refutation for essays

30 Refutation Examples

refutation examples and definition, explained below

Refutation refers to the act of proving a statement or theory wrong through the use of logical reasoning and evidence.

Some strategies for refutation, which we may use in an argumentative essay, speech, or debate, include:

Reductio ad Absurdum : Taking an argument to its logical conclusion to demonstrate its absurdity.
Counterexamples : Presenting counterexamples , which are practical and real-life examples that contradict the opponent’s claims.
Identifying Logical Fallacies : Highlighting instances in which the opponent’s claims don’t follow logical reasoning.
Highlighting Omissions: Demonstrating that the opponent failed to discuss or consider facts that dispute their claims.

I recommend to all my students that they refute possible counterclaims and contradicting perspectives in their argumentative essays in order to establish an authoritative position, demonstrate awareness of a broad range of perspectives, and add depth to your arguments.

Below is a range of methods of refutation.

Refutation Examples

1. analogical disproof.

This method involves refuting an argument by drawing a parallel to a situation that’s logically similar but absurd or clearly incorrect. Used properly, it can effectively puncture an opponent’s argument, showing that the same logic could lead to preposterous conclusions.

Example: “All birds fly. Penguins are birds, so they should fly.” The analogical disproof might be: “Not all office workers use computers. You’re an office worker, so should you not use a computer?”

2. Test of Consistency

This refutation method tests whether an argument stands consistent under different circumstances or scenarios. If an argument contains contradictions or doesn’t hold true in various contexts, it falls under inconsistency.

Example: Someone posits, “A person should always lend money to friends.” A consistency test might involve asking, “Should a person still lend money if they know their friend will spend it irresponsibly?”

See More: Consistency Examples

3. Rebuttal by Cause and Effect

This approach involves contesting an argument by disputing the assumed relationship between cause and effect. Here, you challenge the validity of the cause, the effect, or the linkage between the two.

Example: To refute, “Violent video games cause aggressive behavior in players,” you might present studies showing no significant increase in aggression among players of violent video games. This disrupts the asserted cause-effect relationship.

See More: Cause and Effect Examples

4. Prioritization of Evidence

This method questions the quality, reliability, or relevance of the evidence presented in an argument. You might challenge evidence’s weight, context, source, or legitimacy to weaken the opponent’s stance.

Example: Against the claim, “Spicy food aids in weight loss because it boosts metabolism,” you could highlight that the studies underpinning that claim are less reliable than studies demonstrating that exercise boosts weight loss.

5. Challenge the Relevance

Challenging the relevance involves disputing how pertinent or directly related the opponent’s points are to the argument at hand. Irrelevant points detract from the main argument and don’t strengthen the position they are intended to support.

Example: If someone argues, “Technology improves quality of life because smartphones have advanced cameras,” you might challenge the relevance by questioning how advanced cameras light to better quality of life.

See More: Relevance Examples

6. Statistical Refutation

Statistical refutation seeks to invalidate an argument by questioning the statistical evidence used. This might involve critiquing how data were collected, interpreted, or applied.

Example: If a study claims, “80% of people feel healthier when they eat chocolate daily,” you could challenge the data by asking who was surveyed and how the question was asked.

7. Appeal to Common Sense

An appeal to common sense challenges a claim by invoking widely accepted truths or knowledge. This strategy can debunk arguments that defy everyday observations or popular wisdom.

Example: If someone says, “to prevent climate change we need to shut down all coal-fired powerplants immediately,” you could refute it by appealing to the common sense notion that shutting them all down right now would cause the entire economy to collapse overnight.

See More: Examples of Common Sense

8. Pointing Out Oversimplification

This method involves highlighting how an opponent’s argument oversimplifies a complex issue. It exposes a lack of depth or nuance in their argument, undermining its credibility.

Example: A statement like “More jobs equals less poverty” could be refuted by pointing out the oversimplification in neglecting factors like cost of living and wage levels.

See More: Oversimplification Examples

9. Dismantling a False Dilemma

A false dilemma presents a situation as having only two possible outcomes or solutions. Dismantling a false dilemma involves introducing alternatives or proving that the two proposed options aren’t the only ones.

Example: Against the assertion, “Either we preserve our traditions, or we embrace progress,” you could challenge that we can preserve traditions and also move forward.

See More: False Dilemma Examples

10. Rebuttal through Definition

Rebuttal through definition involves challenging an argument by critiquing the definitions of the concepts, phenomena, or terms used. Here, you question the way an opponent has defined key elements of their argument.

Example: If an argument purports, “Happiness is having a lot of money,” you might dispute that definition by referencing different measures of happiness that don’t involve wealth, such as relationships or personal growth.

See More: Rebuttal Examples

11. Rebuttal by Precedence

This method employs historical or present precedents to debunk an argument. By illustrating similar situations where the opponent’s proposition didn’t hold true or feasible decisions were made contrary to the claim, the argument can be refuted.

Example: If faced with the claim, “No democracy can survive without a two-party system,” you could counter by citing examples of thriving democracies around the world with more than two significant parties.

12. Challenge the Representativeness

Challenging the representativeness entails scrutinizing whether an argument’s supporting evidence adequately represents the whole. It rejects sweeping generalizations or conclusions based on limited data.

Example: Should someone argue, “Most students dislike school, as proven by a survey from my class,” you could counter by questioning whether your class is representative of all students around the country.

13. Rebuttal through Syllogism

Rebuttal through syllogism uses the opponent’s premises to arrive at a different conclusion. If, through logical reasoning, the proposed conclusion does not necessarily follow the premises given, the argument can be effectively refuted.

Example: To the statement, “All apples are fruit. All fruit grow on trees. Therefore, all trees grow apples,” a syllogistic rebuttal might state, “While all apples grow on trees, not all trees grow apples.”

14. Pointing Out Non-Sequitur

Pointing out non-sequitur involves highlighting that an argument’s conclusion does not logically follow from its premises. Non-sequiturs often involve leaps in logic or unwarranted assumptions.

Example: In response to the claim, “He’s a great musician, so he’ll be a fantastic concert organizer,” one might point out the non-sequitur by reminding that a musical talent does not equate managerial skills.

15. Rebuttal by Exception

Rebuttal by exception operates by finding exceptions to the generalization made in an argument. By highlighting exceptions that contradict the claim, the argument’s validity is diminished.

Example: If someone argues, “All politicians are corrupt,” you could refute it by highlighting politicians known for their integrity and conviction.

16. Evidence-Based Counterargument

An evidence-based counterargument refutes a claim by presenting strong, credible, and relevant evidence that contradicts the original argument. This method is most effective when the counter-evidence directly disputes the original claim or its supporting facts.

Example: If a person claims, “Milk should be avoided because it’s unhealthy,” an evidence-based counterargument might bring up numerous scientific studies that indicate the nutritional benefits of milk.

See More: Counterargument Examples

17. Logical Analysis

A logical analysis focuses on the internal coherence and logical validity of an argument. By identifying logical fallacies or missteps in reasoning, you can refute a claim by showing how it fails to adhere to the principles of logic.

Example: A statement like “Every time I eat pizza, it rains, so pizza causes rain” can be refuted through logical analysis by highlighting the improper correlation being made.

18. Reductio ad Absurdum

The Reductio ad Absurdum technique demonstrates the absurdity of an argument by pushing it to its logical extreme, where it produces an absurd or preposterous conclusion. This method effectively challenges the premises or logic of the original claim.

Example: If someone argues, “We should never take any risks,” a Reductio ad Absurdum response might be: “By that logic, no one should ever leave their house because stepping outside is inherently risky.”

19. Counterexamples

Counterexamples are specific instances or examples that contradict a general claim or principle. By showing that the contrary is possible or proven, counterexamples can significantly weaken an argument.

Example: If someone claims, “All athletes are team players,” a compelling counterexample might highlight known instances of successful athletes who are infamous for their individualistic nature.

20. Question the Source

Questioning the source involves casting doubt on the credibility, relevance, or authority of the source supporting an argument. If the source is untrustworthy, the claim it supports is also brought into question.

Example: If the argument is “Vitamin C prevents cold because a juice-ad claims so,” you may question the objectivity of a source that may profit from selling more juice.

See More: Best Sources to Cite in Essays

21. Alternative Explanation

Providing an alternative explanation challenges an argument by proposing a different interpretation or understanding of the topic. This method allows you to dispute a claim by suggesting that another explanation is more plausible, relevant, or comprehensive.

Example: An argument might be, “Increased police presence reduces crime.” An alternative explanation could suggest that a more likely cause of reduced crime is improved social support systems and opportunities.

22. Challenge Assumptions

Challenging assumptions requires questioning the premise or basis of an argument. If the argument is built on flawed or questionable assumptions, exposing these can undermine the argument.

Example: When confronted with the argument “Marriage is essential for happiness,” one might challenge the underlying assumption that happiness necessarily requires marriage, citing examples of fulfilled single individuals.

See More: Assumptions Examples

23. Ethical or Moral Challenge

This type of refutation questions an argument on ethical or moral grounds. If the suggested actions or results of an argument lead to morally questionable outcomes, it can be a valid point of refutation.

Example: If someone says, “We should eliminate all pests for a more comfortable life,” you might counter it by pointing out the ethical concerns regarding biodiversity and the broader ecosystem’s health.

24. Using Comparison to Demonstrate Flawed Arguments

Comparisons involve using parallel scenarios, situations, or cases to refute an argument. By emphasizing the similarities or differences, you can question the validity of the argument.

Example: If the claim is “More expensive colleges provide a better education,” you could compare specific high-quality, affordable colleges with premium, yet underperforming ones to refute this argument.

25. Highlight Omissions

Highlighting omissions refers to pointing out relevant facts, information, or arguments that the opponent has left out of their claim. By illuminating these gaps, you can challenge the reliability or completeness of their argument.

Example: If someone argues, “He must be unsuccessful, he never went to college,” you can point out the omission of successful individuals who did not follow the traditional academic path.

26. Reframe the Debate

Reframing the debate involves changing the perspective or the center of the argument. It allows you to shift focus to a different, often overlooked aspect of the discussion, thus challenging the premises or relevance of the original argument.

Example: When faced with the claim, “Academic achievements determine success in life,” you can reframe the debate by suggesting that emotional intelligence, resilience, or interpersonal skills could be more significant indicators of life success.

27. Historical or Precedent-Based Refutation

This method utilizes historical events or established precedents to refute a claim. By referencing cases that contradict the opponent’s assertion, you can question its validity or applicability.

Example: In response to the claim, “Communism leads to societal chaos,” you could point out Cuba, who maintains law and order, to contradict the argument.

28. Practical Implications

Refuting via practical implications involves evaluating the real-world implications or consequences of an argument. This can be used to highlight unforeseen or negative implications that counter the argument’s intent.

Example: If someone suggests, “Cutting all funding for arts can help resolve government budget issues,” you could mention the practical implication that this could result in lost cultural heritage and inspire public backlash.

29. Question Motives or Bias

This method of refutation questions whether the argument might be influenced by the speaker’s motives or biases. If the speaker seems to benefit from their claim or appears biased, their argument can be viewed suspiciously.

Example: If a smartphone developer declares, “My company’s phones are unbeatable,” question their bias as they stand to gain from promoting their company’s products.

30. Seek Expert Testimony

Seeking expert testimony involves drawing on the knowledge or expertise of recognized authorities on the topic at hand. If expert opinion conflicts with the original statement, the credibility of the argument is undermined.

Example: In an argument about climate change, expert testimony from credible climate scientists refuting a claim of disbelievers can strengthen your refutation.

Understanding refutation will aid in developing stronger arguments and more impactful communication. I recommend to my students that they always refute the strongest claims of their opposition in order to more authoritatively prosecute their own perspective. But remember, in refuting opposing views, you need to be very careful not to fall into poor quality arguments, logical fallacies, or arguments that might otherwise damage your own legitimacy and reputation. Refutation must be clear, systematic, and well-thought-out in order for it to be effective.

