Page 316 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 316
What Do We Know about the World?
× Significant difference among the mean of antithesis arguments of
texts B and A, p = 0,002<0,017
† Significant difference among the mean of antithesis arguments of
texts C and A, p = 0,001<0,017
The difference of cause and effect arguments was significant among
texts Β and Α (p = 0,001 < 0,017) and among texts C and Α (p = 0,000
< 0,017), while the difference among the texts B and C was not statisti-
cally significant (p = 0,193 > 0,017). Also, the increase of antithesis ar-
guments was statistically significant among texts A and B (p = 0,002 <
0,017) and among texts A and C (p = ,001 < 0,017), but not among the
texts B and C (p = ,894 > 0,017). When it comes to the arguments based
on the sub-topic of antecedent and consequent, a significant difference
was noticed only between the initial Text A (M = 0,13) and the final
Text C (M = 0,57) (p = 0,013 < 0,017) in favour of the final text (Text C).
On the contrary, no significant difference concerning the production of
arguments based on the sub-topic of similarity and the subtopic of dif-
ference was noticed.
Figure 4: Total mean of antecedent and consequent arguments in
texts A, B and C
Furthermore, the statistical analysis showed a significant increase of
the mean of stylistic elements (M = 0,4783, SD = 0,51075: Text A, M =
1,6087, SD = 1,49967: Text B and M = 1,2609, SD = 1,05388: Text C). A
statistically important difference was noticed among texts A and B (p =
0,003<0,017) and among texts A and C (p = 0,004 < 0,017), while there
was no important difference among texts B and C.
The mean of rhetorical questions, to complete the one-way repeat-
ed-measures ANOVA, varied from M = 0,13 (SD = 0,344: Text A), to M
= 1,17 (SD = 1,154: Text B) and to M = 1,04 (SD = 0,976: Text C) (Figure
× Significant difference among the mean of antithesis arguments of
texts B and A, p = 0,002<0,017
† Significant difference among the mean of antithesis arguments of
texts C and A, p = 0,001<0,017
The difference of cause and effect arguments was significant among
texts Β and Α (p = 0,001 < 0,017) and among texts C and Α (p = 0,000
< 0,017), while the difference among the texts B and C was not statisti-
cally significant (p = 0,193 > 0,017). Also, the increase of antithesis ar-
guments was statistically significant among texts A and B (p = 0,002 <
0,017) and among texts A and C (p = ,001 < 0,017), but not among the
texts B and C (p = ,894 > 0,017). When it comes to the arguments based
on the sub-topic of antecedent and consequent, a significant difference
was noticed only between the initial Text A (M = 0,13) and the final
Text C (M = 0,57) (p = 0,013 < 0,017) in favour of the final text (Text C).
On the contrary, no significant difference concerning the production of
arguments based on the sub-topic of similarity and the subtopic of dif-
ference was noticed.
Figure 4: Total mean of antecedent and consequent arguments in
texts A, B and C
Furthermore, the statistical analysis showed a significant increase of
the mean of stylistic elements (M = 0,4783, SD = 0,51075: Text A, M =
1,6087, SD = 1,49967: Text B and M = 1,2609, SD = 1,05388: Text C). A
statistically important difference was noticed among texts A and B (p =
0,003<0,017) and among texts A and C (p = 0,004 < 0,017), while there
was no important difference among texts B and C.
The mean of rhetorical questions, to complete the one-way repeat-
ed-measures ANOVA, varied from M = 0,13 (SD = 0,344: Text A), to M
= 1,17 (SD = 1,154: Text B) and to M = 1,04 (SD = 0,976: Text C) (Figure
