Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies

1Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In defense of the PACE trial, Petrie and Weinman employ a series of misleading or fallacious argumentation techniques, including circularity, blaming the victim, bait and switch, non-sequitur, setting up a straw person, guilt by association, red herring, and the parade of horribles. These are described and explained.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lubet, S. (2017, August 1). Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies. Journal of Health Psychology. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105317712523

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free