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 5 Top Tips for Succeeding at University
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 50 Durable Goods Examples
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 100 Consumer Goods Examples
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 30 Globalization Pros and Cons

ESL Lesson Plans, Tests, & Ideas

North American Idioms
Business Idioms
Idioms Quiz
Idiom Requests
Proverbs Quiz & List
Phrasal Verbs Quiz
Basic Phrasal Verbs
North American Idioms App
A(n)/The: Help Understanding Articles
The First & Second Conditional
The Difference between 'So' & 'Too'
The Difference between 'a few/few/a little/little'
The Difference between "Other" & "Another"
Check Your Level
English Vocabulary
Verb Tenses (Intermediate)
Articles (A, An, The) Exercises
Prepositions Exercises
Irregular Verb Exercises
Gerunds & Infinitives Exercises
Discussion Questions
Speech Topics
Argumentative Essay Topics
Top-rated Lessons
Intermediate
Upper-Intermediate
Reading Lessons
View Topic List
Expressions for Everyday Situations
Travel Agency Activity
Present Progressive with Mr. Bean
Work-related Idioms
Adjectives to Describe Employees
Writing for Tone, Tact, and Diplomacy
Speaking Tactfully
Advice on Monetizing an ESL Website
Teaching your First Conversation Class
How to Teach English Conversation
Teaching Different Levels
Teaching Grammar in Conversation Class
Members' Home
Update Billing Info.
Cancel Subscription
North American Proverbs Quiz & List
North American Idioms Quiz
Idioms App (Android)
'Be used to'" / 'Use to' / 'Get used to'
Ergative Verbs and the Passive Voice
Keywords & Verb Tense Exercises
Irregular Verb List & Exercises
Non-Progressive (State) Verbs
Present Perfect vs. Past Simple
Present Simple vs. Present Progressive
Past Perfect vs. Past Simple
Subject Verb Agreement
The Passive Voice
Subject & Object Relative Pronouns
Relative Pronouns Where/When/Whose
Commas in Adjective Clauses
A/An and Word Sounds
'The' with Names of Places
Understanding English Articles
Article Exercises (All Levels)
Yes/No Questions
Wh-Questions
How far vs. How long
Affect vs. Effect
A few vs. few / a little vs. little
Boring vs. Bored
Compliment vs. Complement
Die vs. Dead vs. Death
Expect vs. Suspect
Experiences vs. Experience
Go home vs. Go to home
Had better vs. have to/must
Have to vs. Have got to
I.e. vs. E.g.
In accordance with vs. According to
Lay vs. Lie
Make vs. Do
In the meantime vs. Meanwhile
Need vs. Require
Notice vs. Note
'Other' vs 'Another'
Pain vs. Painful vs. In Pain
Raise vs. Rise
So vs. Such
So vs. So that
Some vs. Some of / Most vs. Most of
Sometimes vs. Sometime
Too vs. Either vs. Neither
Weary vs. Wary
Who vs. Whom
While vs. During
While vs. When
Wish vs. Hope
10 Common Writing Mistakes
34 Common English Mistakes
First & Second Conditionals
Comparative & Superlative Adjectives
Determiners: This/That/These/Those
Check Your English Level
Grammar Quiz (Advanced)
Vocabulary Test - Multiple Questions
Vocabulary Quiz - Choose the Word
Verb Tense Review (Intermediate)
Verb Tense Exercises (All Levels)
Conjunction Exercises
List of Topics
Business English
Games for the ESL Classroom
Pronunciation
Teaching Your First Conversation Class
How to Teach English Conversation Class

Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation

An argumentative essay presents an argument for or against a topic. For example, if your topic is working from home , then your essay would either argue in favor of working from home (this is the for side) or against working from home.

Like most essays, an argumentative essay begins with an introduction that ends with the writer's position (or stance) in the thesis statement .

Introduction Paragraph

(Background information....)

Thesis statement : Employers should give their workers the option to work from home in order to improve employee well-being and reduce office costs.

This thesis statement shows that the two points I plan to explain in my body paragraphs are 1) working from home improves well-being, and 2) it allows companies to reduce costs. Each topic will have its own paragraph. Here's an example of a very basic essay outline with these ideas:

Background information

Body Paragraph 1

Topic Sentence : Workers who work from home have improved well-being .
Evidence from academic sources

Body Paragraph 2

Topic Sentence : Furthermore, companies can reduce their expenses by allowing employees to work at home .
Summary of key points
Restatement of thesis statement

Does this look like a strong essay? Not really . There are no academic sources (research) used, and also...

You Need to Also Respond to the Counter-Arguments!

The above essay outline is very basic. The argument it presents can be made much stronger if you consider the counter-argument , and then try to respond (refute) its points.

The counter-argument presents the main points on the other side of the debate. Because we are arguing FOR working from home, this means the counter-argument is AGAINST working from home. The best way to find the counter-argument is by reading research on the topic to learn about the other side of the debate. The counter-argument for this topic might include these points:

Distractions at home > could make it hard to concentrate
Dishonest/lazy people > might work less because no one is watching

Next, we have to try to respond to the counter-argument in the refutation (or rebuttal/response) paragraph .

The Refutation/Response Paragraph

The purpose of this paragraph is to address the points of the counter-argument and to explain why they are false, somewhat false, or unimportant. So how can we respond to the above counter-argument? With research !

A study by Bloom (2013) followed workers at a call center in China who tried working from home for nine months. Its key results were as follows:

The performance of people who worked from home increased by 13%
These workers took fewer breaks and sick-days
They also worked more minutes per shift

In other words, this study shows that the counter-argument might be false. (Note: To have an even stronger essay, present data from more than one study.) Now we have a refutation.

Where Do We Put the Counter-Argument and Refutation?

Commonly, these sections can go at the beginning of the essay (after the introduction), or at the end of the essay (before the conclusion). Let's put it at the beginning. Now our essay looks like this:

Counter-argument Paragraph

Dishonest/lazy people might work less because no one is watching

Refutation/Response Paragraph

Study: Productivity increased by 14%
(+ other details)

Body Paragraph 3

Topic Sentence : In addition, people who work from home have improved well-being .

Body Paragraph 4

The outline is stronger now because it includes the counter-argument and refutation. Note that the essay still needs more details and research to become more convincing.

Working from home may increase productivity.

Extra Advice on Argumentative Essays

It's not a compare and contrast essay.

An argumentative essay focuses on one topic (e.g. cats) and argues for or against it. An argumentative essay should not have two topics (e.g. cats vs dogs). When you compare two ideas, you are writing a compare and contrast essay. An argumentative essay has one topic (cats). If you are FOR cats as pets, a simplistic outline for an argumentative essay could look something like this:

Thesis: Cats are the best pet.
are unloving
cause allergy issues
This is a benefit > Many working people do not have time for a needy pet
If you have an allergy, do not buy a cat.
But for most people (without allergies), cats are great
Supporting Details

Use Language in Counter-Argument That Shows Its Not Your Position

The counter-argument is not your position. To make this clear, use language such as this in your counter-argument:

Opponents might argue that cats are unloving.
People who dislike cats would argue that cats are unloving.
Critics of cats could argue that cats are unloving.
It could be argued that cats are unloving.

These underlined phrases make it clear that you are presenting someone else's argument , not your own.

Choose the Side with the Strongest Support

Do not choose your side based on your own personal opinion. Instead, do some research and learn the truth about the topic. After you have read the arguments for and against, choose the side with the strongest support as your position.

Do Not Include Too Many Counter-arguments

Include the main (two or three) points in the counter-argument. If you include too many points, refuting these points becomes quite difficult.

If you have any questions, leave a comment below.

- Matthew Barton / Creator of Englishcurrent.com

Additional Resources :

Writing a Counter-Argument & Refutation (Richland College)
Language for Counter-Argument and Refutation Paragraphs (Brown's Student Learning Tools)

EnglishCurrent is happily hosted on Dreamhost . If you found this page helpful, consider a donation to our hosting bill to show your support!

23 comments on “ Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation ”

Thank you professor. It is really helpful.

Can you also put the counter argument in the third paragraph

It depends on what your instructor wants. Generally, a good argumentative essay needs to have a counter-argument and refutation somewhere. Most teachers will probably let you put them anywhere (e.g. in the start, middle, or end) and be happy as long as they are present. But ask your teacher to be sure.

Thank you for the information Professor

how could I address a counter argument for “plastic bags and its consumption should be banned”?

For what reasons do they say they should be banned? You need to address the reasons themselves and show that these reasons are invalid/weak.

Thank you for this useful article. I understand very well.

Thank you for the useful article, this helps me a lot!

Thank you for this useful article which helps me in my study.

Thank you, professor Mylene 102-04

it was very useful for writing essay

Very useful reference body support to began writing a good essay. Thank you!

Really very helpful. Thanks Regards Mayank

Thank you, professor, it is very helpful to write an essay.

It is really helpful thank you

It was a very helpful set of learning materials. I will follow it and use it in my essay writing. Thank you, professor. Regards Isha

Thanks Professor

This was really helpful as it lays the difference between argumentative essay and compare and contrast essay.. Thanks for the clarification.

This is such a helpful guide in composing an argumentative essay. Thank you, professor.

This was really helpful proof, thankyou!

Thanks this was really helpful to me

This was very helpful for us to generate a good form of essay

thank you so much for this useful information.

A Guide to Rebuttals in Argumentative Essays

4-minute read

27th May 2023

Rebuttals are an essential part of a strong argument. But what are they, exactly, and how can you use them effectively? Read on to find out.

What Is a Rebuttal?

When writing an argumentative essay , there’s always an opposing point of view. You can’t present an argument without the possibility of someone disagreeing.

Sure, you could just focus on your argument and ignore the other perspective, but that weakens your essay. Coming up with possible alternative points of view, or counterarguments, and being prepared to address them, gives you an edge. A rebuttal is your response to these opposing viewpoints.

How Do Rebuttals Work?

With a rebuttal, you can take the fighting power away from any opposition to your idea before they have a chance to attack. For a rebuttal to work, it needs to follow the same formula as the other key points in your essay: it should be researched, developed, and presented with evidence.

Rebuttals in Action

Suppose you’re writing an essay arguing that strawberries are the best fruit. A potential counterargument could be that strawberries don’t work as well in baked goods as other berries do, as they can get soggy and lose some of their flavor. Your rebuttal would state this point and then explain why it’s not valid:

Read on for a few simple steps to formulating an effective rebuttal.

Step 1. Come up with a Counterargument

A strong rebuttal is only possible when there’s a strong counterargument. You may be convinced of your idea but try to place yourself on the other side. Rather than addressing weak opposing views that are easy to fend off, try to come up with the strongest claims that could be made.

In your essay, explain the counterargument and agree with it. That’s right, agree with it – to an extent. State why there’s some truth to it and validate the concerns it presents.

Step 2. Point Out Its Flaws

Now that you’ve presented a counterargument, poke holes in it . To do so, analyze the argument carefully and notice if there are any biases or caveats that weaken it. Looking at the claim that strawberries don’t work well in baked goods, a weakness could be that this argument only applies when strawberries are baked in a pie.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

Step 3. Present New Points

Once you reveal the counterargument’s weakness, present a new perspective, and provide supporting evidence to show that your argument is still the correct one. This means providing new points that the opposer may not have considered when presenting their claim.

Offering new ideas that weaken a counterargument makes you come off as authoritative and informed, which will make your readers more likely to agree with you.

Summary: Rebuttals

Rebuttals are essential when presenting an argument. Even if a counterargument is stronger than your point, you can construct an effective rebuttal that stands a chance against it.

We hope this guide helps you to structure and format your argumentative essay . And once you’ve finished writing, send a copy to our expert editors. We’ll ensure perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, referencing, and more. Try it out for free today!

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a rebuttal in an essay.

A rebuttal is a response to a counterargument. It presents the potential counterclaim, discusses why it could be valid, and then explains why the original argument is still correct.

How do you form an effective rebuttal?

To use rebuttals effectively, come up with a strong counterclaim and respectfully point out its weaknesses. Then present new ideas that fill those gaps and strengthen your point.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

2-minute read

How to Cite the CDC in APA

If you’re writing about health issues, you might need to reference the Centers for Disease...

5-minute read

Six Product Description Generator Tools for Your Product Copy

Introduction If you’re involved with ecommerce, you’re likely familiar with the often painstaking process of...

3-minute read

What Is a Content Editor?

Are you interested in learning more about the role of a content editor and the...

The Benefits of Using an Online Proofreading Service

Proofreading is important to ensure your writing is clear and concise for your readers. Whether...

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

Creating presentations can be time-consuming and frustrating. Trying to construct a visually appealing and informative...

What Is Market Research?

No matter your industry, conducting market research helps you keep up to date with shifting...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

21 Argument, Counterargument, & Refutation

In academic writing, we often use an Argument essay structure. Argument essays have these familiar components, just like other types of essays:

Introduction
Body Paragraphs

But Argument essays also contain these particular elements:

Debatable thesis statement in the Introduction
Argument – paragraphs which show support for the author’s thesis (for example: reasons, evidence, data, statistics)
Counterargument – at least one paragraph which explains the opposite point of view
Concession – a sentence or two acknowledging that there could be some truth to the Counterargument
Refutation (also called Rebuttal) – sentences which explain why the Counterargument is not as strong as the original Argument

Consult Introductions & Titles for more on writing debatable thesis statements and Paragraphs ~ Developing Support for more about developing your Argument.

Imagine that you are writing about vaping. After reading several articles and talking with friends about vaping, you decide that you are strongly opposed to it.

Which working thesis statement would be better?

Vaping should be illegal because it can lead to serious health problems.

Many students do not like vaping.

Because the first option provides a debatable position, it is a better starting point for an Argument essay.

Next, you would need to draft several paragraphs to explain your position. These paragraphs could include facts that you learned in your research, such as statistics about vapers’ health problems, the cost of vaping, its effects on youth, its harmful effects on people nearby, and so on, as an appeal to logos . If you have a personal story about the effects of vaping, you might include that as well, either in a Body Paragraph or in your Introduction, as an appeal to pathos .

