Search

In this paper we present the notion of structured reasoning through a model, called the Generic/Actual Argument Model (GAAM). The model which has been used as a computational representation for machine modelling of reasoning and for hybrid combinations of human and machine reasoning can be used as a coalescent framework for decision making. Whilst the notion of structuring reasoning is not new, structured reasoning is advanced as a technique where group consensus on reasoning structures at various levels can be used to facilitate the comprehension of complex reasoning particularly where there are multiple perspectives. For an issue, the approach provides a scaffolding structure for cognitive co-operation and a normative reasoning structure against which group participants can identify points of difference and points in common as well as the nature of the differences and similarities. Intra-group transparency characterized by the ability to recognise points in common and understand the nature of differences is important to the process of coalescing group decisions that carry maximum group support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article a dialectical model for practical reasoning within a community, based on the Generic/Actual Argument Model (GAAM) is advanced and its application to deliberative dialogue discussed. The GAAM, offers a dynamic template for structuring knowledge within a domain of discourse that is connected to and regulated by a community. The paper demonstrates how the community accepted generic argument structure acts to normatively influence both admissible reasoning and the progression of dialectical reasoning between participants. It is further demonstrated that these types of deliberation dialogues supported by the GAAM comply with criteria for normative principles for deliberation, specifically, Alexy’s rules for discourse ethics and Hitchcock’s Principles of Rational Mutual Inquiry. The connection of reasoning to the community in a documented and transparent structure assists in providing best justified reasons, principles of deliberation and ethical discourse which are important advantages for reasoning communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes a narrative-based interactive learning environment which aims to elucidate reasoning using interactive scenarios that may be used in training novices in decision-making. Its design is based on an approach to generating narrative from knowledge that has been modelled in specific decision/reasoning domains. The approach uses a narrative model that is guided partially by inference and contextual information contained in the particular knowledge representation used, the generic/actual argument model of structured reasoning. The approach is described with examples in the area of critical care nursing training. A study of the effectiveness of this approach on learning outcomes was conducted with final year nursing students and provides evidence of improved learning outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Argues that discretion manifests differently in different representations of knowledge. Discretion in legal theory; First-order logic formalization; Association between discretion and a Toulmin representation of reasoning; Analysis of consistency.