Núm. 19 (2019)

Un estudio de los argumentos de autoridad utilizados por los padres con sus hijos durante las comidas

Antonio Bova
Department of Psychology Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Milano, Italia
Publicado enero 11, 2020

Palabras clave:

argumentación, Argumentum Model of Topics, autoridad, modelo ideal de una discusión crítica, familia, hora de comer
Cómo citar
Bova, A. (2020). Un estudio de los argumentos de autoridad utilizados por los padres con sus hijos durante las comidas. Revista Iberoamericana De Argumentación, (19), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.15366/ria2019.19.001


Este artículo pretende examinar cómo los padres usan el argumento de autoridad para persuadir a sus hijos de que acepten reglas y prescripciones durante las comidas. Utilizando el modelo de una discusión crítica integrada con el Argumentum Model of Topics como enfoque analítico, se ha analizado un corpus de 31 argumentos de autoridad propuestos por padres. Los resultados muestran que los padres siempre se refieren a un adulto como fuente de autoridad. En su mayoría, son ellos mismos y, con menos frecuencia, un tercero, como un abuelo o un maestro de niños. A la luz de estos resultados, es razonable suponer que para los padres la referencia a sí mismos es un argumento más efectivo que la referencia a un tercero. Sin embargo, los niños son más propensos a aceptar la argumentación de sus padres cuando la autoridad es otro adulto y no uno de sus padres.


Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.


Alam, F. and C.R. Rosemberg (2014). “Narración y disputas entre niños. Un análisis de argumentaciones tempranas”. Cogency 6(1), 9–31.

Alzate, T. and O. Eugenio (2012). “La argumentación como constituyente del pensamiento crítico en niños”. Hallazgos 9(17), 211-233.

Andone, C. (2012). “The reasonableness of confrontational strategic maneuvering in political interviews”. En F.H. Eemeren van and B. Garssen (Eds.), Exploring Argumentative Contexts (pp. 3-22). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

APA (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Arcidiacono, F., C. Pontecorvo and S. Greco Morasso (2009). “Family conversations: The relevance of context in evaluating argumentation”. Studies in Communication Sciences 9(2), 79-92.

Arcidiacono, F. and A. Bova (2015). “Activity-bound and activity-unbound arguments in response to parental eat-directives at mealtimes: Differences and similarities in children of 3-5 and 6-9 years old”. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 6, 40-55.

Arcidiacono, F. and A. Bova (2017). Interpersonal Argumentation in Educational and Professional Contexts. New York: Springer.

Aronsson, K. (1998). “Identity-in-interaction and social choreography”. Language 31(1), 75-89.

Aronsson, K. and A. Cekaite (2011). “Activity contracts and directives in everyday family politics”. Discourse in Society 22(2), 1-18.

Aukrust, V.G. and C.E. Snow (1998). “Narratives and explanations during mealtime conversations in Norway and the U.S”. Language in Society 27(2), 221-246.

Bigi, S. (2012). Contextual constraints on argumentation. The case of the medical encounter. In F. H. van Eemeren y B. Garssen (Eds.), Exploring argumentative contexts (pp. 289-303). Amsterdam: John Wiley & Sons.

Blum-Kulka, S. (1997). Dinner talk: Cultural patterns of sociability and socialization in family discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bova, A. (2015). “Adult as a source of expert opinion in child’s argumentation during family mealtime conversations”. Journal of Argumentation in Context 4(1), 4-20.

Bova, A. and F. Arcidiacono (2013a). “Investigating children’s Why-questions. A study comparing argumentative and explanatory function”. Discourse Studies 15(6), 713-734.

Bova, A. and F. Arcidiacono (2013b). “Invoking the authority of feelings as a strategic maneuver in family mealtime conversations”. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 23(3), 206-224.

Bova, A. and F. Arcidiacono (2014). “Types of arguments in parents-children discussions: An argumentative analysis”. Rivista di Psicolinguistica Applicata/Journal of Applied Psycholinguistics 14(1), 43-66.

Bova, A. and F. Arcidiacono (2015). “Beyond conflicts. Origin and types of issues leading to argumentative discussions during family mealtimes”. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 3(2), 263-288.

Bova, A. and F. Arcidiacono (2018). “Interplay between parental argumentative strategies, children’s reactions, and topics of disagreement during mealtime conversations”. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 19, 124-133

Brumark, Å. (2006). “Argumentation at the Swedish family dinner table”. En F.H. Eemeren van, A.J. Blair, A.F. Snoeck-Henkemans and C.A. Willards (Eds.) Proceedings of the 6th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 513-520). Amsterdam: Rozenberg/Sic Sat.

Brumark, Å. (2008). “’Eat your Hamburger!’ – ‘No, I don’t Want to!’ Argumentation and argumentative development in the context of dinner conversation in twenty Swedish families”. Argumentation 22(2), 251-271.

Dunn, J. and P. Munn (1987). “Developmental of justification in disputes with mother and sibling”. Developmental Psychology 23(6), 791-798.

Erickson, F. (1988). “Discourse coherence, participation structure and personal display in a family dinner table conversation”. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 4(1), 1-26.

