Dialectical Argumentation as a Heuristic for Courtroom Decision-Making
In several disciplines, models of legal decision making have been designed along
the lines of gradual theory construction.
In the paper, two approaches are discussed and compared: the anchored narrative and
the dialectical argumentation approach. The former (by Crombag, Van Koppen and
Wagenaar) originates from psychology of law, the latter from artificial intelligence
Verheij, Bart (2000).
Dialectical Argumentation as a Heuristic for Courtroom Decision-Making.
Rationality, Information and Progress in Law and Psychology. Liber Amicorum Hans F. Crombag
(eds. Peter J. van Koppen and Nikolas H.M. Roos),
Metajuridica Publications, Maastricht (Argentine.Lankkamp@metajur.unimaas.nl).