{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,29]],"date-time":"2026-04-29T03:44:38Z","timestamp":1777434278716,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":39,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,30]],"date-time":"2024-07-30T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1722297600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,30]],"date-time":"2024-07-30T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1722297600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/page\/policies\/text-and-data-mining-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.sagepub.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Argument &amp; Computation"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>This paper investigates whether empirical findings on how humans evaluate arguments in reinstatement cases support the \u2018fewer attackers is better\u2019 principle, incorporated in many current gradual notions of argument acceptability. Through three variations of an experiment, we find that (1) earlier findings that reinstated arguments are rated lower than when presented alone are replicated, (2) ratings at the reinstated stage are similar if all arguments are presented at once, compared to sequentially, and (3) ratings are overall higher if participants are provided with the relevant theory, while still instantiating imperfect reinstatement. We conclude that these findings could at best support a more specific principle \u2018being unattacked is better than attacked\u2019, but alternative explanations cannot yet be ruled out. More generally, we highlight the danger that experimenters in reasoning experiments interpret examples differently from humans. Finally, we argue that more justification is needed on why, and how, empirical findings on how humans argue can be relevant for normative models of argumentation.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3233\/aac-230016","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,30]],"date-time":"2024-07-30T11:01:35Z","timestamp":1722337295000},"page":"303-323","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Experimental evaluation of gradual argument acceptability semantics: The case of reinstatement"],"prefix":"10.1177","volume":"16","author":[{"given":"Elfia","family":"Bezou\u00a0Vrakatseli","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Informatics, King\u2019s College London, United Kingdom"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Henry","family":"Prakken","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, The Netherlands"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Christian\u00a0P.","family":"Janssen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Experimental Psychology and Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University, The Netherlands"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,30]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_4_2_2","first-page":"6260","author":"Amgoud L.","year":"2019","unstructured":"Amgoud L., A replication study of semantics in argumentation, in: Proceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-19), 2019, pp.\u00a06260\u20136266.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-19)"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-40381-1_11"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11225-008-9101-1"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_5_2","first-page":"914","author":"Bonzon E.","year":"2016","unstructured":"Bonzon E., Delobelle J., Konieczny S., Maudet N., A comparative study of ranking-based semantics for abstract argumentation, in: Proceedings of the 30st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2016), 2016, pp.\u00a0914\u2013920.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 30st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2016)"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3233\/AAC-200905"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/9781108685139"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_8_2","first-page":"111","volume":"4160","author":"Caminada M.","year":"2006","unstructured":"Caminada M., On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation, in: Logics in Artificial Intelligence. Proceedings of JELIA 2006, Fischer M., van der Hoek W., Konev B., Lisitsa A., eds, Springer Lecture Notes in AI, Vol.\u00a04160, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2006, pp.\u00a0111\u2013123.","journal-title":"Logics in Artificial Intelligence. Proceedings of JELIA 2006"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_9_2","first-page":"207","author":"Cerutti F.","year":"2014","unstructured":"Cerutti F., Tintarev N., Oren N., Formal arguments, preferences, and natural language interfaces to humans: An empirical evaluation, in: Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2014, pp.\u00a0207\u2013212.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0010-0277(89)90023-1"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_11_2","first-page":"40","author":"Cramer M.","year":"2018","unstructured":"Cramer M., Guillaume M., Directionality of attacks in natural language argumentation, in: Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Bridging the Gap Between Human and Automated Reasoning, 2018, pp.\u00a040\u201346.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Bridging the Gap Between Human and Automated Reasoning"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_12_2","first-page":"413","author":"Cramer M.","year":"2018","unstructured":"Cramer M., Guillaume M., Empirical cognitive study on abstract argumentation semantics, in: Computational Models of Argument, Modgil S., Budzynska K., Lawrence J., eds, Proceedings of COMMA 2018, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2018, pp.\u00a0413\u2013424.","journal-title":"Computational Models of Argument"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_13_2","first-page":"102","volume":"11468","author":"Cramer M.","year":"2019","unstructured":"Cramer M., Guillaume M., Empirical study on human evaluation of complex argumentation frameworks, in: Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2019), Calimeri F., Leone N., Manna M., eds, Springer Lecture Notes in AI, Vol.\u00a011468, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2019, pp.\u00a0102\u2013115.