1: \begin{abstract}

2: 

3:     This paper addresses the challenge of modeling human reasoning, within 

4:     a new framework called Cognitive Argumentation.  

5:     This framework rests on the assumption that human logical reasoning is inherently a process of 

6:     dialectic argumentation and aims to develop a cognitive model 

7:     for human reasoning that is computational and implementable. 

8:     To give logical reasoning a human cognitive form the framework 

9:     relies on cognitive principles, based on

10:     empirical and theoretical work in Cognitive Science, to suitably adapt a

11:     general and abstract framework of computational argumentation from AI. 

12: 

13:     The approach of Cognitive Argumentation is evaluated with respect to 

14:     Byrne's suppression task, where the aim is not only to capture the 

15:     suppression effect between different groups of people but also to 

16:     account for the variation of reasoning within each group. 

17:     Two main cognitive principles are particularly important to 

18:     capture human conditional reasoning that explain the participants' responses: 

19:     (i) the interpretation of a condition within a conditional as sufficient and/or necessary and

20:     (ii) the mode of reasoning either as predictive or explanatory. 

21:     We argue that Cognitive Argumentation provides a coherent and cognitively adequate model for human conditional reasoning that allows a natural distinction between definite and plausible conclusions, exhibiting the important characteristics of context-sensitive and defeasible reasoning.\end{abstract}

22: