Unlike Kuhn, Cappella et al., do not try to include ''genuine evidence'' in support of reasons as a part of the evaluation of argument repertoire, nor do they attempt to ascertain the ''coherence among multiple reasons'' (e.g., Tetlock, 1989<ref>Tetlock, P. (1989). Structure and function in political belief systems. In A. Pratkanis, S. Breckler, & A. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude structure and function. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</ref>). Both dimensions are plausible components of argument repertoire. However, they want to employ measure in a survey context.

:''Genuine evidence'' is relatively infrequent, and Kuhn required a series of questions and probes in face-to-face interviews to elicit the little evidence that people offered.

==References==