title: Slippery slope arguments imply opposition to change.
abstract: Slippery slope arguments (SSAs) of the form if A, then C describe an initial proposal (A) and a predicted, undesirable consequence of this proposal (C) (e.g., "If cannabis is ever legalized, then eventually cocaine will be legalized, too"). Despite SSAs being a common rhetorical device, there has been surprisingly little empirical research into their subjective evaluation and perception. Here, we present evidence that SSAs are interpreted as a form of consequentialist argument, inviting inferences about the speaker's (or writer's) attitudes. Study 1 confirmed the common intuition that a SSA is perceived to be an argument against the initial proposal (A), whereas Study 2 showed that the subjective strength of this inference relates to the subjective undesirability of the predicted consequences (C). Because arguments are rarely made out of context, in Studies 3 and 4 we examined how one important contextual factor, the speaker's known beliefs, influences the perceived coherence, strength, and persuasiveness of a SSA. Using an unobtrusive dependent variable (eye movements during reading), in Study 3 we showed that readers are sensitive to the internal coherence between a speaker's beliefs and the implied meaning of the argument. Finally, Study 4 revealed that this degree of internal coherence influences the perceived strength and persuasiveness of the argument. Together, these data indicate that SSAs are treated as a form of negative consequentialist argument. People infer that the speaker of a SSA opposes the initial proposal; therefore, SSAs are only perceived to be persuasive and conversationally relevant when the speaker's attitudes match this inference.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK. matthew.haigh@northumbria.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Matthew
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Haigh
authors.affiliation: School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
authors.forename: Jeffrey S
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Wood
authors.affiliation: School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
authors.forename: Andrew J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Stewart
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008128:Logic; D008297:Male; D013850:Thinking; D035761:Wedge Argument
keywords: Argumentation; Experimental pragmatics; Inference; Informal reasoning; Slippery slope