A strong Argument essay would not be complete with only your reasons in support of your position. You should also include a Counterargument, which will show your readers that you have carefully researched and considered both sides of your topic. This shows that you are taking a measured, scholarly approach to the topic – not an overly-emotional approach, or an approach which considers only one side. This helps to establish your ethos as the author. It shows your readers that you are thinking clearly and deeply about the topic, and your Concession (“this may be true”) acknowledges that you understand other opinions are possible.

Here are some ways to introduce a Counterargument:

Some people believe that vaping is not as harmful as smoking cigarettes.
Critics argue that vaping is safer than conventional cigarettes.
On the other hand, one study has shown that vaping can help people quit smoking cigarettes.

Your paragraph would then go on to explain more about this position; you would give evidence here from your research about the point of view that opposes your own opinion.

Here are some ways to begin a Concession and Refutation:

While this may be true for some adults, the risks of vaping for adolescents outweigh its benefits.
Although these critics may have been correct before, new evidence shows that vaping is, in some cases, even more harmful than smoking.
This may have been accurate for adults wishing to quit smoking; however, there are other methods available to help people stop using cigarettes.

Your paragraph would then continue your Refutation by explaining more reasons why the Counterargument is weak. This also serves to explain why your original Argument is strong. This is a good opportunity to prove to your readers that your original Argument is the most worthy, and to persuade them to agree with you.

Activity ~ Practice with Counterarguments, Concessions, and Refutations

A. Examine the following thesis statements with a partner. Is each one debatable?

B. Write your own Counterargument, Concession, and Refutation for each thesis statement.

Thesis Statements:

Online classes are a better option than face-to-face classes for college students who have full-time jobs.
Students who engage in cyberbullying should be expelled from school.
Unvaccinated children pose risks to those around them.
Governments should be allowed to regulate internet access within their countries.

Is this chapter:

…too easy, or you would like more detail? Read “ Further Your Understanding: Refutation and Rebuttal ” from Lumen’s Writing Skills Lab.

Note: links open in new tabs.

reasoning, logic

emotion, feeling, beliefs

moral character, credibility, trust, authority

goes against; believes the opposite of something

ENGLISH 087: Academic Advanced Writing Copyright © 2020 by Nancy Hutchison is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Unit 6: Argumentative Essay Writing

41 Counterargument and Refutation Development

In an argumentative essay, you need to convince your audience that your opinion is the most valid opinion. To do so, your essay needs to be balanced—it needs an opposing (opposite) viewpoint, known as a counter-argument . Even though you are arguing one side of an issue, you must include what someone from the other side would say. After your opponent’s view, include a refutation to demonstrate why the other point of view is wrong.

Identifying Counterarguments

There are many ways to identify alternative perspectives.

Have an imaginary dialogue with a "devil's advocate."
Discuss your topic with a classmate or group of classmates.
Interview someone who holds the opposite opinion.
Read about the topic to learn more about different perspectives.

Example Argument

In the conversation below the writer talks to someone with the opposite opinion. Roberto thinks professors should incorporate Facebook into their teaching. Fatima argues the opposing side. This discussion helps the writer identify a counterargument.

Roberto: I think professors should incorporate Facebook into their teaching . Students could connect with each other in and out of the classroom. ( Position and pro-argument )

Fatima : Hmmm… that could work, but I don’t think it’s a very good idea . Not all students are on Facebook. Some students don’t want to create accounts and share their private information. ( Counterargument )

Roberto: Well…. students could create an account that’s just for the course.

Fatima : Maybe, but some students won’t want to use their personal accounts and would find it troublesome to create an additional “temporary class account.” Plus, I think more young people prefer Instagram.

Example Counterargument paragraph

Roberto used information from the conversation and evidence from sources to write the counterargument paragraph. This paragraph concludes with a concession of validity and is followed by the refutation.

Example Refutation paragraph

Counterargument and refutation stems.

Below are the stems organized in a table.

Watch this video

The video refers to counterarguments as “counterclaims” and refutations as “rebuttals.

From: Karen Baxley

someone who presents a counterargument; someone who pretends to be against the issue for the sake of discussing the issue

Share This Book

school Campus Bookshelves
menu_book Bookshelves
perm_media Learning Objects
login Login
how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
hub Instructor Commons
Download Page (PDF)
Download Full Book (PDF)
Periodic Table
Physics Constants
Scientific Calculator
Reference & Cite
Tools expand_more
Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

10.12: Introduction to Rebuttal and Refutation of Counterargument

Last updated
Save as PDF
Page ID 59931

What you’ll learn to do: evaluate strategies for rebuttal and refutation of counterargument

An integral part of composing a strong argument is including counterargument. This can be difficult, especially if a writer is arguing for a position s/he already agrees with. In such cases, writers can sometimes make good points to support their stances; however, their arguments are vulnerable unless they anticipate and address counterarguments. When a writer does this, it is often referred to as rebuttal or refutation. Some scholars of rhetoric differentiate the two words in terms of if you can actually disprove a claim or just argue against it; however, in this section, we will use the terms as basically interchangeable to help get you more used to their function in argument. When writers are able to skillfully rebut or refute a view that runs counter to their claims, it strengthens their work. Rebuttal and refutation are common in all types of argument, including academic argument. As you complete more advanced work in college, you will be expected to address counterargument often. And while you might not always need to or be able to prove that other points of view are wrong, you may at least need to try to argue against them.

Rebuttal and Refutation. Provided by : University of Mississippi. Project : PLATO Project. License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Rebuttals and Refutations

introduction to rebuttal and refutation of counterargument.

An integral part of composing a strong argument is including a counterargument. This can be difficult, especially if a writer is arguing for a position s/he already agrees with. In such cases, writers can sometimes make good points to support their stances; however, their arguments are vulnerable unless they anticipate and address counterarguments. When a writer does this, it is often referred to as rebuttal or refutation. Some scholars of rhetoric differentiate the two words in terms of whether you can actually disprove a claim or just argue against it; however, in this section, we will use the terms as basically interchangeable to help get you more used to their function in argument. When writers are able to skillfully rebut or refute a view that runs counter to their claims, it strengthens their work. Rebuttal and refutation are common in all types of arguments, including academic arguments. As you complete more advanced work in college, you will be expected to address counterargument often. And while you might not always need to or be able to prove that other points of view are wrong, you may at least need to try to argue against them.

Formula for Refutation and Rebuttal

Though writers may handle rebuttal and refutation in different ways, there is a formula for success in academic argument. Here are the key parts of that formula:

Accurately represent opposing viewpoints

If you don’t accurately and thoroughly represent opposing viewpoints in your own writing, some of your potential audience will automatically be turned off. Good rebuttal and refutation begins with a solid understanding of all possible points of view on your topic. That may mean you even need to acknowledge and accommodate opposing points of view. Acknowledging other views shows you are aware of ideas that run counter to your claims. You will almost always be expected to at least acknowledge such views in your work. You may also, though, need to accommodate opposing views, especially if many people see them as reasonable. If, for example, you were writing a piece arguing that students should take a gap year between high school and college, it would benefit your work to acknowledge that a gap year isn’t realistic for or even desired by all students. You may further accommodate this other view by explaining how some students may thrive in the structure that school provides and would gain by going directly from high school to college. Remember that even if you cannot prove positions that counter your own are wrong, you can still use rebuttal and refutation to show why they might be problematic, flawed, or just not as good as another possible position for some people.

Illustration showing a green map of the world overlaid with the "coexist" icon and human figures in various colors.

Use a respectful, non-incendiary tone

It doesn’t help the writer’s cause to offend, upset, or alienate potential readers, even those who hold differing views. Treating all potential readers with respect and avoiding words or phrases that belittle people and/or their views will help you get your points across more effectively. For example, if you are writing a paper on why America would benefit from a third viable major political party, it will not help your cause to write that “Republicans are dumb, and Democrats are whiny.” First, those claims are too general. But even if they weren’t, they won’t help your cause. If you choose to break down the perceived problems with members of political parties, you must do so in a way that is as respectful as possible. Calling someone a name or insulting them (directly or indirectly) is very rarely a successful strategy in argument.

Use reliable information in your rebuttal/refutation

Always be sure to carefully check the ideas or claims you make in rebutting a counterargument. The brain is not an infallible computer, and there are instances when we think we know information is accurate but it isn’t. Sometimes we know a lot about a particular subject but we get information confused or time has changed things a bit. Additionally, we may be tempted to use a source that backs up our ideas perfectly, but it might not be the most reputable, credible, or up-to-date place for information. Don’t assume you just have all of the information to shoot down counterarguments. Use your knowledge, but also do thorough research, double- and triple-check information, and look for sources that are likely to carry weight with readers. For example, it is widely assumed that bulls are attracted to the color red; however, in reality, bulls are colorblind, so what many people assume as fact is incorrect. Be thorough so you have confidence in your claims when you are rebutting/refuting and likewise when you are attempting to prevent yourself from being open to rebuttal/refutation.

Use qualifying words when applicable

Qualifying words are terms such as “many,” “most,” “some,” “might,” “rarely,” “doubtful,” “often,” etc. You get the point. These are words that don’t lock you into a claim that could be easily refuted and that can help you more easily rebut counterarguments. For example, if someone says, “Nobody dies of tuberculosis anymore,” we might get the point that it isn’t as common as it used to be. Still, it isn’t an accurate statement, and a more precise way to phrase such a claim would be to qualify it: “Not many people die each year in America from tuberculosis.” You might not always need to use qualifying terms. If you are making a point that is absolute, feel free to make it strongly; however, if there is a need to give your claim more flexibility, use qualifying words to help you.

Now let’s take a look at examples of rebuttal and refutation to further your understanding:

Download the PDF of these examples.

Felix is writing his argument paper on why his university should not have cut funding to the school’s library. His arguable thesis reads as follows: Because Northern State University has a mission statement that includes becoming a Research 1 (R1) institution, full funding should be restored to the library to ensure faculty and students have adequate resources to enhance their research agendas.

Felix has done his research, and he knows that a couple of the main counterarguments are that the school needs funds to renovate the student union and to construct a new building for the Engineering Department. Thus, he can anticipate counterarguments and include them in his paper. While Felix cannot prove beyond doubt that the school should use more funding for the library instead of addressing other needs, he can try to make the case.

Read over Felix’s passage below to see how he strengthens his case, and note the annotations to help you see parts of the formula in action:

Notice how each student has a different goal and approach, yet they both still use parts of the formula to help them accomplish their rhetorical aims.

Share This Book

Consider the following thesis for a short paper that analyzes different approaches to stopping climate change:

Climate activism that focuses on personal actions such as recycling obscures the need for systemic change that will be required to slow carbon emissions.

The author of this thesis is promising to make the case that personal actions not only will not solve the climate problem but may actually make the problem more difficult to solve. In order to make a convincing argument, the author will need to consider how thoughtful people might disagree with this claim. In this case, the author might anticipate the following counterarguments:

By encouraging personal actions, climate activists may raise awareness of the problem and encourage people to support larger systemic change.
Personal actions on a global level would actually make a difference.
Personal actions may not make a difference, but they will not obscure the need for systemic solutions.
Personal actions cannot be put into one category and must be differentiated.

In order to make a convincing argument, the author of this essay may need to address these potential counterarguments. But you don’t need to address every possible counterargument. Rather, you should engage counterarguments when doing so allows you to strengthen your own argument by explaining how it holds up in relation to other arguments.

How to address counterarguments

Once you have considered the potential counterarguments, you will need to figure out how to address them in your essay. In general, to address a counterargument, you’ll need to take the following steps.

State the counterargument and explain why a reasonable reader could raise that counterargument.
Counter the counterargument. How you grapple with a counterargument will depend on what you think it means for your argument. You may explain why your argument is still convincing, even in light of this other position. You may point to a flaw in the counterargument. You may concede that the counterargument gets something right but then explain why it does not undermine your argument. You may explain why the counterargument is not relevant. You may refine your own argument in response to the counterargument.
Consider the language you are using to address the counterargument. Words like but or however signal to the reader that you are refuting the counterargument. Words like nevertheless or still signal to the reader that your argument is not diminished by the counterargument.

Here’s an example of a paragraph in which a counterargument is raised and addressed.

Image version

The two steps are marked with counterargument and “counter” to the counterargument: COUNTERARGUMENT/ But some experts argue that it’s important for individuals to take action to mitigate climate change. In “All That Performative Environmentalism Adds Up,” Annie Lowery argues that personal actions to fight climate change, such as reducing household trash or installing solar panels, matter because change in social behavior can lead to changes in laws. [1]

COUNTER TO THE COUNTERARGUMENT/ While Lowery may be correct that individual actions can lead to collective action, this focus on individual action can allow corporations to receive positive publicity while continuing to burn fossil fuels at dangerous rates.

