This document discusses argument mapping as a tool to stimulate critical thinking. It defines argument mapping as a visual way to show the logical structure of arguments by breaking them into claims and indicating relationships between parts. The document notes that argument mapping is associated with improved critical thinking. It then describes an assignment where students were randomly assigned to prepare arguments using either talking points or argument maps. Results showed that argument mapping led to greater changes in opinion and more questioning of previous assumptions compared to using talking points alone.

1. ARGUMENT MAPPING AS TOOL TO
STIMULATE CRITICAL THINKING
P AU S W E 2 0 1 3
L E AH H A M I L T O N , M S W , P H D
AS S I S T AN T P R O F E S S O R AN D F I E L D E D U C A T I O N D I R E C T O R
J U N I AT A C O L L E G E

2. WHAT IS ARGUMENT MAPPING?
• Definition: “Argument mapping is a way to visually
show the logical structure of arguments. You break
up an argument into its constituent claims, and use
lines, boxes… and location to indicate the
relationships between the various parts. The
resulting map allows us to see exactly how each
part of an argument is related to every other part.”
Source: Ostwald, J. (2013). Argument mapping-The basics. Retrieved from
http://www.jostwald.com/ArgumentMapping/ARGUMENT%20MAPPING.pdf.

3. WHY USE ARGUMENT MAPPING?
• Human have
evolved to be
“pattern seeking,
story-telling
animals”.
• If a statement
makes intuitive
sense, it will be
believed.

4. WHY USE ARGUMENT MAPPING?
• Most people do not
naturally exhibit
critical thinking.
• Most people are
unable to provide
reasons for their
opinions.
• Critical thinking is a
learned skill.

5. WHY USE ARGUMENT MAPPING?
• There is no “magic
bullet.”
• Critical thinking is
not learned by
osmosis.
• Argument mapping
is associated with
improved critical
thinking.

6. WHAT DOES AN ARGUMENT MAP LOOK LIKE?
Source: Van Gelder, T. (2009). Argument mapping. Retrieved from http://timvangelder.com/2009/02/17/what-is-
argument-mapping/.

7. THE ASSIGNMENT: 4 RANDOMLY
ASSIGNED GROUPS
• Group 1: Choose a speaker for your group. As a group, you will prepare
your speaker to defend the following statement. “Deficient values in poor
families are responsible for the poverty experienced by this population.”
As a group, prepare talking points for your speaker to use in a larger
classroom debate.
• Group 2: Choose a speaker for your group. As a group, you will prepare
your speaker to defend the following statement. “Deficient values in poor
families are responsible for the poverty experienced by this population.”
As a group, you will create an argument map (see instructions attached)
to prepare your speaker for a larger classroom debate.
• Group 3: Choose a speaker for your group. As a group, you will prepare
your speaker to defend the following statement. “Internal
colonization/economic marginalization are responsible for the poverty
experienced by poor families.” As a group, prepare talking points for your
speaker to use in a larger classroom debate.
• Group 4: Choose a speaker for your group. As a group, you will prepare
your speaker to defend the following statement. “Internal
colonization/economic marginalization are responsible for the poverty
experienced by poor families.” As a group, you will create an argument
map (see instructions attached) to prepare your speaker for a larger
classroom debate.

8. Argument Mapping
Definition: “Argument mapping is a way to visually show the logical structure of arguments. You break
up an argument into its constituent claims, and use lines, boxes… and location to indicate the
relationships between the various parts. The resulting map allows us to see exactly how each part of an
argument is related to every other part.”1
Instructions: You will create an argument using the statement given (i.e., regarding the causes of
poverty among low-income families) as your contention. Brainstorm the reasons and assumptions for
this contention. If you have time, also consider any possible objections.
Example2:
1
Ostwald, J. (2013). Argument mapping-The basics. Retrieved from
http://www.jostwald.com/ArgumentMapping/ARGUMENT%20MAPPING.pdf.
2
Van Gelder, T. (2009). Argument mapping. Retrieved from http://timvangelder.com/2009/02/17/what-is-
argument-mapping/.

9. PRETEST
• ID# (Choose a random 3 digit number. Save this
number in your notes for future reference.):
• Group # (circle one): 1 2 3 4
• Please indicate (circle one) the degree to
which you personally agree with the statement
that your group has been assigned to defend:
1------------------2-----------------3---------------4---------------5
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
agree disagree

10. POSTTEST
• ID# (Include the same 3 digit number from your pretest):
• Group # (circle one): 1 2 3 4
• Please indicate (circle one) the degree to which you personally
agree with the statement that your group has been assigned to
defend:
1--------------------------2-------------------3------------------------4----------------------------5
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
agree disagree
• How did this activity influence your original opinion on the issue (circle
one)?
1. My opinion did not change at all.
2. My opinion did not change, but this activity did cause me to question some of my
previous assumptions.
3. This activity has caused me to question my previous assumptions and now I am not
sure how I feel about the issue.
4. During this activity, my opinion on the issue changed.

11. TALKING POINTS VS. ARGUMENT
MAPPING
3 2.714
2.5
2
2
1.5
1 0.7857
0.5 0.2857
0
Opinion Change Average (Q1) Nature of Influence Average
(Q2)
Talking Points Argument Mapping

12. VALUES VS. MARGINALIZATION
3.5 3.1667
3
2.5
2 1.75
1.5
1 0.6667
0.4375
0.5
0
Opinion Change Average (Q1) Nature of Influence Average
(Q2)
Values Marginalization

13. REFERENCES & DISCUSSION
• Van Gelder, T. (2005). Teaching Critical Thinking:
Some Lessons From Cognitive Science. College
Teaching, 53(1), 41–48. doi:10.3200/CTCH.53.1.41-48
• Van Gelder, T., Bissett, M., & Cumming, G. (2004).
Cultivating expertise in informal reasoning.
Canadian journal of experimental
psychology, 58(2), 142–52. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15285604
• Are there better ways to measure this activity?
• Would this activity be applicable in your classes?
• Are there other ways for students to practice the art
of critical thinking?

14. CONTACT INFORMATION
• Email: hamilton@juniata.edu
• Slides at leahhamilton.net