ABSTRACT
College students who supported opposing positions on abortion were asked to state their reasons for and against their own position as well as their reason for and against the opposition. Students then served as judges on 4 cases in which women were seeking an abortion. The circumstances motivating a woman varied across the 4 cases. Case information either challenged or supported prototypic assumptions and beliefs that underlie a prolife or prochoice stance. Students who received information directly challenging their position on abortion changed stances more frequently than those who did not. The presence or absence of biased knowledge for and against each side of an issue has important theoretical and empirical implications for the outcomes of argumentation. Students were then presented with cases that differed in terms of the circumstances and conditions that motivated a woman to seek an abortion. The participants were asked to choose which stance best characterized their position on abortion.
