{"id":{"repo_id":"missouri","oai_identifier":"oai:mospace.umsystem.edu:10355/14547"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/missouri/oai:mospace.umsystem.edu:10355/14547","repository":{"repo_id":"missouri","name":"University of Missouri","base_url":"https://mospace.umsystem.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Argument quality in Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting","abstract":"This thesis uses techniques and theory from argumentation, informal logic, and critical thinking to assess the quality of arguments presented by journalists in Pulitzer Prize-winning stories. Journalists strive to inform citizens about the way their world is, was, and will be. These claims about the world are descriptive arguments, which can be accepted or rejected based on the quality of their reasons and evidence. Argumentation, informal logic, and critical thinking provide tools for determining whether the reasons and evidence given in an argument support its conclusion. So one way to test whether journalists fulfill their goal of informing citizens is to see whether they offer good reasons and evidence to support their conclusions. This thesis carries out such a test on Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporting. It finds that the stories frequently presented insufficient evidence in support of their conclusions, while also struggling to justify important assumptions and appeals to authority.","abstract_html":"This thesis uses techniques and theory from argumentation, informal logic, and critical thinking to assess the quality of arguments presented by journalists in Pulitzer Prize-winning stories. Journalists strive to inform citizens about the way their world is, was, and will be. These claims about the world are descriptive arguments, which can be accepted or rejected based on the quality of their reasons and evidence. Argumentation, informal logic, and critical thinking provide tools for determining whether the reasons and evidence given in an argument support its conclusion. So one way to test whether journalists fulfill their goal of informing citizens is to see whether they offer good reasons and evidence to support their conclusions. This thesis carries out such a test on Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporting. It finds that the stories frequently presented insufficient evidence in support of their conclusions, while also struggling to justify important assumptions and appeals to authority.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Herrera, David, 1986-"],"institution":"University of Missouri--Columbia","degree_name":"M.A.","degree_level":"Masters","degree_discipline":"Journalism (MU)","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Davis, Charles N."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2011,"date_issued":"2011","date_published":"2011","updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:08:43Z","subjects":["investigative reporting","critical thinking","informal logic"],"languages":["eng","English"],"rights":["OpenAccess."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10355/14547","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Davis, Charles N."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Herrera, David, 1986-"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2012-06-06T20:32:05Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2012-06-06T20:32:05Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2011"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["University of Missouri--Columbia"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Journalism (MU)"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["M.A."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Missouri--Columbia"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["investigative reporting","critical thinking","informal logic"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]},{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["OpenAccess."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10355/14547"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Title from PDF of title page (University of Missouri--Columbia, viewed on June 6, 2012).","The entire thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file; a non-technical public abstract appears in the public.pdf file.","Thesis advisor: Dr. Charles Davis","Includes bibliographical references.","M.A. University of Missouri--Columbia 2011.","\"December 2011\""]},{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This thesis uses techniques and theory from argumentation, informal logic, and critical thinking to assess the quality of arguments presented by journalists in Pulitzer Prize-winning stories. Journalists strive to inform citizens about the way their world is, was, and will be. These claims about the world are descriptive arguments, which can be accepted or rejected based on the quality of their reasons and evidence. Argumentation, informal logic, and critical thinking provide tools for determining whether the reasons and evidence given in an argument support its conclusion. So one way to test whether journalists fulfill their goal of informing citizens is to see whether they offer good reasons and evidence to support their conclusions. This thesis carries out such a test on Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporting. It finds that the stories frequently presented insufficient evidence in support of their conclusions, while also struggling to justify important assumptions and appeals to authority."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Argument quality in Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Davis, Charles N."],"dc:creator":["Herrera, David, 1986-"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2012-06-06T20:32:05Z"],"dc:date.available":["2012-06-06T20:32:05Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2011"],"dc:description":["Title from PDF of title page (University of Missouri--Columbia, viewed on June 6, 2012).","The entire thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file; a non-technical public abstract appears in the public.pdf file.","Thesis advisor: Dr. Charles Davis","Includes bibliographical references.","M.A. University of Missouri--Columbia 2011.","\"December 2011\""],"dc:description.abstract":["This thesis uses techniques and theory from argumentation, informal logic, and critical thinking to assess the quality of arguments presented by journalists in Pulitzer Prize-winning stories. Journalists strive to inform citizens about the way their world is, was, and will be. These claims about the world are descriptive arguments, which can be accepted or rejected based on the quality of their reasons and evidence. Argumentation, informal logic, and critical thinking provide tools for determining whether the reasons and evidence given in an argument support its conclusion. So one way to test whether journalists fulfill their goal of informing citizens is to see whether they offer good reasons and evidence to support their conclusions. This thesis carries out such a test on Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporting. It finds that the stories frequently presented insufficient evidence in support of their conclusions, while also struggling to justify important assumptions and appeals to authority."],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10355/14547"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:language.iso":["eng"],"dc:publisher":["University of Missouri--Columbia"],"dc:rights":["OpenAccess."],"dc:subject":["investigative reporting","critical thinking","informal logic"],"dc:title":["Argument quality in Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Journalism (MU)"],"thesis:degree_level":["Masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["M.A."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Missouri--Columbia"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:08:43Z"}