Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments
Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the abi...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Mercier, Hugo [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2014transfer abstract |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
8 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view - Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER, 2016transfer abstract, JECP, Orlando, Fla |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:125 ; year:2014 ; pages:102-109 ; extent:8 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV034253793 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV034253793 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230625200336.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 180603s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a GBVA2014022000018.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV034253793 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | |a 150 | |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 150 |q DE-600 |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 000 |q VZ |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 620 |q VZ |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 44.48 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Mercier, Hugo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2014transfer abstract | |
| 300 | |a 8 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. | ||
| 520 | |a Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. | ||
| 650 | 7 | |a Testimony |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Argumentation |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Reasoning |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Argument evaluation |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Preschoolers |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Circular arguments |2 Elsevier | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bernard, Stéphane |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Clément, Fabrice |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Acad. Press |a Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER |t Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view |d 2016transfer abstract |d JECP |g Orlando, Fla |w (DE-627)ELV01976152X |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:125 |g year:2014 |g pages:102-109 |g extent:8 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_496 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2032 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2563 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 44.48 |j Medizinische Genetik |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 125 |j 2014 |h 102-109 |g 8 | ||
| 953 | |2 045F |a 150 | ||
| author_variant |
h m hm |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
mercierhugobernardstphaneclmentfabrice:2014----:alsniiiyoruethwrshoesegt |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2014transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
44.48 |
| publishDate |
2014 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 doi GBVA2014022000018.pica (DE-627)ELV034253793 (ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 150 150 DE-600 000 VZ 620 VZ 610 VZ 44.48 bkl Mercier, Hugo verfasserin aut Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments 2014transfer abstract 8 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments Elsevier Bernard, Stéphane oth Clément, Fabrice oth Enthalten in Acad. Press Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view 2016transfer abstract JECP Orlando, Fla (DE-627)ELV01976152X volume:125 year:2014 pages:102-109 extent:8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_496 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2032 GBV_ILN_2563 44.48 Medizinische Genetik VZ AR 125 2014 102-109 8 045F 150 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 doi GBVA2014022000018.pica (DE-627)ELV034253793 (ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 150 150 DE-600 000 VZ 620 VZ 610 VZ 44.48 bkl Mercier, Hugo verfasserin aut Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments 2014transfer abstract 8 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments Elsevier Bernard, Stéphane oth Clément, Fabrice oth Enthalten in Acad. Press Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view 2016transfer abstract JECP Orlando, Fla (DE-627)ELV01976152X volume:125 year:2014 pages:102-109 extent:8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_496 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2032 GBV_ILN_2563 44.48 Medizinische Genetik VZ AR 125 2014 102-109 8 045F 150 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 doi GBVA2014022000018.pica (DE-627)ELV034253793 (ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 150 150 DE-600 000 VZ 620 VZ 610 VZ 44.48 bkl Mercier, Hugo verfasserin aut Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments 2014transfer abstract 8 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments Elsevier Bernard, Stéphane oth Clément, Fabrice oth Enthalten in Acad. Press Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view 2016transfer abstract JECP Orlando, Fla (DE-627)ELV01976152X volume:125 year:2014 pages:102-109 extent:8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_496 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2032 GBV_ILN_2563 44.48 Medizinische Genetik VZ AR 125 2014 102-109 8 045F 150 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 doi GBVA2014022000018.pica (DE-627)ELV034253793 (ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 150 150 DE-600 000 VZ 620 VZ 610 VZ 44.48 bkl Mercier, Hugo verfasserin aut Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments 2014transfer abstract 8 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments Elsevier Bernard, Stéphane oth Clément, Fabrice oth Enthalten in Acad. Press Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view 2016transfer abstract JECP Orlando, Fla (DE-627)ELV01976152X volume:125 year:2014 pages:102-109 extent:8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_496 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2032 GBV_ILN_2563 44.48 Medizinische Genetik VZ AR 125 2014 102-109 8 045F 150 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 doi GBVA2014022000018.pica (DE-627)ELV034253793 (ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 150 150 DE-600 000 VZ 620 VZ 610 VZ 44.48 bkl Mercier, Hugo verfasserin aut Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments 2014transfer abstract 8 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments Elsevier Bernard, Stéphane oth Clément, Fabrice oth Enthalten in Acad. Press Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view 2016transfer abstract JECP Orlando, Fla (DE-627)ELV01976152X volume:125 year:2014 pages:102-109 extent:8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_496 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2032 GBV_ILN_2563 44.48 Medizinische Genetik VZ AR 125 2014 102-109 8 045F 150 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view Orlando, Fla volume:125 year:2014 pages:102-109 extent:8 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view Orlando, Fla volume:125 year:2014 pages:102-109 extent:8 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Medizinische Genetik |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Testimony Argumentation Reasoning Argument evaluation Preschoolers Circular arguments |
| dewey-raw |
150 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Mercier, Hugo @@aut@@ Bernard, Stéphane @@oth@@ Clément, Fabrice @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2014-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV01976152X |
| dewey-sort |
3150 |
| id |