Erickson, F. (1990). The social construction of discourse coherence in a family dinner table conversation. In B. Dorval (Ed.), Conversational organization and its development (pp. 207-238). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Felton, M. and D. Kuhn (2001). “The development of argumentative discourse skills”. Discourse Processes 32(2-3), 135-153.

Fiese, B.H., K.P. Foley and M. Spagnola (2006). “Routine and ritual elements in family mealtimes: Contexts for child well-being and family identity”. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development 111, 67-89.

Goodman, L. A. (1961). “Snowball sampling”. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32(1), 148-170.

Greco Morasso, S. (2011). Argumentation in dispute mediation: A reasonable way to handle conflict. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Greco Morasso, S. (2012). “Contextual frames and their argumentative implications: a case-study in media argumentation”. Discourse Studies 14(2), 197-216.

Heckathorn, D.D. (1997). “Respondent-driven sampling: A new approach to the study of hidden populations”. Social Problems 44(2), 174-199.

Heckathorn, D.D. (2002). “Respondent-driven sampling II: Deriving valid estimates from chain-referral samples of hidden populations”. Social Problems 49(1), 11-34.

Hester, S. and S. Hester (2010). “Conversational actions and category relations: An analysis of a children’s argument”. Discourse Studies 12(1), 33-48.

Laforest, M. (2002). “Scenes of family life: complaining in everyday conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics 34(10-11), 1595-1620.

Laurier, E. and S. Wiggins (2011). “Finishing the family meal. The interactional organisation of satiety”. Appetite 56(1), 53-64.

Muller-Mirza, N. and A.-N. Perret-Clermont (2009). Argumentation and Education. Theoretical Foundations and Practices. New York, NY: Springer.

Ochs, E. and M. Shohet (2006). “The cultural structuring of mealtime socialization”. En R. Larson, A. Wiley and K. Branscomb (Eds.), Family mealtime as a context of development and socialization (pp. 35-50). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ochs, E., R. Smith and C. Taylor (1989). “Detective stories at dinnertime: Problem-solving through co-narration”. Cultural Dynamics 2(2), 238-257.

Pan, B.A., R.Y. Perlmann and C.E. Snow (2000). “Food for thought: Dinner table as a context for observing parent-child discourse”. En L. Menn and N.B. Ratner (Eds.), Methods for studying language production (pp. 205-224). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Patterson, G.R. and M.S. Forgatch (1995). “Predicting future clinical adjustment from treatment outcome and process variables”. Psychological Assessment 7(3), 275-285.

Pontecorvo, C. and A. Fasulo (1997). “Learning to argue in family shared discourse: The reconstruction of past events”. En L. Resnick, R. Säljö, C.

Pontecorvo and B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (pp. 406-442). New York, NY: Springer.

Pontecorvo, C. and A. Fasulo (1999). “Planning a typical Italian meal: A family reflection on culture”. Culture & Psychology 5(3), 313-335.

Pontecorvo C. and S. Pirchio (2000). “A Developmental View on Children’s Arguing: the Need of the Other”. Human Development 43(6), 361-363.

Rigotti, E. (2009). “Whether and how classical topics can be revived within contemporary argumentation theory”. En F.H. Eemeren van and B. Garssen (Eds.), Pondering on problems of argumentation (pp. 157-178). Dordrecht: Springer.

Rigotti, E., y Greco Morasso, S. (2010). “Comparing the argumentum model of topics to other contemporary approaches to argument schemes: The procedural and material components”. Argumentation 24(4), 489-512.

Rigotti, E., y Greco Morasso, S. (2019). Inference in argumentation: A topics-based approach to argument schemes. Cham: Springer.

Rundquist, S. (1992). “Indirectness: A gender study of flouting Grice’s maxims”. Journal of Pragmatics 18(5), 431-449.

Slomkowski, C.L. and J. Dunn (1992). “Arguments and relationships within the family: Differences in young children’s disputes with mother and sibling”. Developmental Psychology 28(5), 919-924.

Stein, N.L. and E.R. Albro (2001). “The origins and nature of arguments: Studies in conflict understanding, emotion and negotiation”. Discourse Processes 32(2-3), 113-133.

Stein, N.L. and C.A. Miller (1993). “A theory of argumentative understanding: Relationships among position preference, judgments of goodness, memory and reasoning”. Argumentation 7(2), 183-204.

Sterponi, L. (2003). “Account episodes in family discourse: the making of morality in everyday interaction”. Discourse Studies 5(1), 79-100.

Sterponi, L. (2009). “Accountability in family discourse: Socialization into norms and standards and negotiation of responsibility in Italian dinner conversations”. Childhood 16(4), 441-459.

van Eemeren, F.H. (2010). Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

van Eemeren, F.H. and R. Grootendorst (1992). Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

van Eemeren, F.H. and R. Grootendorst (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

van Eemeren, F.H., R. Grootendorst and A.F. Snoeck Henkemans (2002). Argumentation. Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

van Eemeren, F.H. and P. Houtlosser (2003). “The development of the Pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation”. Argumentation 17(4), 387-403.

Walton, D.N. (1997). Appeal to expert opinion. Arguments from authority. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.

Wiggins, S. (2013). “The social life of ‘eugh’: Disgust as assessment in family mealtimes”. British Journal of Social Psychology 52(3), 489-509.