ARGUMENTATIVE COMPLEXITY OF ABORTION DISCOURSE

Using integrative complexity theory and its associated coding scheme, this article explores the structure of arguments on abortion articulated by single- and multi-issue ''pro-choice'' and ''pro-life'' groups between July 1989 (following the Supreme Court Webster v. Reproductive Health Services opinion) and May 1991. A simple random sample of 13 paragraph-sized statements representative of each organization's position was rated by two trained coders on a 7-point scale measuring conceptual differentiation and integration. The debate, as a whole, was conducted at a low level of integrative complexity. Contrary to the ''rigidity of the Right'' hypothesis, both pro-choice and pro-life arguments were characterized by similarly low levels of integrative complexity. Supporting an ideologue hypothesis, the arguments of multi- as opposed to single-issue organizations were more integratively complex.