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2019)"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4324\/9780203027677"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_16_2","first-page":"169","volume-title":"Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics","author":"Field A.","year":"2021","unstructured":"Field A., Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, SAGE Publications, 5th edn, 2021, pp.\u00a0169\u2013190, Chapter on ANOVA.","edition":"5"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_17_2","first-page":"123","volume-title":"Discovering Statistics Using R","author":"Field A.","year":"2021","unstructured":"Field A., Discovering Statistics Using R, SAGE Publications, 5th edn, 2021, pp.\u00a0123\u2013145, Chapter on T-Test.","edition":"5"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_18_2","first-page":"146","volume-title":"Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics","author":"Field A.","year":"2021","unstructured":"Field A., Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, SAGE Publications, 5th edn, 2021, pp.\u00a0146\u2013168, Chapter on Welch\u2019s Test.","edition":"5"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/S1471068403001674"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_20_2","first-page":"868","author":"Grossi D.","year":"2015","unstructured":"Grossi D., Modgil S., On the graded acceptability of arguments, in: Proceedings of the 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2015, pp.\u00a0868\u2013874.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_21_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2019.05.001"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Guillaume M. Cramer M. van der Torre L. Schiltz C. Reasoning on conflicting information: An empirical study of formal argumentation Plos one 17(8) (2022) e0273225.","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0273225"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_23_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2020.103236"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1613\/jair.5393"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1515\/9783110877175-010"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_26_2","unstructured":"Jakobovits H. On the Theory of Argumentation Frameworks Doctoral dissertation Free University Brussels 2000."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_27_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/19462166.2013.869766"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_28_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1146\/annurev-psych-010419-051132"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_29_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/1745691612465253"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_30_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3233\/AAC-210016"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_31_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11023-017-9425-6"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_32_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijar.2017.11.009"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_33_2","author":"Pollock J.","year":"1986","unstructured":"Pollock J., Contemporary Theories of Knowledge, Rowman & Littlefield, Littlefield, NY, 1986.","journal-title":"Contemporary Theories of Knowledge"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_34_2","first-page":"21","volume":"2669","author":"Prakken H.","year":"2020","unstructured":"Prakken H., On validating theories of abstract argumentation frameworks: The case of bipolar argumentation frameworks, in: Proceedings of the 20th Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol.\u00a02669, 2020, pp.\u00a021\u201330.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 20th Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_35_2","first-page":"85","author":"Prakken H.","year":"2018","unstructured":"Prakken H., de\u00a0Winter M., Abstraction in argumentation: Necessary but dangerous, in: Computational Models of Argument, Modgil S., Budzynska K., Lawrence J., eds, Proceedings of COMMA 2018, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2018, pp.\u00a085\u201396.","journal-title":"Computational Models of Argument"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_36_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1551-6709.2010.01123.x"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_37_2","first-page":"1320","author":"Rosenfeld A.","year":"2015","unstructured":"Rosenfeld A., Kraus S., Providing arguments in discussions based on the prediction of human argumentative behavior, in: Proceedings of the 29th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2015), 2015, pp.\u00a01320\u20131327.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 29th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2015)"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_38_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41586-021-03215-w"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_39_2","first-page":"413","author":"Thimm M.","year":"2014","unstructured":"Thimm M., Kern-Isberner G., On controversiality of arguments and stratified labelings, in: Computational Models of Argument, Parsons S., Oren N., Reed C., Cerutti F., eds, Proceedings of COMMA 2014, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2014, pp.\u00a0413\u2013420.","journal-title":"Computational Models of Argument"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_40_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/19462166.2013.869878"}],"container-title":["Argument &amp; Computation"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.3233\/AAC-230016","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.3233\/AAC-230016","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.3233\/AAC-230016","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,28]],"date-time":"2026-04-28T11:53:31Z","timestamp":1777377211000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.3233\/AAC-230016"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,30]]},"references-count":39,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,10]]}},"alternative-id":["10.3233\/AAC-230016"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3233\/aac-230016","relation":{},"ISSN":["1946-2166","1946-2174"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1946-2166","type":"print"},{"value":"1946-2174","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,30]]}}}