critical thinking the guardian

International edition
Australia edition
Europe edition

Illustration of a mantrap with a speech bubble inside

The big idea: the simple trick that can sabotage your critical thinking

Influencers and politicians use snappy cliches to get you on side – but you can fight fire with fire

S ince the moment I learned about the concept of the “thought-terminating cliche” I’ve been seeing them everywhere I look: in televised political debates, in flouncily stencilled motivational posters, in the hashtag wisdom that clogs my social media feeds. Coined in 1961 by psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton, the phrase describes a catchy platitude aimed at shutting down or bypassing independent thinking and questioning. I first heard about the tactic while researching a book about the language of cult leaders , but these sayings also pervade our everyday conversations: expressions such as “It is what it is”, “Boys will be boys”, “Everything happens for a reason” and “Don’t overthink it” are familiar examples.

From populist politicians to holistic wellness influencers, anyone interested in power is able to weaponise thought-terminating cliches to dismiss followers’ dissent or rationalise flawed arguments. In his book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, Lifton wrote that these semantic stop signs compress “the most far-reaching and complex of human problems … into brief, highly selective, definitive-sounding phrases, easily memorized and easily expressed. They become the start and finish of any ideological analysis.”

Such zingy stock phrases are enjoying something of a golden age in the digital era, propagated by way of aesthetically pleasing quotegrams and viral social media posts. During Covid lockdowns, dogmatic maxims such as “Reality is subjective”, “Don’t let yourself be ruled by fear” and “Truth is a construct” exploded among online conspiracy theorists.

Thought-terminating cliches exist, of course, in every language. In China, some government officials are known to exploit the phrase “ Mei banfa ”, meaning “ No solution ”, or “There’s nothing to be done” to justify inaction. The saying “ Shouganai ”, a linguistic shrug of resignation similar to “It is what it is”, is similarly weaponised in Japan. The Polish idiom “ Co wolno wojewodzie, to nie tobie, smrodzie ” roughly means “People in positions of power can get away with anything” (hence, don’t bother putting up a fight). According to Walter Scheirer, author of A History of Fake Things on the Internet , thought-terminating cliches commonly carry a defeatist flavour. It’s hard work, involving psychological friction, to figure out the best way to think about complex subjects such as climate policy or geopolitics. Any licence to give up the struggle is going to be appealing.

Tobia Spampatti, a decision scientist at the University of Geneva, argues that such phrases become especially problematic when wielded by politicians with decision-making power. In 2023, Australian conservatives used the rhyming slogan “ If you don’t know, vote no ” to discourage citizens from supporting a constitutional amendment that would have afforded Indigenous people representation in parliament. Spampatti, who studies the relationship between information processing and beliefs about climate change, says disinformation tends to spike around major events, like elections and climate deals. That’s when thought-terminating cliches do their wiliest work. Examples used to squash environmental efforts range from “Climate change is a hoax” and “Scientists have a political agenda” to “Climate change is natural” (or the related “The climate has always changed”), “Humans will adapt” and “It’s too late to do anything now”.

Unfortunately, mere awareness of such tricks is not always enough to help us resist their influence. For this, we can blame the “illusory truth effect” – a cognitive bias defined by the unconscious yet pervasive tendency to trust a statement simply because we have heard it multiple times. Memory scientist Lisa Fazio has found that we are so primed to confuse a statement’s familiarity with veracity that the bias persists even when listeners are warned to look out for it, even when they are explicitly told the source was untrustworthy. “Some of these cliches catch on not necessarily because we believe them to be true but because they feel comfortable and are easy to understand,” she says.

In the past, repetition was a decent clue that a statement was reliable. When we hear a piece of information over and over again, that’s a sign it has come from multiple sources and is more likely to be true than a one-off factoid. “Our brains pick up early on in development that these cues are associated with truth, but this can go wrong in situations with a lot of ambient misinformation [like social media],” Fazio says.

Of the many cognitive biases that silently govern our decision-making, the illusory truth effect is one of the most potent. There’s really no way to prevent or combat it, says Spampatti, as “even raising awareness of this risk does not lower its effectiveness”. To compete in the marketplace of thought-terminating cliches, then, our best bet might be to take what we know about illusory truth and harness it to spread accurate information.

