Research has shown that novice writers tend to ignore opposing viewpoints when framing and developing arguments in writing, a phenomenon commonly referred to as my-side bias. In a recent study, we tested whether manipulating argumentative discourse goals in a dialogue that occurred prior to writing would mitigate my-side bias. We found that consensus-seeking argument with a disagreeing partner was more effective in mitigating my-side bias than persuasion-seeking argument. Here, in Study 1, we revisit the dialogue data from this previous study to explore how differences in the two argumentative discourse conditions might explain their differential effects on my-side bias. In study 2, we ask whether similar differences in argumentative discourse can be found when we test the same manipulation in discourse goals (persuasion vs. consensus) with expert arguers. The educational implications of both studies are discussed.