Where to address counterarguments

There is no one right place for a counterargument—where you raise a particular counterargument will depend on how it fits in with the rest of your argument. The most common spots are the following:

Before your conclusion This is a common and effective spot for a counterargument because it’s a chance to address anything that you think a reader might still be concerned about after you’ve made your main argument. Don’t put a counterargument in your conclusion, however. At that point, you won’t have the space to address it, and readers may come away confused—or less convinced by your argument.
Before your thesis Often, your thesis will actually be a counterargument to someone else’s argument. In other words, you will be making your argument because someone else has made an argument that you disagree with. In those cases, you may want to offer that counterargument before you state your thesis to show your readers what’s at stake—someone else has made an unconvincing argument, and you are now going to make a better one.
After your introduction In some cases, you may want to respond to a counterargument early in your essay, before you get too far into your argument. This is a good option when you think readers may need to understand why the counterargument is not as strong as your argument before you can even launch your own ideas. You might do this in the paragraph right after your thesis.
Anywhere that makes sense As you draft an essay, you should always keep your readers in mind and think about where a thoughtful reader might disagree with you or raise an objection to an assertion or interpretation of evidence that you are offering. In those spots, you can introduce that potential objection and explain why it does not change your argument. If you think it does affect your argument, you can acknowledge that and explain why your argument is still strong.

[1] Annie Lowery, “All that Performative Environmentalism Adds Up.” The Atlantic . August 31, 2020. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/08/your-tote-bag-can-mak…

picture_as_pdf Counterargument

Module: Academic Argument

Formula for refutation and rebuttal, learning objective.

Recognize strategies for rebuttal and refutation of counterargument

Though writers may handle rebuttal and refutation in different ways, there is a formula for success in academic argument. Here are the key parts of that formula:

Accurately represent opposing viewpoints

Use a respectful, non-incendiary tone

Use reliable information in your rebuttal/refutation

Use qualifying words when applicable to help you be more accurate and to avoid locking you into an absolute claim

Qualifying words are terms such as “many,” “most,” “some,” “might,” “rarely,” “doubtful,” “often,” etc. You get the point. These are words that don’t lock you into a claim that could be easily refuted and that can help you more easily rebut counterarguments. For example, if someone says “Nobody dies of tuberculosis anymore” we might get the point that it isn’t as common as it used to be. Still, it isn’t an accurate statement, and a more precise way to phrase such a claim would be to qualify it: “Not many people die each year in America from tuberculosis.” You might not always need to use qualifying terms. If you are making a point that is absolute, feel free to make it strongly; however, if there is a need to give your claim more flexibility, use qualifying words to help you.

Rebuttal and Refutation. Provided by : University of Mississippi. Project : PLATO Project. License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Organizing Your Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

This page summarizes three historical methods for argumentation, providing structural templates for each.

How can I effectively present my argument?

In order for your argument to be persuasive, it must use an organizational structure that the audience perceives as both logical and easy to parse. Three argumentative methods —the Toulmin Method , Classical Method , and Rogerian Method — give guidance for how to organize the points in an argument.

Note that these are only three of the most popular models for organizing an argument. Alternatives exist. Be sure to consult your instructor and/or defer to your assignment’s directions if you’re unsure which to use (if any).

Toulmin Method

The Toulmin Method is a formula that allows writers to build a sturdy logical foundation for their arguments. First proposed by author Stephen Toulmin in The Uses of Argument (1958), the Toulmin Method emphasizes building a thorough support structure for each of an argument's key claims.

The basic format for the Toulmin Method is as follows:

Claim: In this section, you explain your overall thesis on the subject. In other words, you make your main argument.

Data (Grounds): You should use evidence to support the claim. In other words, provide the reader with facts that prove your argument is strong.

Warrant (Bridge): In this section, you explain why or how your data supports the claim. As a result, the underlying assumption that you build your argument on is grounded in reason.

Backing (Foundation): Here, you provide any additional logic or reasoning that may be necessary to support the warrant.

Counterclaim: You should anticipate a counterclaim that negates the main points in your argument. Don't avoid arguments that oppose your own. Instead, become familiar with the opposing perspective. If you respond to counterclaims, you appear unbiased (and, therefore, you earn the respect of your readers). You may even want to include several counterclaims to show that you have thoroughly researched the topic.

Rebuttal: In this section, you incorporate your own evidence that disagrees with the counterclaim. It is essential to include a thorough warrant or bridge to strengthen your essay’s argument. If you present data to your audience without explaining how it supports your thesis, your readers may not make a connection between the two, or they may draw different conclusions.

Example of the Toulmin Method:

Claim: Hybrid cars are an effective strategy to fight pollution.

Data1: Driving a private car is a typical citizen's most air-polluting activity.

Warrant 1: Due to the fact that cars are the largest source of private (as opposed to industrial) air pollution, switching to hybrid cars should have an impact on fighting pollution.

Data 2: Each vehicle produced is going to stay on the road for roughly 12 to 15 years.

Warrant 2: Cars generally have a long lifespan, meaning that the decision to switch to a hybrid car will make a long-term impact on pollution levels.

Data 3: Hybrid cars combine a gasoline engine with a battery-powered electric motor.

Warrant 3: The combination of these technologies produces less pollution.

Counterclaim: Instead of focusing on cars, which still encourages an inefficient culture of driving even as it cuts down on pollution, the nation should focus on building and encouraging the use of mass transit systems.

Rebuttal: While mass transit is an idea that should be encouraged, it is not feasible in many rural and suburban areas, or for people who must commute to work. Thus, hybrid cars are a better solution for much of the nation's population.

Rogerian Method

The Rogerian Method (named for, but not developed by, influential American psychotherapist Carl R. Rogers) is a popular method for controversial issues. This strategy seeks to find a common ground between parties by making the audience understand perspectives that stretch beyond (or even run counter to) the writer’s position. Moreso than other methods, it places an emphasis on reiterating an opponent's argument to his or her satisfaction. The persuasive power of the Rogerian Method lies in its ability to define the terms of the argument in such a way that:

your position seems like a reasonable compromise.
you seem compassionate and empathetic.

The basic format of the Rogerian Method is as follows:

Introduction: Introduce the issue to the audience, striving to remain as objective as possible.

Opposing View : Explain the other side’s position in an unbiased way. When you discuss the counterargument without judgement, the opposing side can see how you do not directly dismiss perspectives which conflict with your stance.

Statement of Validity (Understanding): This section discusses how you acknowledge how the other side’s points can be valid under certain circumstances. You identify how and why their perspective makes sense in a specific context, but still present your own argument.

Statement of Your Position: By this point, you have demonstrated that you understand the other side’s viewpoint. In this section, you explain your own stance.

Statement of Contexts : Explore scenarios in which your position has merit. When you explain how your argument is most appropriate for certain contexts, the reader can recognize that you acknowledge the multiple ways to view the complex issue.

Statement of Benefits: You should conclude by explaining to the opposing side why they would benefit from accepting your position. By explaining the advantages of your argument, you close on a positive note without completely dismissing the other side’s perspective.

Example of the Rogerian Method:

Introduction: The issue of whether children should wear school uniforms is subject to some debate.

Opposing View: Some parents think that requiring children to wear uniforms is best.

Statement of Validity (Understanding): Those parents who support uniforms argue that, when all students wear the same uniform, the students can develop a unified sense of school pride and inclusiveness.

Statement of Your Position : Students should not be required to wear school uniforms. Mandatory uniforms would forbid choices that allow students to be creative and express themselves through clothing.

Statement of Contexts: However, even if uniforms might hypothetically promote inclusivity, in most real-life contexts, administrators can use uniform policies to enforce conformity. Students should have the option to explore their identity through clothing without the fear of being ostracized.

Statement of Benefits: Though both sides seek to promote students' best interests, students should not be required to wear school uniforms. By giving students freedom over their choice, students can explore their self-identity by choosing how to present themselves to their peers.

Classical Method

The Classical Method of structuring an argument is another common way to organize your points. Originally devised by the Greek philosopher Aristotle (and then later developed by Roman thinkers like Cicero and Quintilian), classical arguments tend to focus on issues of definition and the careful application of evidence. Thus, the underlying assumption of classical argumentation is that, when all parties understand the issue perfectly, the correct course of action will be clear.

The basic format of the Classical Method is as follows:

Introduction (Exordium): Introduce the issue and explain its significance. You should also establish your credibility and the topic’s legitimacy.

Statement of Background (Narratio): Present vital contextual or historical information to the audience to further their understanding of the issue. By doing so, you provide the reader with a working knowledge about the topic independent of your own stance.

Proposition (Propositio): After you provide the reader with contextual knowledge, you are ready to state your claims which relate to the information you have provided previously. This section outlines your major points for the reader.

Proof (Confirmatio): You should explain your reasons and evidence to the reader. Be sure to thoroughly justify your reasons. In this section, if necessary, you can provide supplementary evidence and subpoints.

Refutation (Refuatio): In this section, you address anticipated counterarguments that disagree with your thesis. Though you acknowledge the other side’s perspective, it is important to prove why your stance is more logical.

Conclusion (Peroratio): You should summarize your main points. The conclusion also caters to the reader’s emotions and values. The use of pathos here makes the reader more inclined to consider your argument.

Example of the Classical Method:

Introduction (Exordium): Millions of workers are paid a set hourly wage nationwide. The federal minimum wage is standardized to protect workers from being paid too little. Research points to many viewpoints on how much to pay these workers. Some families cannot afford to support their households on the current wages provided for performing a minimum wage job .

Statement of Background (Narratio): Currently, millions of American workers struggle to make ends meet on a minimum wage. This puts a strain on workers’ personal and professional lives. Some work multiple jobs to provide for their families.

Proposition (Propositio): The current federal minimum wage should be increased to better accommodate millions of overworked Americans. By raising the minimum wage, workers can spend more time cultivating their livelihoods.

Proof (Confirmatio): According to the United States Department of Labor, 80.4 million Americans work for an hourly wage, but nearly 1.3 million receive wages less than the federal minimum. The pay raise will alleviate the stress of these workers. Their lives would benefit from this raise because it affects multiple areas of their lives.

Refutation (Refuatio): There is some evidence that raising the federal wage might increase the cost of living. However, other evidence contradicts this or suggests that the increase would not be great. Additionally, worries about a cost of living increase must be balanced with the benefits of providing necessary funds to millions of hardworking Americans.

Conclusion (Peroratio): If the federal minimum wage was raised, many workers could alleviate some of their financial burdens. As a result, their emotional wellbeing would improve overall. Though some argue that the cost of living could increase, the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks.

Definition of Refutation

The literary term refutation refers to that part of an argument where a speaker or a writer encounters contradicting points of view. Alternatively, refutation can be described as the negation of an argument, opinion, testimony, doctrine, or theory, through contradicting evidence . It normally constitutes a part of an essay that disproves the opposing arguments.

An important distinction to be appreciated is the difference between refutation and counter-argument. In the case of counter-argument, the writer acknowledges that there is substance in the contradicting argument, yet he provides evidence for his alleged stance. On the other hand, refutation goes a bit further by presenting evidence that in turn negates the opposing arguments.

In a circumstance in which the writer happens to agree with certain aspects of the opposing argument, he makes a concession . However, writers and speakers rarely employ concession, as it can very easily undermine their own stance.

Types of Refutation

There are various ways through which the tool of refutation can be employed. The three most common modes used for the purpose of incorporating the device of refutation in an argument are : (1) refutation through evidence, (2) refutation through logic, and (3) refutation through exposing the discrepancies of opposing argument.

Refutation through Evidence

For an argument to be counted as one of the valid examples of refutation through evidence, it needs to be an argument backed up by some form of evidence. In the absence of clear bases or justifications it cannot be declared valid. Therefore, a writer can refute a contradicting argument if he can provide evidence that conclusively negates it, or by presenting more recent or credible evidence.

Refutation through Logic

Refutation examples through logic are quite tricky to construct. It involves deconstructing the opposing argument, and presenting it in such a way as to highlight the discrepancies present within the argument. Most skilled writers check the validity of their arguments before publishing them. This makes refutation through logic all the more difficult. There is no denying the fact then that refutation through logic constitutes a difficult task at hand. However, writers have employed this tool in their respective writings.

Refutation through Exposing Discrepancies

The method involves showing that one of the contradicting arguments lacks the core ingredient of centrality to the issue as the opposition had intended to project. Also, the writer can logically present his argument as being superior to the one presented by the opposition, by showing that the opposition’s argument lacks the crucial link to the topic. Further, the writer can highlight the insignificance of the opposition’s argument by exposing the deficiencies found within the opposing argument.

Examples of Refutation in Literature

Example #1: elements of rhetoric (by richard whately).

“If indeed very strong objections have obtained much currency, or have been just stated by an opponent, so that what is asserted is likely to be regarded as paradoxical, it may be advisable to begin with a Refutation.”

As can be seen from the excerpt quoted above, refutation of an objection should be placed in the midst of an argument. However, the nearer it is to the beginning the more effective it is likely to be.

Example #2: Remarks made to the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Seattle, Washington (By William Kennard, Chairman of the FCC)

“So we may well hear from a whole chorus of naysayers. And to all of them I have only one response: we cannot afford to wait. We cannot afford to let the homes and schools and businesses throughout America wait. Not when we have seen the future. We have seen what high capacity broadband can do for education and for our economy. We must act today to create an environment where all competitors have a fair shot at bringing high capacity bandwidth to consumers—especially residential consumers. And especially residential consumers in rural and underserved areas.”

