. These are deeper (ie, have more layers of neurons) than what came before, and are organised in ways that let them churn quickly through reams of data.

LLM s—such as GPT , Gemini, Claude and Llama—are all built on the so-called transformer architecture. Introduced in 2017 by Ashish Vaswani and his team at Google Brain, the key principle of transformers is that of “attention”. An attention layer allows a model to learn how multiple aspects of an input—such as words at certain distances from each other in text—are related to each other, and to take that into account as it formulates its output. Many attention layers in a row allow a model to learn associations at different levels of granularity—between words, phrases or even paragraphs. This approach is also well-suited for implementation on graphics-processing unit ( GPU ) chips, which has allowed these models to scale up and has, in turn, ramped up the market capitalisation of Nvidia, the world’s leading GPU -maker.

Transformer-based models can generate images as well as text. The first version of DALL - E , released by Open AI in 2021, was a transformer that learned associations between groups of pixels in an image, rather than words in a text. In both cases the neural network is translating what it “sees” into numbers and performing maths (specifically, matrix operations) on them. But transformers have their limitations. They struggle to learn consistent world-models. For example, when fielding a human’s queries they will contradict themselves from one answer to the next, without any “understanding” that the first answer makes the second nonsensical (or vice versa), because they do not really “know” either answer—just associations of certain strings of words that look like answers.

And as many now know, transformer-based models are prone to so-called “hallucinations” where they make up plausible-looking but wrong answers, and citations to support them. Similarly, the images produced by early transformer-based models often broke the rules of physics and were implausible in other ways (which may be a feature for some users, but was a bug for designers who sought to produce photo-realistic images). A different sort of model was needed.

Not my cup of tea

Enter diffusion models, which are capable of generating far more realistic images. The main idea for them was inspired by the physical process of diffusion. If you put a tea bag into a cup of hot water, the tea leaves start to steep and the colour of the tea seeps out, blurring into clear water. Leave it for a few minutes and the liquid in the cup will be a uniform colour. The laws of physics dictate this process of diffusion. Much as you can use the laws of physics to predict how the tea will diffuse, you can also reverse-engineer this process—to reconstruct where and how the tea bag might first have been dunked. In real life the second law of thermodynamics makes this a one-way street; one cannot get the original tea bag back from the cup. But learning to simulate that entropy-reversing return trip makes realistic image-generation possible.

Training works like this. You take an image and apply progressively more blur and noise, until it looks completely random. Then comes the hard part: reversing this process to recreate the original image, like recovering the tea bag from the tea. This is done using “self-supervised learning”, similar to how LLM s are trained on text: covering up words in a sentence and learning to predict the missing words through trial and error. In the case of images, the network learns how to remove increasing amounts of noise to reproduce the original image. As it works through billions of images, learning the patterns needed to remove distortions, the network gains the ability to create entirely new images out of nothing more than random noise.

Most state-of-the-art image-generation systems use a diffusion model, though they differ in how they go about “de-noising” or reversing distortions. Stable Diffusion (from Stability AI ) and Imagen, both released in 2022, used variations of an architecture called a convolutional neural network ( CNN ), which is good at analysing grid-like data such as rows and columns of pixels. CNN s, in effect, move small sliding windows up and down across their input looking for specific artefacts, such as patterns and corners. But though CNN s work well with pixels, some of the latest image-generators use so-called diffusion transformers, including Stability AI ’s newest model, Stable Diffusion 3. Once trained on diffusion, transformers are much better able to grasp how various pieces of an image or frame of video relate to each other, and how strongly or weakly they do so, resulting in more realistic outputs (though they still make mistakes).

Recommendation systems are another kettle of fish. It is rare to get a glimpse at the innards of one, because the companies that build and use recommendation algorithms are highly secretive about them. But in 2019 Meta, then Facebook, released details about its deep-learning recommendation model ( DLRM ). The model has three main parts. First, it converts inputs (such as a user’s age or “likes” on the platform, or content they consumed) into “embeddings”. It learns in such a way that similar things (like tennis and ping pong) are close to each other in this embedding space.

The DLRM then uses a neural network to do something called matrix factorisation. Imagine a spreadsheet where the columns are videos and the rows are different users. Each cell says how much each user likes each video. But most of the cells in the grid are empty. The goal of recommendation is to make predictions for all the empty cells. One way a DLRM might do this is to split the grid (in mathematical terms, factorise the matrix) into two grids: one that contains data about users, and one that contains data about the videos. By recombining these grids (or multiplying the matrices) and feeding the results into another neural network for more number-crunching, it is possible to fill in the grid cells that used to be empty—ie, predict how much each user will like each video.

The same approach can be applied to advertisements, songs on a streaming service, products on an e-commerce platform, and so forth. Tech firms are most interested in models that excel at commercially useful tasks like this. But running these models at scale requires extremely deep pockets, vast quantities of data and huge amounts of processing power.

Wait until you see next year’s model

In academic contexts, where datasets are smaller and budgets are constrained, other kinds of models are more practical. These include recurrent neural networks (for analysing sequences of data), variational autoencoders (for spotting patterns in data), generative adversarial networks (where one model learns to do a task by repeatedly trying to fool another model) and graph neural networks (for predicting the outcomes of complex interactions).

Just as deep neural networks, transformers and diffusion models all made the leap from research curiosities to widespread deployment, features and principles from these other models will be seized upon and incorporated into future AI models. Transformers are highly efficient, but it is not clear that scaling them up can solve their tendencies to hallucinate and to make logical errors when reasoning. The search is already under way for “post-transformer” architectures, from “state-space models” to “neuro-symbolic” AI , that can overcome such weaknesses and enable the next leap forward. Ideally such an architecture would combine attention with greater prowess at reasoning. Right now no human yet knows how to build that kind of model. Maybe someday an AI model will do the job.  ■

Explore more

This article appeared in the Schools brief section of the print edition under the headline “Fashionable models”

From the August 10th 2024 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

More from Schools brief

LLMs will transform medicine, media and more

But not without a helping (human) hand

The race is on to control the global supply chain for AI chips

The focus is no longer just on faster chips, but on more chips clustered together

AI firms will soon exhaust most of the internet’s data

Can they create more?

A short history of AI

In the first of six weekly briefs, we ask how AI overcame decades of underdelivering

Finding living planets

Life evolves on planets. And planets with life evolve

On the origin of “species”

The term, though widely used, is hard to define