RT Journal Article
T1 Emotional Tension as a Frame for Argumentation and Decision-Making: Vegetarian vs. Omnivorous Diets
A1 Jiménez Aleixandre, María Pilar
A1 Brocos Mosquera, Pablo
K1 Argumentation
K1 Emotions
K1 Discourse
K1 Decision-making
K1 Vegetarianism
K1 Sustainable diet
AB Argumentative discourse has a complexity that is not entirely captured by purely structural analyses. In arguments about socio-scientific issues (SSI), a range of dimensions, besides scientific knowledge, including values, ethical concerns, cultural habits, or emotions, are mobilized. The relationship between argumentation and emotions is now drawing attention of researchers. Our focus is on the dynamic interactions among emotions and scientific evidence. We draw from Plantin, who proposed that emotions are mobilized as argumentative resources alongside knowledge. The goal of our study is to examine in which ways emotional tension frames the construction of arguments about vegetarian vs. omnivorous diets (ODs) with a group of four preservice teachers. The results suggest that the interactions between the group emotional tension and the evaluation of evidence drive a change toward a decision that would be emotionally acceptable for all participants. Participants attended to the epistemic dimension, weighing evidence, and values about the choices, but the emotional framing took priority. We suggest that the analysis of this emotive framing may be a fruitful approach for sophisticated studies of argumentation beyond structural issues
PB Frontiers Media
SN 1664-1078
YR 2021
FD 2021
LK http://hdl.handle.net/10347/26735
UL http://hdl.handle.net/10347/26735
LA eng
NO Front. Psychol. 2021, 12:662141. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.662141
NO This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Education and Universities and is partly funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). Contract grant PGC2018-096581-B-C22
DS Minerva
RD 27 abr 2026