\input zb-basic \input zb-matheduc \iteman{ZMATH 2014f.00468} \itemau{Conner, AnnaMarie; Singletary, Laura M.; Smith, Ryan C.; Wagner, Patty Anne; Francisco, Richard T.} \itemti{Identifying kinds of reasoning in collective argumentation.} \itemso{Math. Think. Learn. 16, No. 3, 181-200 (2014).} \itemab Summary: We combine Peirce's rule, case, and result with Toulmin's data, claim, and warrant to differentiate between deductive, inductive, abductive, and analogical reasoning within collective argumentation. In this theoretical article, we illustrate these kinds of reasoning in episodes of collective argumentation using examples from one teacher's practice. Examining different kinds of reasoning in collective argumentation can inform how students engage in generating and examining hypotheses using inductive and abductive reasoning and move toward the deductive reasoning required for proof. Mathematics educators can build on their understanding of these kinds of reasoning to support students in reasoning in productive ways. \itemrv{~} \itemcc{E50} \itemut{reasoning; kinds of reasoning; collective argumentation} \itemli{doi:10.1080/10986065.2014.921131} \end