Cognitive Argumentation and the Selection Task
This paper presents a study of the selection task based on Cognitive Argumentation (CA), a computational framework for dialectic argumentation-based reasoning. CA is built from a theoretical framework of argumentation in AI which is then grounded via cognitive principles from Cognitive Science. The aim is to understand the selection task variations by studying how argumentative reasoning is suitably flexible to uniformly capture the differences among the individuals' selections, the canonical groups and the shifts within the different contexts in which the experiment is carried out. Our approach is assessed with respect to the developed criteria within the meta-analysis of Ragni and Johnson-Laird in 2018.