Workshop 1, part II: Constructing standard form

Overview

Teaching: 10 min
Exercises: 20 min

Questions

• What are implicit and explicit arguments?

• How do we mark the difference between explicit and implicit arguments?

Objectives

• Learn to spot different types of arguments

• Learn to map arguments using a standard form

Explicit Arguments

These are the ones that are expressed in the paper or the piece of literature you are reading.

Example:

Laughing at yourself is healthy, new research has shown (Conclusion)

Researchers at the Mind, Brain and Behavior Research Center in Spain (CIMCYC) have concluded that self-deprecating jokes might make you a happier person (Explicit Argument)

Implicit arguments

These arguments are derived from the conclusion and the explicit argument and they are left unstated in the main body: you will have to deduce them.

Example:

Laughing at yourself is healthy, new research has shown.

Researchers at the Mind, Brain and Behavior Research Center in Spain (CIMCYC) have concluded that self-deprecating jokes might make you a happier person. (Explicit Assumption)

What works in Spanish culture will work everywhere (Implicit Assumption)

Importance

• Spotting Explicit and implicit assumptions help you to map Arguments
• You can use them to address what’s missing or
• you can use them to spot what new knowledge to build

Rules

• Each argument will have only ONE conclusion
• THAT conclusion = “FINAL Conclusion”
• Each argument may have many explicit assumptions
• Each argument may have many implicit assumptions
• You will need to supply the implicit assumptions
• The authors supply the explicit assumptions
• Explicit and implicit assumptions lead to many intermediate conclusions
• Intermediate conclusions can be treated as implicit premises
• Everythiing lead to a final conclusion

How to put everything together in standard form

• Start with a Spreadsheet
• Identify the strongest argument in the paper (principle of charity)
• Identify the final conclusion of this argument
• Final conclusion will be placed at the bottom
• Identify the explicit assumptions next
• List the explicit assumptions in the spreadsheet
• Figure out implicit assumptions for the explicit assumptions
• Insert the implicit assumptions between explicits
• Construct an argument map: call it standard form

Example of a simple standard form

• Researchers at Spain’s CIMCYC found that “…people who practice self-deprecating humor do not excel at managing anger but are more likely to quell angry feelings”
• If they can quell angry feelings, they can control their stress levels (implicit assumption)
• People who control their stress levels lead healthier lives (intermediate conclusion)
• Hence, laughing at yourself is healthy (final conclusion)

Why would you like to use standard form?

This is a simple example and most studies will provide you with sufficient information to assess their implicit and explicit assumptions and test them. The best way to do this is to frame a standard form. You can do this using a spreadsheet (as we suggest here) but after some practice, you will see you can insert your comments directly in the paper and can assess them. Assessing implicit assumptions helps you to identify “gaps in the literature”, or query assumptions and chart new studies. We will learn how assumptions and reasonings can be taken up to start new lines of inquiry.

Challenge for you!

Read the following abstract and construct a standard form using the spreadsheet you downloaded: Laughing at yourself is healthy, new research has shown.

Researchers at the Mind, Brain and Behavior Research Center in Spain (CIMCYC) have concluded that self-deprecating jokes might make you a happier person.

Their findings contradict previous research done on the topic, which suggests that making fun of oneself consistently is linked only to negative psychological effects, reports Daily Mail.

Researcher Jorge Torres Marín explained the work, which was published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences, saying: “In particular, we have observed that a greater tendency to employ self-defeating humor is indicative of high scores in psychological well-being dimensions such as happiness and, to a lesser extent, sociability.”

But the specifics of this finding vary depending on where one lives, Marín went on to say.

“The results, as well as being consistent with the positive connotations traditionally attributed to the act of ‘laughing at oneself’ in our country, also suggest that the effects of self-defeating humor on well-being may differ depending on where the research takes place.”

Because of this, Marín’s team is calling for more research on the topic to create a map that outlines where and to what extent their work is applicable.

“Consequently, we believe it is necessary to conduct new studies aimed at analyzing potential cultural differences in the use of this kind of humor,” he said.

The new report explains that differences in the phrase “sense of humor” have caused previous research in this area to be murky.

It said: “The implications arising from cultural or individual differences in terms of ‘senses of humor’ have been poorly addressed in psychological research for two key reasons.”

The first of those reasons comes down to the fact that people of different cultures - researchers as well as consumers of scientific literature - find different subjects “funny”.

Secondly, the study said, the sheer amount of ways that humor can be expressed has overwhelmed researchers. The report stated: “The enormous variety of comments, behaviors, etc. that can be categorized as ‘humorous’ has hindered the creation of a standardized theoretical framework for unifying all of the information collected to date in the scientific literature.”

But the CIMCYC researchers worked outside of these boundaries while conducting their new study.

Researcher Hugo Carretero Dios explained: “Our research fits into one of the theoretical models that aim to overcome these limitations and provide the psychology of humor with a well-founded, accurate theoretical body of knowledge.

“This should enable us to discern the different behavioral tendencies related to the everyday use of humor, which can be classified in even greater depth by focusing on their adaptive, as opposed to their harmful, natures.”

The study broke down different styles of humor, explaining that “adaptive” styles include humor that is aimed at making social relationships stronger.

This is opposed to self-enhancing humor, which entails sustaining a humorous view in adverse and potentially stressful situations.

Both of these styles have been associated with physiological well being concepts - including satisfaction, happiness and hope - as well as negative concepts, such as anxiety and depression.

The study’s authors found that people who practice self-deprecating humor do not excel at managing anger but are more likely to quell angry feelings.

The report said: “People who tend to use aggressive or self-defeating humor do not manage anger or rage as well…Meanwhile, self defeating humor was linked to a greater tendency to suppress anger.”

The CIMCYC team is hopeful that their study will inspire more related research.

Key Points

• Explicit arguments are directly expressed

• Implicit arguments have to be inferred from explicit arguments

• Standard form provides an argument map