Beyond repetition, studies show that people perceive statements as more believable when presented in easy-to-read fonts or easy-to-understand speech styles , such as rhyme. In contemporary studies of the so-called rhyme-as-reason effect , researchers found that participants generally rate the phrase “Woes unite foes” as more truthful than “Woes unite enemies”, even though they mean the same thing. And a 2021 study showed that humour is among the qualities that make information more memorable and shareable. A titbit is “just more likely to spread if it’s funny”, says Scheirer.

It doesn’t only have to be shameless disinformers who exploit the power of repetition, rhyme, pleasing graphics and funny memes. “Remember, it’s OK to repeat true information,” says Fazio. “People need reminders of what’s true,” such as the fact that vaccines are safe and climate change is driven by our actions.

“I think it is better to create our own catchy phrases – ‘There is no planet B’ comes to mind – and repeat them,” advised Spampatti. In the pursuit of spreading sense during senseless times, it’s surely worth sounding a bit cliched.

after newsletter promotion

Amanda Montell is a linguist and the author of The Age of Magical Overthinking: Notes on Modern Irrationality (Thorsons).

Critical Thinking: A Model of Intelligence for Solving Real-World Problems

Diane f. halpern.

1 Department of Psychology, Claremont McKenna College, Emerita, Altadena, CA 91001, USA

Dana S. Dunn

2 Department of Psychology, Moravian College, Bethlehem, PA 18018, USA; ude.naivarom@nnud

Most theories of intelligence do not directly address the question of whether people with high intelligence can successfully solve real world problems. A high IQ is correlated with many important outcomes (e.g., academic prominence, reduced crime), but it does not protect against cognitive biases, partisan thinking, reactance, or confirmation bias, among others. There are several newer theories that directly address the question about solving real-world problems. Prominent among them is Sternberg’s adaptive intelligence with “adaptation to the environment” as the central premise, a construct that does not exist on standardized IQ tests. Similarly, some scholars argue that standardized tests of intelligence are not measures of rational thought—the sort of skill/ability that would be needed to address complex real-world problems. Other investigators advocate for critical thinking as a model of intelligence specifically designed for addressing real-world problems. Yes, intelligence (i.e., critical thinking) can be enhanced and used for solving a real-world problem such as COVID-19, which we use as an example of contemporary problems that need a new approach.

1. Introduction

The editors of this Special Issue asked authors to respond to a deceptively simple statement: “How Intelligence Can Be a Solution to Consequential World Problems.” This statement holds many complexities, including how intelligence is defined and which theories are designed to address real-world problems.

2. The Problem with Using Standardized IQ Measures for Real-World Problems

For the most part, we identify high intelligence as having a high score on a standardized test of intelligence. Like any test score, IQ can only reflect what is on the given test. Most contemporary standardized measures of intelligence include vocabulary, working memory, spatial skills, analogies, processing speed, and puzzle-like elements (e.g., Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Fourth Edition; see ( Drozdick et al. 2012 )). Measures of IQ correlate with many important outcomes, including academic performance ( Kretzschmar et al. 2016 ), job-related skills ( Hunter and Schmidt 1996 ), reduced likelihood of criminal behavior ( Burhan et al. 2014 ), and for those with exceptionally high IQs, obtaining a doctorate and publishing scholarly articles ( McCabe et al. 2020 ). Gottfredson ( 1997, p. 81 ) summarized these effects when she said the “predictive validity of g is ubiquitous.” More recent research using longitudinal data, found that general mental abilities and specific abilities are good predictors of several work variables including job prestige, and income ( Lang and Kell 2020 ). Although assessments of IQ are useful in many contexts, having a high IQ does not protect against falling for common cognitive fallacies (e.g., blind spot bias, reactance, anecdotal reasoning), relying on biased and blatantly one-sided information sources, failing to consider information that does not conform to one’s preferred view of reality (confirmation bias), resisting pressure to think and act in a certain way, among others. This point was clearly articulated by Stanovich ( 2009, p. 3 ) when he stated that,” IQ tests measure only a small set of the thinking abilities that people need.”

