FREE U.S. Shipping on $75+ Orders

Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (3 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...
By S. Lubet 
 
Abstract
 
In defense of the PACE trial, Petrie and Weinman employ a series of misleading or fallacious argumentation techniques, including circularity, blaming the victim, bait and switch, non-sequitur, setting up a straw person, guilt by association, red herring, and the parade of horribles. These are described and explained.

Source: Lubet S. Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies. J Health Psychol. 2017 Aug;22(9):1201-1205. doi: 10.1177/1359105317712523. Epub 2017 Jun 14.

ProHealth CBD Store

 

Are you vitamin d deficient?

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (3 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...



One thought on “Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies”

  1. IanH says:

    Steven Lubet is indeed a formidable ally.

Leave a Reply