This excerpt serves to illustrate the effectiveness of early refutation. The early placement of refutation within the extract has had an enhanced persuasive impact on the audience .

Function of Refutation

The tool of refutation has a crucial significance in writing. It is important in determining whether the speaker or writer has successfully persuaded his readers or not. Mostly, the device of refutation is employed when one is dealing with a controversial topic. It allows the reader to prefer one argument over another. The use of the device is frequently witnessed in intricate arguments.

[stmool | Adobe Stock}

Refutation Text and Critical Thinking

The Rationality of Science

Critical thinking is important in both education and everyday thinking. It has been shown to have positive associations with a range of important outcomes (Stanovich et al. 2016), and a key component of critical thinking is holding evidence-based beliefs (epistemic rationality).

Misconceptions—beliefs that are contradicted by evidence—can be a roadblock to critical thinking. When these misconceptions are strong they are highly resistant to change; overcoming this resistance may require strategies that go beyond what is used in standard textbooks and teaching models. Presenting students with factual knowledge, alone, and expecting them to critically evaluate and make conceptual changes appear to be inadequate, especially when attempting to refute inaccurate or incomplete beliefs.

This type of information, often referred to as expository text , is intended to explain material without mention of associated misconceptions. The scientific literature shows there is better method for combating misconceptions. Refutation (or refutational) text has been used in various disciplines and has been shown to be particularly useful in combating misconceptions about science. Although misconceptions exist in virtually every subject area, they appear to be highly prevalent in science (Maria 2000).

Refutational Teaching

Refutation, as it used in textbooks and lectures, has three key components: the misconception is explicitly stated, the misconception is then identified as being false, then scientific information is given that refutes the misconception (Kowalski and Taylor 2011). An example of the components of a refutation text: misconception : some people believe humans only use 10 percent of their brains; refutation cue : this belief is incorrect; refutation with scientific explanation : Our brains are constantly bombarded with sensory information, and widely distributed brain areas are involved in communication and processing information virtually all the time. Humans use much more than 10 percent of their brains.

It is essential that the refutation text explicitly states a misconception and then refutes it with evidence. Refutation text includes elements of argumentation that are sometimes referred to as being some of the most effective strategies for changing people’s misconceptions. The conditions for changing misconceptions include being highly motivated, the information must be understandable (subjectively meaningful), the alternative concept must be plausible, and the information needs to be perceived as being useful in helping solve problems (Hughes et al. 2013).

Kowalski and Taylor (2009) conducted a study to determine whether refutational lecture and text are effective in changing student misconceptions. The researchers tested students’ knowledge of forty-five common misconceptions about the brain, and then taught the course with refutational lecture and readings or taught the course using a standard format (simply presenting accurate facts). When tested at the end of the semester students showed significant changes in their beliefs when refutational approaches were used.

In a study conducted by Broughton and colleagues (2010), undergraduates read either a refutation or standard text on seasonal change. Participant reading times were recorded and their conceptions were measured at pre- and posttest. Results showed readers spent less time reading the refutation paragraph compared to the standard text paragraph, and the refutation text group showed fewer misconceptions at posttest. The results showed intentional resources were allocated differently between the two types of text. The researchers asserted this difference in attention likely contributed to the reduction in misconceptions shown by those in the refutation text group. It may be that readers perceive the refutation text information as important, interesting, and easier to process as reflected by the brief amount of time spent reading the information. The finding of less time spent reading when readers are exposed to information that contradicts belief is supported by research examining people’s interests. Other research on interest shows that readers process material fast when they find it interesting.

Aguilar and colleagues (2019) examined refutation texts in the context of controversial educational policies (including Common Core State Standards and charter schools). Results of two experiments showed that refutation texts reduced participants’ misconceptions and led to correct conceptions about both policy issues. The researchers concluded that their findings hold promise for policymakers, implementers, and researchers seeking support for policies through evidence-based refutation texts.

Kowalski and Taylor (2011) conducted a study examining the effectiveness of refutational readings and lecture on decreasing psychological misconceptions for students of high versus low levels of achievement. High achieving students had fewer misconceptions after completing the refutational readings or after they heard the refutational lecture. However, low achieving students had fewer misconceptions only after hearing the refutational lecture. The refutational readings did not lead to conceptual change in low achieving students. This study indicates that different forms of refutational teaching may produce different outcomes, and that in some cases refutational readings are not enough to promote conceptual change.

Tippett (2010) reviewed two decades of refutation text reasearch in the fields of science and reading education, and found than reading refutation text rather than expository text is more likely to result in conceptual changes. The review examined studies across age groups and grade levels. “[T]he results of 20 years of research conducted in both reading and science education are clear: reading refutation text can effectively promote conceputal change when readers possess science misconceptions, regardless of age or grade level” (Tippett 2010).

Developing and implementing tools for critical thinking has widespread implications. Educators and other knowledge workers may benefit society by promoting evidence based information, while at the same time combating misconceptions. A relatively large body of research suggests that refutational teaching, in various forms, can assist in forming evidence-based beliefs. Refutational text and reading should be used in various domains, particularly in domains where misconceptions are most prevalent.

References

Aguilar, et al. 2019. Refutation Texts: A New Approach to Changing Public Misconceptions about Education Policy. Educational Researcher 48, 263–272.

Broughton, et al. 2010. The Nature of the Refutation Text Effect: An Investigation of Attention Allocation. The Journal of Educational Research 103(6), 407–423.

Hughes, S., et al. 2013. Misconceptions about Psychological Science: a review. Psychology Learning and Teaching 12(1), 20–31.

Kowalski, P., and Taylor, A.K. 2009. The effect of refuting misconceptions in the introductory psychology class. Teaching of Psychology 36(3), 153–159.

Kowalski, P., and Taylor, A.K. 2011. Effectiveness of refutational teaching for high- and low- achieving students. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 11(1), 79–90.

Maria, K. 2000. Conceptual change instruction: a social constructivist perspective. Reading and Writing Quarterly 16, 5–22.

Stanovich, et al. 2016. The Rationality Quotient: Toward A Test Of Rational Thinking . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Tippett, C. 2010. Refutation Text in Science Education: A Review of Two Decades of Research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 8(6), 951–970.

What are your chances of acceptance?

Calculate for all schools, your chance of acceptance.

Your chancing factors

Extracurriculars.

52 Argumentative Essay Ideas that are Actually Interesting

What’s covered:, how to pick a good argumentative essay topic, elements of a strong argumentative essay, argumentative essay idea example topics.

Are you having writer’s block? Coming up with an essay topic can be the hardest part of the process. You have very likely encountered argumentative essay writing in high school and have been asked to write your own. If you’re having trouble finding a topic, we’ve created a list of 52 essay ideas to help jumpstart your brainstorming process! In addition, this post will cover strategies for picking a topic and how to make your argument a strong one. Ultimately, the goal is to convince your reader.

An argumentative essay tasks the writer with presenting an assertion and bolstering that assertion with proper research. You’ll present the claim’s authenticity. This means that whatever argument you’re making must be empirically true! Writing an argumentative essay without any evidence will leave you stranded without any facts to back up your claim. When choosing your essay topic, begin by thinking about themes that have been researched before. Readers will be more engaged with an argument that is supported by data.

This isn’t to say that your argumentative essay topic has to be as well-known, like “Gravity: Does it Exist?” but it shouldn’t be so obscure that there isn’t ample evidence. Finding a topic with multiple sources confirming its validity will help you support your thesis throughout your essay. If upon review of these articles you begin to doubt their worth due to small sample sizes, biased funding sources, or scientific disintegrity, don’t be afraid to move on to a different topic. Your ultimate goal should be proving to your audience that your argument is true because the data supports it.

The hardest essays to write are the ones that you don’t care about. If you don’t care about your topic, why should someone else? Topics that are more personal to the reader are immediately more thoughtful and meaningful because the author’s passion shines through. If you are free to choose an argumentative essay topic, find a topic where the papers you read and cite are fun to read. It’s much easier to write when the passion is already inside of you!

However, you won’t always have the choice to pick your topic. You may receive an assignment to write an argumentative essay that you feel is boring. There is still value in writing an argumentative essay on a topic that may not be of interest to you. It will push you to study a new topic, and broaden your ability to write on a variety of topics. Getting good at proving a point thoroughly and effectively will help you to both understand different fields more completely and increase your comfort with scientific writing.

Convincing Thesis Statement

It’s important to remember the general essay structure: an introduction paragraph with a thesis statement, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. A strong thesis statement will set your essay up for success. What is it? A succinct, concise, and pithy sentence found in your first paragraph that summarizes your main point. Pour over this statement to ensure that you can set up your reader to understand your essay. You should also restate your thesis throughout your essay to keep your reader focused on your point.

Ample Research

A typical argumentative essay prompt may look like this: “What has been the most important invention of the 21st century? Support your claim with evidence.” This question is open-ended and gives you flexibility. But that also means it requires research to prove your point convincingly. The strongest essays weave scientific quotes and results into your writing. You can use recent articles, primary sources, or news sources. Maybe you even cite your own research. Remember, this process takes time, so be sure you set aside enough time to dive deep into your topic.

Clear Structure

If the reader can’t follow your argument, all your research could be for nothing! Structure is key to persuading your audience. Below are two common argumentative essay structures that you can use to organize your essays.

The Toulmin argument and the Rogerian argument each contain the four sections mentioned above but executes them in different ways. Be sure to familiarize yourself with both essay structures so that your essay is the most effective it can be.

The Toulmin argument has a straightforward presentation. You begin with your assertion, your thesis statement. You then list the evidence that supports your point and why these are valid sources. The bulk of your essay should be explaining how your sources support your claim. You then end your essay by acknowledging and discussing the problems or flaws that readers may find in your presentation. Then, you should list the solutions to these and alternative perspectives and prove your argument is stronger.

The Rogerian argument has a more complex structure. You begin with a discussion of what opposing sides do right and the validity of their arguments. This is effective because it allows you to piece apart your opponent’s argument. The next section contains your position on the questions. In this section, it is important to list problems with your opponent’s argument that your argument fixes. This way, your position feels much stronger. Your essay ends with suggesting a possible compromise between the two sides. A combination of the two sides could be the most effective solution.

Is the death penalty effective?
Is our election process fair?
Is the electoral college outdated?
Should we have lower taxes?
How many Supreme Court Justices should there be?
Should there be different term limits for elected officials?
Should the drinking age be lowered?
Does religion cause war?
Should the country legalize marijuana?
Should the country have tighter gun control laws?
Should men get paternity leave?
Should maternity leave be longer?
Should smoking be banned?
Should the government have a say in our diet?
Should birth control be free?
Should we increase access to condoms for teens?
Should abortion be legal?
Do school uniforms help educational attainment?
Are kids better or worse students than they were ten years ago?
Should students be allowed to cheat?
Is school too long?
Does school start too early?
Are there benefits to attending a single-sex school?
Is summer break still relevant?
Is college too expensive?

Art / Culture

How can you reform copyright law?
What was the best decade for music?
Do video games cause students to be more violent?
Should content online be more harshly regulated?
Should graffiti be considered art or vandalism?
Should schools ban books?
How important is art education?
Should music be taught in school?
Are music-sharing services helpful to artists?
What is the best way to teach science in a religious school?
Should fracking be legal?
Should parents be allowed to modify their unborn children?
Should vaccinations be required for attending school?
Are GMOs helpful or harmful?
Are we too dependent on our phones?
Should everyone have internet access?
Should internet access be free?
Should the police force be required to wear body cams?
Should social media companies be allowed to collect data from their users?
How has the internet impacted human society?
Should self-driving cars be allowed on the streets?
Should athletes be held to high moral standards?
Are professional athletes paid too much?
Should the U.S. have more professional sports teams?
Should sports be separated by gender?
Should college athletes be paid?
What are the best ways to increase safety in sports?

Where to Get More Argumentative Essay Topic Ideas

If you need more help brainstorming topics, especially those that are personalized to your interests, you can use CollegeVine’s free AI tutor, Ivy . Ivy can help you come up with original argumentative essay ideas, and she can also help with the rest of your homework, from math to languages.

50 Argumentative Essay Topics

Illustration by Catherine Song. ThoughtCo.

M.Ed., Education Administration, University of Georgia
B.A., History, Armstrong State University

An argumentative essay requires you to decide on a topic and take a position on it. You'll need to back up your viewpoint with well-researched facts and information as well. One of the hardest parts is deciding which topic to write about, but there are plenty of ideas available to get you started.

Choosing a Great Argumentative Essay Topic

Students often find that most of their work on these essays is done before they even start writing. This means that it's best if you have a general interest in your subject, otherwise you might get bored or frustrated while trying to gather information. (You don't need to know everything, though.) Part of what makes this experience rewarding is learning something new.

It's best if you have a general interest in your subject, but the argument you choose doesn't have to be one that you agree with.

The subject you choose may not necessarily be one that you are in full agreement with, either. You may even be asked to write a paper from the opposing point of view. Researching a different viewpoint helps students broaden their perspectives.