3. Which Theories of Intelligence Are Relevant to the Question?

Most theories of intelligence do not directly address the question of whether people with high intelligence can successfully solve real world problems. For example, Grossmann et al. ( 2013 ) cite many studies in which IQ scores have not predicted well-being, including life satisfaction and longevity. Using a stratified random sample of Americans, these investigators found that wise reasoning is associated with life satisfaction, and that “there was no association between intelligence and well-being” (p. 944). (critical thinking [CT] is often referred to as “wise reasoning” or “rational thinking,”). Similar results were reported by Wirthwein and Rost ( 2011 ) who compared life satisfaction in several domains for gifted adults and adults of average intelligence. There were no differences in any of the measures of subjective well-being, except for leisure, which was significantly lower for the gifted adults. Additional research in a series of experiments by Stanovich and West ( 2008 ) found that participants with high cognitive ability were as likely as others to endorse positions that are consistent with their biases, and they were equally likely to prefer one-sided arguments over those that provided a balanced argument. There are several newer theories that directly address the question about solving real-world problems. Prominent among them is Sternberg’s adaptive intelligence with “adaptation to the environment” as the central premise, a construct that does not exist on standardized IQ tests (e.g., Sternberg 2019 ). Similarly, Stanovich and West ( 2014 ) argue that standardized tests of intelligence are not measures of rational thought—the sort of skill/ability that would be needed to address complex real-world problems. Halpern and Butler ( 2020 ) advocate for CT as a useful model of intelligence for addressing real-world problems because it was designed for this purpose. Although there is much overlap among these more recent theories, often using different terms for similar concepts, we use Halpern and Butler’s conceptualization to make our point: Yes, intelligence (i.e., CT) can be enhanced and used for solving a real-world problem like COVID-19.

4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence

One definition of intelligence that directly addresses the question about intelligence and real-world problem solving comes from Nickerson ( 2020, p. 205 ): “the ability to learn, to reason well, to solve novel problems, and to deal effectively with novel problems—often unpredictable—that confront one in daily life.” Using this definition, the question of whether intelligent thinking can solve a world problem like the novel coronavirus is a resounding “yes” because solutions to real-world novel problems are part of his definition. This is a popular idea in the general public. For example, over 1000 business managers and hiring executives said that they want employees who can think critically based on the belief that CT skills will help them solve work-related problems ( Hart Research Associates 2018 ).

We define CT as the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. It is used to describe thinking that is purposeful, reasoned, and goal directed--the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions, when the thinker is using skills that are thoughtful and effective for the particular context and type of thinking task. International surveys conducted by the OECD ( 2019, p. 16 ) established “key information-processing competencies” that are “highly transferable, in that they are relevant to many social contexts and work situations; and ‘learnable’ and therefore subject to the influence of policy.” One of these skills is problem solving, which is one subset of CT skills.

The CT model of intelligence is comprised of two components: (1) understanding information at a deep, meaningful level and (2) appropriate use of CT skills. The underlying idea is that CT skills can be identified, taught, and learned, and when they are recognized and applied in novel settings, the individual is demonstrating intelligent thought. CT skills include judging the credibility of an information source, making cost–benefit calculations, recognizing regression to the mean, understanding the limits of extrapolation, muting reactance responses, using analogical reasoning, rating the strength of reasons that support and fail to support a conclusion, and recognizing hindsight bias or confirmation bias, among others. Critical thinkers use these skills appropriately, without prompting, and usually with conscious intent in a variety of settings.

One of the key concepts in this model is that CT skills transfer in appropriate situations. Thus, assessments using situational judgments are needed to assess whether particular skills have transferred to a novel situation where it is appropriate. In an assessment created by the first author ( Halpern 2018 ), short paragraphs provide information about 20 different everyday scenarios (e.g., A speaker at the meeting of your local school board reported that when drug use rises, grades decline; so schools need to enforce a “war on drugs” to improve student grades); participants provide two response formats for every scenario: (a) constructed responses where they respond with short written responses, followed by (b) forced choice responses (e.g., multiple choice, rating or ranking of alternatives) for the same situations.

There is a large and growing empirical literature to support the assertion that CT skills can be learned and will transfer (when taught for transfer). See for example, Holmes et al. ( 2015 ), who wrote in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , that there was “significant and sustained improvement in students’ critical thinking behavior” (p. 11,199) for students who received CT instruction. Abrami et al. ( 2015, para. 1 ) concluded from a meta-analysis that “there are effective strategies for teaching CT skills, both generic and content specific, and CT dispositions, at all educational levels and across all disciplinary areas.” Abrami et al. ( 2008, para. 1 ), included 341 effect sizes in a meta-analysis. They wrote: “findings make it clear that improvement in students’ CT skills and dispositions cannot be a matter of implicit expectation.” A strong test of whether CT skills can be used for real-word problems comes from research by Butler et al. ( 2017 ). Community adults and college students (N = 244) completed several scales including an assessment of CT, an intelligence test, and an inventory of real-life events. Both CT scores and intelligence scores predicted individual outcomes on the inventory of real-life events, but CT was a stronger predictor.