ELV034253793 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV034253793</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625200336.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180603s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2014022000018.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV034253793</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">150</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">000</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">620</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.48</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mercier, Hugo</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2014transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Testimony</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Argumentation</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Reasoning</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Argument evaluation</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Preschoolers</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Circular arguments</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bernard, Stéphane</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Clément, Fabrice</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Acad. Press</subfield><subfield code="a">Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view</subfield><subfield code="d">2016transfer abstract</subfield><subfield code="d">JECP</subfield><subfield code="g">Orlando, Fla</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV01976152X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:125</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2014</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:102-109</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_496</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2032</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2563</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.48</subfield><subfield code="j">Medizinische Genetik</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">125</subfield><subfield code="j">2014</subfield><subfield code="h">102-109</subfield><subfield code="g">8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">150</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Mercier, Hugo |
| spellingShingle |
Mercier, Hugo ddc 150 ddc 000 ddc 620 ddc 610 bkl 44.48 Elsevier Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments |
| authorStr |
Mercier, Hugo |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV01976152X |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
150 - Psychology 000 - Computer science, information & general works 620 - Engineering & allied operations 610 - Medicine & health |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
150 150 DE-600 000 VZ 620 VZ 610 VZ 44.48 bkl Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments Elsevier |
| topic |
ddc 150 ddc 000 ddc 620 ddc 610 bkl 44.48 Elsevier Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 150 ddc 000 ddc 620 ddc 610 bkl 44.48 Elsevier Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments |
| topic_browse |
ddc 150 ddc 000 ddc 620 ddc 610 bkl 44.48 Elsevier Testimony Elsevier Argumentation Elsevier Reasoning Elsevier Argument evaluation Elsevier Preschoolers Elsevier Circular arguments |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
s b sb f c fc |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV01976152X |
| dewey-tens |
150 - Psychology 000 - Computer science, knowledge & systems 620 - Engineering 610 - Medicine & health |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV01976152X |
| title |
Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV034253793 (ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8 |
| title_full |
Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments |
| author_sort |
Mercier, Hugo |
| journal |
Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view |
| journalStr |
Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
100 - Philosophy & psychology 000 - Computer science, information & general works 600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2014 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
102 |
| author_browse |
Mercier, Hugo |
| container_volume |
125 |
| physical |
8 |
| class |
150 150 DE-600 000 VZ 620 VZ 610 VZ 44.48 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Mercier, Hugo |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 |
| dewey-full |
150 000 620 610 |
| title_sort |
early sensitivity to arguments: how preschoolers weight circular arguments |
| title_auth |
Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments |
| abstract |
Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. |
| abstractGer |
Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_496 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2032 GBV_ILN_2563 |
| title_short |
Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Bernard, Stéphane Clément, Fabrice |
| author2Str |
Bernard, Stéphane Clément, Fabrice |
| ppnlink |
ELV01976152X |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T20:39:03.774Z |
| _version_ |
1803863556122214400 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV034253793</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625200336.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180603s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2014022000018.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV034253793</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0022-0965(13)00248-8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">150</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">000</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">620</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.48</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mercier, Hugo</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Early sensitivity to arguments: How preschoolers weight circular arguments</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2014transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Observational studies suggest that children as young as 2years can evaluate some of the arguments people offer them. However, experimental studies of sensitivity to different arguments have not yet targeted children younger than 5years. The current study aimed at bridging this gap by testing the ability of preschoolers (3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds) to weight arguments. To do so, it focused on a common type of fallacy—circularity—to which 5-year-olds are sensitive. The current experiment asked children—and, as a group control, adults—to choose between the contradictory opinions of two speakers. In the first task, participants of all age groups favored an opinion supported by a strong argument over an opinion supported by a circular argument. In the second task, 4- and 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds or adults, favored the opinion supported by a circular argument over an unsupported opinion. We suggest that the results of these tasks in 3- to 5-year-olds are best interpreted as resulting from the combination of two mechanisms: (a) basic skills of argument evaluations that process the content of arguments, allowing children as young as 3years to favor non-circular arguments over circular arguments, and (b) a heuristic that leads older children (4- and 5-year-olds) to give some weight to circular arguments, possibly by interpreting these arguments as a cue to speaker dominance.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Testimony</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Argumentation</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Reasoning</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Argument evaluation</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Preschoolers</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Circular arguments</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bernard, Stéphane</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Clément, Fabrice</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Acad. Press</subfield><subfield code="a">Asadi, Mohammad Mehdi ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Distributed control of a network of single integrators with limited angular fields of view</subfield><subfield code="d">2016transfer abstract</subfield><subfield code="d">JECP</subfield><subfield code="g">Orlando, Fla</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV01976152X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:125</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2014</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:102-109</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.011</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_496</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2032</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2563</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.48</subfield><subfield code="j">Medizinische Genetik</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">125</subfield><subfield code="j">2014</subfield><subfield code="h">102-109</subfield><subfield code="g">8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">150</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.399626 |