Ideas for Argument Essays

Sometimes, the best ideas are sparked by looking at many different options. Explore this list of possible topics and see if a few pique your interest. Write those down as you come across them, then think about each for a few minutes.

Which would you enjoy researching? Do you have a firm position on a particular subject? Is there a point you would like to make sure to get across? Did the topic give you something new to think about? Can you see why someone else may feel differently?

50 Possible Topics

A number of these topics are rather controversial—that's the point. In an argumentative essay, opinions matter and controversy is based on opinions, which are, hopefully, backed up by facts. If these topics are a little too controversial or you don't find the right one for you, try browsing through persuasive essay and speech topics as well.

Is global climate change caused by humans?
Is the death penalty effective?
Is our election process fair?
Is torture ever acceptable?
Should men get paternity leave from work?
Are school uniforms beneficial?
Do we have a fair tax system?
Do curfews keep teens out of trouble?
Is cheating out of control?
Are we too dependent on computers?
Should animals be used for research?
Should cigarette smoking be banned?
Are cell phones dangerous?
Are law enforcement cameras an invasion of privacy?
Do we have a throwaway society?
Is child behavior better or worse than it was years ago?
Should companies market to children?
Should the government have a say in our diets?
Does access to condoms prevent teen pregnancy?
Should members of Congress have term limits?
Are actors and professional athletes paid too much?
Are CEOs paid too much?
Should athletes be held to high moral standards?
Do violent video games cause behavior problems?
Should creationism be taught in public schools?
Are beauty pageants exploitative ?
Should English be the official language of the United States?
Should the racing industry be forced to use biofuels?
Should the alcohol drinking age be increased or decreased?
Should everyone be required to recycle?
Is it okay for prisoners to vote (as they are in some states)?
Is it good that same-sex couples are able to marry?
Are there benefits to attending a single-sex school ?
Does boredom lead to trouble?
Should schools be in session year-round ?
Does religion cause war?
Should the government provide health care?
Should abortion be illegal?
Are girls too mean to each other?
Is homework harmful or helpful?
Is the cost of college too high?
Is college admission too competitive?
Should euthanasia be illegal?
Should the federal government legalize marijuana use nationally ?
Should rich people be required to pay more taxes?
Should schools require foreign language or physical education?
Is affirmative action fair?
Is public prayer okay in schools?
Are schools and teachers responsible for low test scores?
Is greater gun control a good idea?
Preparing an Argument Essay: Exploring Both Sides of an Issue
Controversial Speech Topics
100 Persuasive Essay Topics
Tips on How to Write an Argumentative Essay
Bad Essay Topics for College Admissions
25 Essay Topics for American Government Classes
Topic In Composition and Speech
MBA Essay Tips
How to Write a Solid Thesis Statement
How to Write a Narrative Essay or Speech
High School Debate Topics
61 General Expository Essay Topic Ideas to Practice Academic Writing
40 Writing Topics for Argumentative and Persuasive Essays
Expository Essay Genre With Suggested Prompts
501 Topic Suggestions for Writing Essays and Speeches
Middle School Debate Topics

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, 50 great argumentative essay topics for any assignment.

General Education

At some point, you’re going to be asked to write an argumentative essay. An argumentative essay is exactly what it sounds like—an essay in which you’ll be making an argument, using examples and research to back up your point.

But not all argumentative essay topics are created equal. Not only do you have to structure your essay right to have a good impact on the reader, but even your choice of subject can impact how readers feel about your work.

In this article, we’ll cover the basics of writing argumentative essays, including what argumentative essays are, how to write a good one, and how to pick a topic that works for you. Then check out a list of argumentative essay ideas to help you get started.

What Is an Argumentative Essay?

An argumentative essay is one that makes an argument through research. These essays take a position and support it through evidence, but, unlike many other kinds of essays, they are interested in expressing a specific argument supported by research and evidence.

A good argumentative essay will be based on established or new research rather than only on your thoughts and feelings. Imagine that you’re trying to get your parents to raise your allowance, and you can offer one of two arguments in your favor:

You should raise my allowance because I want you to.

You should raise my allowance because I’ve been taking on more chores without complaining.

The first argument is based entirely in feelings without any factual backup, whereas the second is based on evidence that can be proven. Your parents are more likely to respond positively to the second argument because it demonstrates that you have done something to earn the increased allowance. Similarly, a well-researched and reasoned argument will show readers that your point has a basis in fact, not just feelings.

The standard five-paragraph essay is common in writing argumentative essays, but it’s not the only way to write one. An argumentative essay is typically written in one of two formats, the Toulmin model or the Rogerian model.

The Toulmin model is the most common, comprised of an introduction with a claim (otherwise known as a thesis), with data to support it. This style of essay will also include rebuttals, helping to strengthen your argument by anticipating counterarguments.

The Rogerian model analyzes two sides of an argument and reaches a conclusion after weighing the strengths and weaknesses of each.

Both essay styles rely on well-reasoned logic and supporting evidence to prove a point, just in two different ways.

The important thing to note about argumentative essays as opposed to other kinds of essays is that they aim to argue a specific point rather than to explain something or to tell a story. While they may have some things in common with analytical essays, the primary difference is in their objective—an argumentative essay aims to convince someone of something, whereas an analytical essay contextualizes a topic with research.

What Makes a Good Argumentative Essay?

To write an effective argumentative essay, you need to know what a good one looks like. In addition to a solid structure, you’ll need an argument, a strong thesis, and solid research.

An Argument

Unlike other forms of essays, you are trying to convince your reader of something. You’re not just teaching them a concept or demonstrating an idea—you’re constructing an argument to change the readers’ thinking.

You’ll need to develop a good argument, which encompasses not just your main point, but also all the pieces that make it up.

Think beyond what you are saying and include how you’re saying it. How will you take an idea and turn it into a complex and well thought out argument that is capable of changing somebody’s mind?

A Strong Thesis

The thesis is the core of your argument. What specific message are you trying to get across? State that message in one sentence, and that will be your thesis.

This is the foundation on which your essay is built, so it needs to be strong and well-reasoned. You need to be able to expand on it with facts and sources, not just feelings.

A good argumentative essay isn’t just based on your individual thoughts, but research. That can be citing sources and other arguments or it can mean direct research in the field, depending on what your argument is and the context in which you are arguing it.

Be prepared to back your thesis up with reporting from scientific journals, newspapers, or other forms of research. Having well-researched sources will help support your argument better than hearsay or assumptions. If you can’t find enough research to back up your point, it’s worth reconsidering your thesis or conducting original research, if possible.

How to Come Up With an Argumentative Essay Topic

Sometimes you may find yourself arguing things you don’t necessarily believe. That’s totally fine—you don’t actually have to wholeheartedly believe in what you’re arguing in order to construct a compelling argument.

However, if you have free choice of topic, it’s a good idea to pick something you feel strongly about. There are two key components to a good argumentative essay: a strong stance, and an assortment of evidence. If you’re interested and feel passionate about the topic you choose, you'll have an easier time finding evidence to support it, but it's the evidence that's most important.

So, to choose a topic, think about things you feel strongly about, whether positively or negatively. You can make a list of ideas and narrow those down to a handful of things, then expand on those ideas with a few potential points you want to hit on.

For example, say you’re trying to decide whether you should write about how your neighborhood should ban weed killer, that your school’s lunch should be free for all students, or that the school day should be cut by one hour. To decide between these ideas, you can make a list of three to five points for each that cover the different evidence you could use to support each point.

For the weed killer ban, you could say that weed killer has been proven to have adverse impacts on bees, that there are simple, natural alternatives, and that weeds aren’t actually bad to have around. For the free lunch idea, you could suggest that some students have to go hungry because they can’t afford lunch, that funds could be diverted from other places to support free lunch, and that other items, like chips or pizza, could be sold to help make up lost revenue. And for the school day length example, you could argue that teenagers generally don’t get enough sleep, that you have too much homework and not enough time to do it, and that teenagers don’t spend enough time with their families.

You might find as you make these lists that some of them are stronger than others. The more evidence you have and the stronger you feel that that evidence is, the better the topic. Of course, if you feel that one topic may have more evidence but you’d rather not write about it, it’s okay to pick another topic instead. When you’re making arguments, it can be much easier to find strong points and evidence if you feel passionate about our topic than if you don't.

50 Argumentative Essay Topic Ideas

If you’re struggling to come up with topics on your own, read through this list of argumentative essay topics to help get you started!

Should fracking be legal?
Should parents be able to modify their unborn children?
Do GMOs help or harm people?
Should vaccinations be required for students to attend public school?
Should world governments get involved in addressing climate change?
Should Facebook be allowed to collect data from its users?
Should self-driving cars be legal?
Is it ethical to replace human workers with automation?
Should there be laws against using cell phones while driving?
Has the internet positively or negatively impacted human society?

Should college athletes be paid for being on sports teams?
Should coaches and players make the same amount of money?
Should sports be segregated by gender?
Should the concept of designated hitters in baseball be abolished?
Should US sports take soccer more seriously?
Should religious organizations have to pay taxes?
Should religious clubs be allowed in schools?
Should “one nation under God” be in the pledge of allegiance?
Should religion be taught in schools?
Should clergy be allowed to marry?
Should minors be able to purchase birth control without parental consent?
Should the US switch to single-payer healthcare?
Should assisted suicide be legal?
Should dietary supplements and weight loss items like teas be allowed to advertise through influencers?
Should doctors be allowed to promote medicines?

Government/Politics

Is the electoral college an effective system for modern America?
Should Puerto Rico become a state?
Should voter registration be automatic?
Should people in prison be allowed to vote?
Should Supreme Court justices be elected?
Should sex work be legalized?
Should Columbus Day be replaced with Indigenous Peoples’ Day?
Should the death penalty be legal?
Should animal testing be allowed?
Should drug possession be decriminalized?

Should unpaid internships be legal?
Should minimum wage be increased?
Should monopolies be allowed?
Is universal basic income a good idea?
Should corporations have a higher or lower tax rate?
Are school uniforms a good idea?
Should PE affect a student’s grades?
Should college be free?
Should Greek life in colleges be abolished?
Should students be taught comprehensive sex ed?

Arts/Culture

Should graffiti be considered art or vandalism?
Should books with objectionable words be banned?
Should content on YouTube be better regulated?
Is art education important?
Should art and music sharing online be allowed?

How to Argue Effectively

A strong argument isn’t just about having a good point. If you can’t support that point well, your argument falls apart.

One of the most important things you can do in writing a strong argumentative essay is organizing well. Your essay should have a distinct beginning, middle, and end, better known as the introduction, body and opposition, and conclusion.

This example follows the Toulmin model—if your essay follows the Rogerian model, the same basic premise is true, but your thesis will instead propose two conflicting viewpoints that will be resolved through evidence in the body, with your conclusion choosing the stronger of the two arguments.

Introduction

Your hook should draw the reader’s interest immediately. Questions are a common way of getting interest, as well as evocative language or a strong statistic

Don’t assume that your audience is already familiar with your topic. Give them some background information, such as a brief history of the issue or some additional context.

Your thesis is the crux of your argument. In an argumentative essay, your thesis should be clearly outlined so that readers know exactly what point you’ll be making. Don’t explain all your evidence in the opening, but do take a strong stance and make it clear what you’ll be discussing.

Your claims are the ideas you’ll use to support your thesis. For example, if you’re writing about how your neighborhood shouldn’t use weed killer, your claim might be that it’s bad for the environment. But you can’t just say that on its own—you need evidence to support it.

Evidence is the backbone of your argument. This can be things you glean from scientific studies, newspaper articles, or your own research. You might cite a study that says that weed killer has an adverse effect on bees, or a newspaper article that discusses how one town eliminated weed killer and saw an increase in water quality. These kinds of hard evidence support your point with demonstrable facts, strengthening your argument.

In your essay, you want to think about how the opposition would respond to your claims and respond to them. Don’t pick the weakest arguments, either— figure out what other people are saying and respond to those arguments with clearly reasoned arguments.

Demonstrating that you not only understand the opposition’s point, but that your argument is strong enough to withstand it, is one of the key pieces to a successful argumentative essay.

Conclusions are a place to clearly restate your original point, because doing so will remind readers exactly what you’re arguing and show them how well you’ve argued that point.

Summarize your main claims by restating them, though you don’t need to bring up the evidence again. This helps remind readers of everything you’ve said throughout the essay.

End by suggesting a picture of a world in which your argument and action are ignored. This increases the impact of your argument and leaves a lasting impression on the reader.

A strong argumentative essay is one with good structure and a strong argument , but there are a few other things you can keep in mind to further strengthen your point.

When you’re crafting an argument, it can be easy to get distracted by all the information and complications in your argument. It’s important to stay focused—be clear in your thesis and home in on claims that directly support that thesis.

Be Rational

It’s important that your claims and evidence be based in facts, not just opinion. That’s why it’s important to use reliable sources based in science and reporting—otherwise, it’s easy for people to debunk your arguments.

Don’t rely solely on your feelings about the topic. If you can’t back a claim up with real evidence, it leaves room for counterarguments you may not anticipate. Make sure that you can support everything you say with clear and concrete evidence, and your claims will be a lot stronger!

