Busy. Please wait.

Forgot Password?

Don't have an account?  Sign up 

show password


Make sure to remember your password. If you forget it there is no way for StudyStack to send you a reset link. You would need to create a new account.

By signing up, I agree to StudyStack's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Already a StudyStack user? Log In

Reset Password
Enter the email address associated with your account, and we'll email you a link to reset your password.

Remove ads
Don't know (0)
Know (0)
remaining cards (0)
To flip the current card, click it or press the Spacebar key.  To move the current card to one of the three colored boxes, click on the box.  You may also press the UP ARROW key to move the card to the "Know" box, the DOWN ARROW key to move the card to the "Don't know" box, or the RIGHT ARROW key to move the card to the Remaining box.  You may also click on the card displayed in any of the three boxes to bring that card back to the center.

Pass complete!

"Know" box contains:
Time elapsed:
restart all cards

Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.

  Normal Size     Small Size show me how

Critical Th Unit 4

Revision cards for the key aspects of OCR A2 Unit 4 CT, June 7th Exam

High reputation of the author and sources Can accurately trust based upon past evidence of writing with realistic, well-researched knowledge.
Ability to see, eyewitness Based on the empirical evidence - valid conclusions are reached other than those based on hearsay or opinions
Expertise in a relevant field Enables them to use evidence with greater accurate knowledge to answer a question and reach a conclusion. Can take an holistic overview of a situation.
Neutrality/bias/balance The degree to which opposing or supporting viewpoints are ignored or explored. Bias can result in downplaying evidence or giving it undeserved weighting.
Vested interest It influences a person/group's ability to see a situation with complete neutrality because they stand to gain financially from a specific course of action stemming from a certain conclusion.
Reasonable/plausible Likely circumstances/outcomes to occur. Conclusions may be too strong for evidence/reasons. Reasons may be arbitrary and support alternative claim.
Evidence Needs to be relevant, up-to-date, detailed. Probable that some shows a different relationship. Strength of correlation. Supports reasons directly.
Research (form of evidence) Well-conducted and based on large representative samples. Typicality and a larger size increases accuracy, allows strong conclusion and extrapolation so 'generalisations' about population valid.
Convincing statistics and examples Good example will illustrate scenario and depict events accurately.
Inconsistency Points either inconsistent or contradictory. Implies research poor, argument even may be invalid. Can mean conclusion unsupported.
Inadequate reasoning Superficial in supporting conclusion.
Ambiguous terms Claim not supported if unclear which instance it refers to. It may be that the term itsef is general and flawed or taken to mean sth subjective.
Slippery slope Series of unlinked and disconnected statements or reasons with inadequate supports to link between them (weak assumptions). Consequences are unlikely and invalid to support conclusion.
Post hoc Conclusion attributed to be outcome of earlier reason simply due to having occurred afterwards.
Circular argument/begging question Reasons do not actually develop the argument, simply supporting each other. If the conclusion relies on the reasons which in turn only rely on the conclusion to be true, there is little certainty.
False dichotomy Contrast between two extreme options which is insufficient to show that one choice must be chosen. The conclusion may be invalid. More information is needed about the alternatives.
False assumptions These can inhibit the validity of joint reasons chains because the end intermediate conclusion will not be valid. Is the assumption likely to be factual and how easily can it be investigated?
Analogy (disanalogy if criticism) Recognise situations, mistaken facts or generalisations. Relevant similarities or differences. Show awareness of cruciality to argument.
Tu quoque or reasoning from wrong actions 'Mistakes' taken in another system are irrelevant in acting as reasons to support another claim.
Hasty and sweeping generalisation Hasty = assumptions made about sth. Sweeping = whole population to a person or back. Unfair to link all characteristics in this way (not applicable to all in group). May link to invalid syllogism.
Appeals Various means to encourage the audience to conform to ideas without using reasoning. E.g. ad baculum, crumenam.
Rogatio Question asked by speaker and immediately answered, anticipate possible response for emphasis.
Quaestitio String of questions in rapid succession for emphasis.
Parallelism Clauses or sentences similarly structured to highlight links between ideas through rhythmn.
Antithesis Establish an obvious contrast between ideas through juxtaposing them in a parallel structure.
Expletive Short phrase for interrupting syntax of sentence.
Tricolon and tetracolon Three- or four-part statements using similar syntax for emphasis.
Created by: 100003856359306