Types of conclusion for argumentative discussions between adults and children

Antonio Bova, Francesco Arcidiacono

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter


This study aims to examine the types of conclusion of argumentative discussions between parents and children during mealtime. Within a data corpus constituted by 30 video-recorded meals of 10 Swiss and Italian families, a corpus of 132 argumentative discussions was selected for a qualitative analysis through the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation. The findings of this study show that the most frequent types of conclusions are dialectical, i.e., one of the two parties accept or refuse the standpoint of the other party, reaching in this way the concluding stage of their argumentative discussions. In particular, the most frequent type of conclusion is that the child accepts the parent’s standpoint, while the second type is that the parent accepts the child’s standpoint. Less frequently, the argumentative discussions between parents and children did not reach a conclusion. For example, when the parents shifted the focus of the conversation or when a long silence indicated that neither the parent nor the child wanted to continue the discussion. These findings bring to light the important role that children can play in stimulating the parents to reason with them and to justify family rules and prescriptions.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProgress in Education
EditorsR.V. Nata
Number of pages26
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Publication series



  • Argumentation
  • Disagreement
  • Family
  • Parent-child interaction


Dive into the research topics of 'Types of conclusion for argumentative discussions between adults and children'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this