What’s Next?

No matter what kind of essay you're writing, a strong plan will help you have a bigger impact. This guide to writing a college essay is a great way to get started on your essay organizing journey!

Brushing up on your essay format knowledge to prep for the SAT? Check out this list of SAT essay prompts to help you kickstart your studying!

A bunch of great essay examples can help you aspire to greatness, but bad essays can also be a warning for what not to do. This guide to bad college essays will help you better understand common mistakes to avoid in essay writing!

Melissa Brinks graduated from the University of Washington in 2014 with a Bachelor's in English with a creative writing emphasis. She has spent several years tutoring K-12 students in many subjects, including in SAT prep, to help them prepare for their college education.

Student and Parent Forum

Our new student and parent forum, at ExpertHub.PrepScholar.com , allow you to interact with your peers and the PrepScholar staff. See how other students and parents are navigating high school, college, and the college admissions process. Ask questions; get answers.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

A Theory of Knowledge Revision: the Development of the KReC Framework

Review Article
Published: 18 April 2024
Volume 36 , article number 44 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

Panayiota Kendeou ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0392-7659 1

In this paper, I discuss the inspiration, development, and further refinement of the Knowledge Revision Components framework (KReC; Kendeou & O’Brien, 2014 ). In KReC, we theorize about the conditions that facilitate knowledge revision during reading, and thus successful learning in the presence of prior, often incorrect knowledge. I discuss how the inspiration and need for the framework arose, and how a systematic set of experimental studies and a shift in paradigm led to its initial development and further refinement. I also outline several virtues and contributions of this framework to the extant literature. I conclude with future directions for further development and applications of the framework in the current information ecosystem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Aguilar, S. J., Polikoff, M. S., & Sinatra, G. M. (2019). Refutation texts: A new approach to changing public misconceptions about education policy. Educational Researcher, 48 (5), 263–272.

Article Google Scholar

Albrecht, J. E., & O’Brien, E. J. (1993). Updating a situation model: Maintaining both local and global coherence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19 (5), 1061–1070.

Google Scholar

Amazeen, M. A., & Krishna, A. (2023). Refuting misinformation: Examining theoretical underpinnings of refutational interventions. Current Opinion in Psychology , 101774.

Ariasi, N., Hyönä, J., Kaakinen, J. K., & Mason, L. (2017). An eye-movement analysis of the refutation effect in reading science text. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33 (3), 202–221.

Ariasi, N., & Mason, L. (2011). Uncovering the effect of text structure in learning from a science text: An eye-tracking study. Instructional Science, 39 (5), 581–601.

Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn?: A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128 (4), 612–637.

Beker, K., Kim, J., Van Boekel, M., van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2019). Refutation texts enhance spontaneous transfer of knowledge. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 56 , 67–78.

Bohn-Gettler, C. M. (2019). Getting a grip: The PET framework for studying how reader emotions influence comprehension. Discourse Processes, 56 (5-6), 386–401.

Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J. (2020). Multiple document comprehension. In L. F. Zhang (Ed.), The Oxford encyclopedia of educational psychology . Oxford University Press.

Butterfuss, R. (2020). Revising misconceptions using multiple documents. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/216409 .

Butterfuss, R., & Kendeou, P. (2018). The role of executive functions in reading comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, 30 , 801–826.

Butterfuss, R., & Kendeou, P. (2021). KReC-MD: Knowledge revision with multiple documents. Educational Psychology Review, 33 , 1475–1497.

Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61–82). Taylor & Francis.

Chi, M. T. H. (2013). Two kinds and four sub-types of misconceived knowledge, ways to change it and the learning outcomes. In International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change ((2nd edition). ed., pp. 49–70). Routledge Press.

Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63 (1), 1–49.

Chinn, C. A., Buckland, L. A., & Samarapungavan, A. L. A. (2011). Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology. Educational Psychologist, 46 (3), 141–167.

Danielson, R. W., Sinatra, G. M., & Kendeou, P. (2016). Augmenting the refutation text effect with analogies and graphics. Discourse Processes, 53 (5-6), 392–414.

DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., & Schutz, P. A. (2024). The evolution of race-focused and race-reimaged approaches in educational psychology: Future directions for the field. Educational Psychology Review, 36 , 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09873-2

Diakidoy, I. N., & Kendeou, P. (2001). Facilitating conceptual change in astronomy: A comparison of the effectiveness of two instructional approaches. Learning and Instruction, 11 , 1–20.

Diakidoy, I. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: Τhe effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28 , 335–356.

diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Foreman & P. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age (pp. 49–70). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

diSessa, A. A. (2013). A bird’s eye view of “pieces” vs. “coherence” controversy. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of conceptual change research (2nd ed., pp. 31–48). Routledge.

Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1994). Social psychology research on beliefs and attitudes: Implications for research on learning from text. In R. Garner & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Beliefs about text and instruction with text (pp. 245–264). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..

Donovan, A. M., Zhan, J., & Rapp, D. N. (2018). Supporting historical understandings with refutation texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54 , 1–11.

Ecker, U., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E., & Amazeen, M. (2022). Drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1 , 13–29.

Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data . MIT Press.

Book Google Scholar

Fleury, V. P., Trevors, G., & Kendeou, P. (2019). Public perception of autism treatments: The role of credibility and evidence. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 49 , 1876–1886.

Franco, G., Muis, K., Kendeou, P., Ranellucci, J., Sampasivam, L., & Wang, X. (2012). Examining the influences of epistemic beliefs and knowledge representations on cognitive processing and conceptual change when learning physics. Learning and Instruction, 22 , 62–77.

Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review, 91 (1), 1–67.

Greene, J. A. (2022). What can educational psychology learn from, and contribute to, scholarship on theory development? Educational Psychology Review, 34 , 3011–3035.

Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Bräten, I. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of epistemic cognition . Routledge.

Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly , 117–159.

Harsch, R., & Kendeou, P. (2023). Learning from refutation texts about scientific topics with analogical and causal explanations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 73 , 102172.

Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. G. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13 , 1–13.

Hintzman, D. L. (1986). ‘Schema abstraction’ in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93 (4), 411–428.

Hynd, C. R., & Alvermann, D. E. (1986). The role of refutation text in overcoming difficulty with science concepts. Journal of Reading, 29 , 440–446.

Johnson, V., Butterfuss, R., Kim, J., Orcutt, E., Harsch, R., & Kendeou, P. (2022). The ‘Fauci Effect’: Reducing COVID-19 misconceptions and vaccine hesitancy using an authentic multimodal intervention. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 70 , np.

Kendeou, P., Braasch, J. L. G., & Bråten, I. (2016). Optimizing conditions for learning: Situating refutations in epistemic cognition. Journal of Experimental Education, 84 , 245–263.

Kendeou, P., Butterfuss, R., Kim, J., & Van Boekel, M. (2019). Knowledge revision through the lenses of the three-pronged approach. Memory & Cognition, 47 , 33 – 46 .

Kendeou, P., & Johnson, V. (2024). The nature of misinformation in education. Current Opinion in Psychology, 55 , 101734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101734

Kendeou, P., Muis, K. R., & Fulton, S. (2011). Reader and text factors on reading comprehension processes. Journal of Research in Reading, 34 , 365–383.

Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). The Knowledge Revision Components (KReC) framework: Processes and mechanisms. In D. N. Rapp & J. L. G. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 353–377). MIT Press.

Chapter Google Scholar

Kendeou, P., Smith, E. R., & O’Brien, E. J. (2013). Updating during reading comprehension: Why causality matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 39 , 854–865.

Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2005). The effects of readers’ misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97 , 235–245.

Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35 , 1567–1577.

Kendeou, P., Walsh, E., Smith, E. R., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). Knowledge revision processes in refutation texts. Discourse Processes, 51 , 374–397.

Kim, J., & Kendeou, P. (2021). Knowledge transfer in the context of refutation texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 67 , 102–117.

Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95 , 163–182.

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition . Cambridge University Press.

Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85 , 363–394.

Lassonde, K., Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2016). Refutation texts: Overcoming psychology misconceptions that are resistant to change. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 2 , 62–74.

Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Ecker, U. K. H., Albarracín, D., Amazeen, M. A., Kendeou, P., Lombardi, D., Newman, E. J., Pennycook, G., Porter, E., Rand, D. G., Rapp, D. N., Reifler, J., Roozenbeek, J., Schmid, P., Seifert, C. M., Sinatra, G. M., Swire-Thompson, et al. (2020). The Debunking Handbook 2020 . Available at: https://sks.to/db2020. https://doi.org/10.17910/b7.1182

Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Holford, D. L., Finn, A., Leask, J., Thomson, A., Lombardi, D., Al-Rawi, A. K., Amazeen, M. A., Anderson, E. C., Armaos, K. D., Betsch, C., Bruns, H. H. B., Ecker, U. K. H., Gavaruzzi, T., Hahn, U., Herzog, S., Juanchich, M., … Vraga, E. K (2021). The COVID-19 vaccine communication handbook. A practical guide for improving vaccine communication and fighting misinformation. Available at: https://sks.to/c19vax

López, F. (2022). Can educational psychology be harnessed to make changes for the greater good? Educational Psychologist, 57 (2), 114–130.

Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1991). A three-pronged method for studying inference generation in literary text. Poetics, 20 , 193–232.

Magliano, J. P., Trabasso, T., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). Strategic processing during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (4), 615–629.

Mason, L., Borella, E., Diakidoy, I. A., Butterfuss, R., Kendeou, P., & Carretti, B. (2020). Learning from refutation and standard expository science texts: The contribution of inhibitory functions in relation to text type. Discourse Processes, 57 , 921–939.

McCrudden, M. T., & Kendeou, P. (2014). Exploring the link between cognitive processes and learning from refutational text. Journal of Research in Reading, 37 , 116–140.

Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41 (1), 49–100.

Muis, K. M., Kendeou, P., & Franco, G. M. (2011). Consistent results with the consistency hypothesis? the effects of epistemic beliefs on metacognitive processing. Metacognition and Learning, 6 , 45–63.

Myers, J. L., & O'Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Processes, 26 (2-3), 131–157.

O’Brien, E. J., Cook, A. E., & Guéraud, S. (2010). Accessibility of outdated information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36 , 979–991.

O’Brien, E. J., & Myers, J. L. (1987). The role of causal connections in the retrieval of text. Memory & Cognition, 15 , 419–427.

O’Brien, E. J., & Myers, J. L. (1999). Text comprehension: A view from the bottom up. In S. R. Goldman, A. C. Graesser, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 36–53). Erlbaum.

O’Brien, E. J., Rizzella, M. L., Albrecht, J. E., & Halleran, J. G. (1998). Updating a situation model: A memory-based text processing view. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24 (5), 1200–1210.

Pereira, A., Harris, E., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2023). Identity concerns drive belief: The impact of partisan identity on the belief and dissemination of true and false news. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 26 (1), 24–47.

Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Toward a theory of documents representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 99–122). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66 (2), 211–227.

Potvin, P. (2013). Proposition for improving the classical models of conceptual change based on neuroeducational evidence: Conceptual prevalence. Neuroeducation, 1 , 16–43.

Potvin, P., Masson, S., Lafortune, S., & Cyr, G. (2015). Persistence of the intuitive conception that heavier objects sink more: A reaction time study with different levels of interference. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13 , 21–43.

Rapp, D. N., & Kendeou, P. (2007). Revising what readers know: Updating text representations during narrative comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 35 , 2019–2032.

Rapp, D. N., & Kendeou, P. (2009). Noticing and revising discrepancies as texts unfold. Discourse Processes, 46 , 1–24.

Rapp D. N., & Mensink M. C. (2011). Focusing effects from online and offline reading tasks. In McCrudden M. T., Magliano J. P., Schraw G. (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 141–164). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (1988). A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review, 95 , 385–408.

Rich, P. R., & Zaragoza, M. S. (2020). Correcting misinformation in news stories: An investigation of correction timing and correction durability. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9 (3), 310–322.

Rizzella, M. L., & O'Brien, E. J. (2002). Retrieval of concepts in script-based texts and narratives: The influence of general world knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28 (4), 780–790.

Scattarelli, J., & Kendeou, P. (2023, June). Automating debunking: Can chatbots correct misconceptions? Poster presentation at the 2023 Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse.

Schroeder, N. L., & Kucera, A. C. (2022). Refutation text facilitates learning: A meta-analysis of between-subjects experiments. Educational Psychology Review, 34 (2), 957–987.

Shtulman, A., & Valcarcel, J. (2012). Scientific knowledge suppresses but does not supplant earlier intuitions. Cognition, 124 (2), 209–215.

Simchon, A., Edwards, M., & Lewandowsky, S. (2024). The persuasive effects of political microtargeting in the age of generative artificial intelligence. PNAS nexus, 3 (2), pgae035.

Sinatra, G., & Broughton, S. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46 (4), 374–393.

Sparks, J. R., & Rapp, D. N. (2011). Readers’ reliance on source credibility in the service of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37 (1), 230.

Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8 (6), 951–970.

Trabasso, T., & Suh, S. (1993). Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory. Discourse Processes, 16 (1-2), 3–34.

Trabasso, T., & van den Broek, P. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24 (5), 612–630.

Trevors, G., & Kendeou, P. (2020). The effects of positive and negative emotional text content on knowledge revision. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73 ( 9 ), 1326–1339.

Trevors, G., Kendeou, P., & Butterfuss, R. (2017). Emotions in knowledge revision. Discourse Processes, 54 ( 5-6 ), 406–426.

Trevors, G. J. (2022). The roles of identity conflict, emotion, and threat in learning from refutation texts on vaccination and immigration. Discourse Processes, 59 (1-2), 36–51.

Trevors, G. J., Muis, K. R., Pekrun, R., Sinatra, G. M., & Winne, P. H. (2016). Identity and epistemic emotions during knowledge revision: A potential account for the backfire effect. Discourse Processes, 53 (5-6), 339–370.

Van Boekel, M., Lassonde, K., O’Brien, E. J., & Kendeou, P. (2017). Source credibility and the processing of refutation texts. Memory & Cognition, 45 , 168–181.

van den Broek, P., Bohn-Gettler, C., Kendeou, P., Carlson, S., & White, M. J. (2011). When a reader meets a text: The role of standards of coherence in reading comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 123–140). Information Age Publishing.

van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2008). Cognitive processes in comprehension of science texts: The role of co-activation in confronting misconceptions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22 , 335–351.

van den Broek, P., Young, M., Tzeng, Y., & Linderholm, T. (1999). The landscape model of reading: Inferences and the on-line construction of a memory representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 71–98). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4 , 45–69.

Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2008). International handbook of research on conceptual change (1st ed.). Erlbaum.

Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2013). International handbook of research on conceptual change (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.

Will, K., Vlach, H., & Kendeou, P. (2019). The effects of refutation texts on generating explanations. Learning and Individual Differences, 69 , 109–115.

Wilson, J. T., & Bauer, P. J. (2023). Generative processes and knowledge revision. Learning and Motivation, 84 , 101936.

Zengilowski, A., Schuetze, B. A., Nash, B. L., & Schallert, D. L. (2021). A critical review of the refutation text literature: Methodological confounds, theoretical problems, and possible solutions. Educational Psychologist, 56 (3), 175–195.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Edward J. O’Brien, Victoria Johnson, Marianna Pagkratidou, and Ali Fulsher for their feedback during the writing of this manuscript.

Writing of this manuscript was funded in part by the Guy Bond Chair in Reading and Distinguished McKnight Professorship to P. Kendeou from the University of Minnesota.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, 56 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA

Panayiota Kendeou

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Panayiota Kendeou .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kendeou, P. A Theory of Knowledge Revision: the Development of the KReC Framework. Educ Psychol Rev 36 , 44 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09885-y

Download citation

Accepted : 10 April 2024

Published : 18 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09885-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Knowledge revision
Misconceptions
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

IMAGES

PPT
PPT
😱 How to write a refutation paragraph. Writing a Refutation webapi.bu
😱 How to write a refutation paragraph. Writing a Refutation webapi.bu
PPT
Refutation Exercise

VIDEO

Refutation mensonge Peerbaye
Refutation Speech
Refutation speech
The Refutation of Scepticism
Refuting the Refutation
A Refutation of Moral Relativism #PeterKreeft #CausaSui #Faith #Hope #Love #Truth

COMMENTS

30 Refutation Examples (2024)
Refutation refers to the act of proving a statement or theory wrong through the use of logical reasoning and evidence. Some strategies for refutation, which we may use in an argumentative essay, speech, or debate, include: Reductio ad Absurdum: Taking an argument to its logical conclusion to demonstrate its absurdity.
Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation
Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation. An argumentative essay presents an argument for or against a topic. For example, if your topic is working from home, then your essay would either argue in favor of working from home (this is the for side) or against working from home. Like most essays, an argumentative essay begins with ...
A Guide to Rebuttals in Argumentative Essays
Read on for a few simple steps to formulating an effective rebuttal. Step 1. Come up with a Counterargument. A strong rebuttal is only possible when there's a strong counterargument. You may be convinced of your idea but try to place yourself on the other side. Rather than addressing weak opposing views that are easy to fend off, try to come ...
Argument, Counterargument, & Refutation
21 Argument, Counterargument, & Refutation In academic writing, we often use an Argument essay structure. Argument essays have these familiar components, just like other types of essays: Introduction; Body Paragraphs; Conclusion; But Argument essays also contain these particular elements: Debatable thesis statement in the Introduction
Refutation Definition and Examples
"Refutation is the part of an essay that disproves the opposing arguments. It is always necessary in a persuasive paper to refute or answer those arguments. A good method for formulating your refutation is to put yourself in the place of your readers, imagining what their objections might be. In the exploration of the issues connected with your ...
Counterargument and Refutation Development
41 Counterargument and Refutation Development . In an argumentative essay, you need to convince your audience that your opinion is the most valid opinion. To do so, your essay needs to be balanced—it needs an opposing (opposite) viewpoint, known as a counter-argument.Even though you are arguing one side of an issue, you must include what someone from the other side would say.
10.12: Introduction to Rebuttal and Refutation of Counterargument
Book: Writing Skills Lab (Lumen) 10: Module: Academic Argument 10.12: Introduction to Rebuttal and Refutation of Counterargument ... When a writer does this, it is often referred to as rebuttal or refutation. Some scholars of rhetoric differentiate the two words in terms of if you can actually disprove a claim or just argue against it; however ...
Rebuttals and Refutations
Rebuttal and refutation are common in all types of argument, including academic argument. As you complete more advanced work in college, you will be expected to address counterargument often. And while you might not always need to or be able to prove that other points of view are wrong, you may at least need to try to argue against them.
Counterargument
The most common spots are the following: Before your conclusion. This is a common and effective spot for a counterargument because it's a chance to address anything that you think a reader might still be concerned about after you've made your main argument. Don't put a counterargument in your conclusion, however.
Further Your Understanding: Refutation and Rebuttal
Evaluate strategies for rebuttal and refutation of counterargument. Now let's take a look at examples of rebuttal and refutation to further your understanding: Felix is writing his argument paper on why his university should not have cut funding to the school's library. His arguable thesis reads as follows: Because Northern State University ...
Rebuttal Sections
The outline below, adapted from Seyler's Understanding Argument, is an example of a rebuttal section from a thesis essay. When you rebut or refute an opposing position, use the following three-part organization: The opponent's argument: Usually, you should not assume that your reader has read or remembered the argument you are refuting.
Formula for Refutation and Rebuttal
Though writers may handle rebuttal and refutation in different ways, there is a formula for success in academic argument. Here are the key parts of that formula: Accurately represent opposing viewpoints. If you don't accurately and thoroughly represent opposing viewpoints in your own writing, some of your potential audience will automatically ...
Organizing Your Argument
Three argumentative methods —the Toulmin Method, Classical Method, and Rogerian Method— give guidance for how to organize the points in an argument. Note that these are only three of the most popular models for organizing an argument. Alternatives exist. Be sure to consult your instructor and/or defer to your assignment's directions if ...
PDF Writing a Refutation Paragraph
refutation paragraph, much less written one. Even though the vocabulary may seem intimidating, a refutation paragraph boils down to a simple idea: responding to arguments that disagree with your thesis statement. If you are writing a paper in favor of universal health care, then your refutation paragraphs would need to
Refutation
The literary term refutation refers to that part of an argument where a speaker or a writer encounters contradicting points of view. Alternatively, refutation can be described as the negation of an argument, opinion, testimony, doctrine, or theory, through contradicting evidence. It normally constitutes a part of an essay that disproves the ...
PDF Argumentative essay rubric
Refutation missing or vague. _____ C. ORGANIZATION Logical, compelling progression of ideas in essay;clear structure which enhances and showcases the central idea or theme and moves the reader through the text. Organization flows so smoothly the reader hardly thinks about it. Effective, mature, graceful transitions exist throughout the essay.
Counterargument and Refutation
Are you confused about writing a Counterargument or Refutation for an Argumentative Essay? This video CLEARLY explains how to write each one in complete deta...
Refutation Text and Critical Thinking
Reading and Writing Quarterly 16, 5-22. Stanovich, et al. 2016. The Rationality Quotient: Toward A Test Of Rational Thinking. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Tippett, C. 2010. Refutation Text in Science Education: A Review of Two Decades of Research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 8(6), 951-970.
PDF TEACHER'S NOTES Counter-Argument and Refutation
In the second paragraph, include a counter-argument and refutation which includes a concession. The counter-argument will be based on one of the cons shown. If you are against online shopping, follow the same procedure, but the points for the first paragraph will be taken from the cons column and the counter-argument from the pros column. Pros ...
What is refutation and what are the three strategies for refuting an
Here are some ways to refute arguments: 1. Identify a flaw in the reasoning . There are several logical fallacies among which are these: Appeal to authority - This is the mentioning of a respected ...
52 Argumentative Essay Ideas that are Actually Interesting
Coming up with an essay topic can be the hardest part of the process. You have very likely encountered argumentative essay writing in high school and have been asked to write your own. If you're having trouble finding a topic, we've created a list of 52 essay ideas to help jumpstart your brainstorming process!
50 Compelling Argumentative Essay Topics
50 Argumentative Essay Topics. Illustration by Catherine Song. ThoughtCo. An argumentative essay requires you to decide on a topic and take a position on it. You'll need to back up your viewpoint with well-researched facts and information as well. One of the hardest parts is deciding which topic to write about, but there are plenty of ideas ...
50 Great Argumentative Essay Topics for Any Assignment
You should raise my allowance because I want you to. You should raise my allowance because I've been taking on more chores without complaining. The first argument is based entirely in feelings without any factual backup, whereas the second is based on evidence that can be proven.
Effective Research Paper Paraphrasing: A Quick Guide
Research papers rely on other people's writing as a foundation to create new ideas, but you can't just use someone else's words. That's why paraphrasing is an essential writing technique for academic writing.. Paraphrasing rewrites another person's ideas, evidence, or opinions in your own words.With proper attribution, paraphrasing helps you expand on another's work and back up ...
A Theory of Knowledge Revision: the Development of the KReC ...
Butterfuss tested core hypotheses derived from KReC-MD regarding the influence of text structure, source credibility, and intertextual integration on knowledge revision.In a series of experiments, he showed that readers engaged in superior intertextual integration during reading of refutation texts from high-credibility sources than non-refutation texts from low-credibility sources.

30 Refutation Examples

Refutation Examples

2. Test of Consistency

3. Rebuttal by Cause and Effect

4. Prioritization of Evidence

5. Challenge the Relevance

6. Statistical Refutation

7. Appeal to Common Sense

8. Pointing Out Oversimplification

9. Dismantling a False Dilemma

10. Rebuttal through Definition

11. Rebuttal by Precedence

12. Challenge the Representativeness

13. Rebuttal through Syllogism

14. Pointing Out Non-Sequitur

15. Rebuttal by Exception

16. Evidence-Based Counterargument

17. Logical Analysis

18. Reductio ad Absurdum

19. Counterexamples

20. Question the Source

21. Alternative Explanation

22. Challenge Assumptions

23. Ethical or Moral Challenge

24. Using Comparison to Demonstrate Flawed Arguments

25. Highlight Omissions

26. Reframe the Debate

27. Historical or Precedent-Based Refutation

28. Practical Implications

29. Question Motives or Bias

30. Seek Expert Testimony

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

ESL Lesson Plans, Tests, & Ideas

Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation

You Need to Also Respond to the Counter-Arguments!

The Refutation/Response Paragraph

Where Do We Put the Counter-Argument and Refutation?

Extra Advice on Argumentative Essays

Use Language in Counter-Argument That Shows Its Not Your Position

Choose the Side with the Strongest Support

Do Not Include Too Many Counter-arguments

23 comments on “ Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation ”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

A Guide to Rebuttals in Argumentative Essays

What Is a Rebuttal?

How Do Rebuttals Work?

Rebuttals in Action

Step 1. Come up with a Counterargument

Step 2. Point Out Its Flaws

Find this useful?

Step 3. Present New Points

Summary: Rebuttals

Frequently Asked Questions

How do you form an effective rebuttal?

Share this article:

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

How to Cite the CDC in APA

Six Product Description Generator Tools for Your Product Copy

What Is a Content Editor?

The Benefits of Using an Online Proofreading Service

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

What Is Market Research?

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

21 Argument, Counterargument, & Refutation

Share This Book

41 Counterargument and Refutation Development

Identifying Counterarguments

Example Argument

Example Counterargument paragraph

Example Refutation paragraph

Watch this video

Share This Book

10.12: Introduction to Rebuttal and Refutation of Counterargument

What you’ll learn to do: evaluate strategies for rebuttal and refutation of counterargument

Rebuttals and Refutations

Formula for Refutation and Rebuttal

Accurately represent opposing viewpoints

Use a respectful, non-incendiary tone

Use reliable information in your rebuttal/refutation

Use qualifying words when applicable