Heijltjes et al. ( 2015, p. 487 ) randomly assigned participants to either a CT instruction group or one of six other control conditions. They found that “only participants assigned to CT instruction improved their reasoning skills.” Similarly, when Halpern et al. ( 2012 ) used random assignment of participants to either a learning group where they were taught scientific reasoning skills using a game format or a control condition (which also used computerized learning and was similar in length), participants in the scientific skills learning group showed higher proportional learning gains than students who did not play the game. As the body of additional supportive research is too large to report here, interested readers can find additional lists of CT skills and support for the assertion that these skills can be learned and will transfer in Halpern and Dunn ( Forthcoming ). There is a clear need for more high-quality research on the application and transfer of CT and its relationship to IQ.

5. Pandemics: COVID-19 as a Consequential Real-World Problem

A pandemic occurs when a disease runs rampant over an entire country or even the world. Pandemics have occurred throughout history: At the time of writing this article, COVID-19 is a world-wide pandemic whose actual death rate is unknown but estimated with projections of several million over the course of 2021 and beyond ( Mega 2020 ). Although vaccines are available, it will take some time to inoculate most or much of the world’s population. Since March 2020, national and international health agencies have created a list of actions that can slow and hopefully stop the spread of COVID (e.g., wearing face masks, practicing social distancing, avoiding group gatherings), yet many people in the United States and other countries have resisted their advice.

Could instruction in CT encourage more people to accept and comply with simple life-saving measures? There are many possible reasons to believe that by increasing citizens’ CT abilities, this problematic trend can be reversed for, at least, some unknown percentage of the population. We recognize the long history of social and cognitive research showing that changing attitudes and behaviors is difficult, and it would be unrealistic to expect that individuals with extreme beliefs supported by their social group and consistent with their political ideologies are likely to change. For example, an Iranian cleric and an orthodox rabbi both claimed (separately) that the COVID-19 vaccine can make people gay ( Marr 2021 ). These unfounded opinions are based on deeply held prejudicial beliefs that we expect to be resistant to CT. We are targeting those individuals who beliefs are less extreme and may be based on reasonable reservations, such as concern about the hasty development of the vaccine and the lack of long-term data on its effects. There should be some unknown proportion of individuals who can change their COVID-19-related beliefs and actions with appropriate instruction in CT. CT can be a (partial) antidote for the chaos of the modern world with armies of bots creating content on social media, political and other forces deliberately attempting to confuse issues, and almost all media labeled “fake news” by social influencers (i.e., people with followers that sometimes run to millions on various social media). Here, are some CT skills that could be helpful in getting more people to think more critically about pandemic-related issues.

Reasoning by Analogy and Judging the Credibility of the Source of Information

Early communications about the ability of masks to prevent the spread of COVID from national health agencies were not consistent. In many regions of the world, the benefits of wearing masks incited prolonged and acrimonious debates ( Tang 2020 ). However, after the initial confusion, virtually all of the global and national health organizations (e.g., WHO, National Health Service in the U. K., U. S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) endorse masks as a way to slow the spread of COVID ( Cheng et al. 2020 ; Chu et al. 2020 ). However, as we know, some people do not trust governmental agencies and often cite the conflicting information that was originally given as a reason for not wearing a mask. There are varied reasons for refusing to wear a mask, but the one most often cited is that it is against civil liberties ( Smith 2020 ). Reasoning by analogy is an appropriate CT skill for evaluating this belief (and a key skill in legal thinking). It might be useful to cite some of the many laws that already regulate our behavior such as, requiring health inspections for restaurants, setting speed limits, mandating seat belts when riding in a car, and establishing the age at which someone can consume alcohol. Individuals would be asked to consider how the mandate to wear a mask compares to these and other regulatory laws.

Another reason why some people resist the measures suggested by virtually every health agency concerns questions about whom to believe. Could training in CT change the beliefs and actions of even a small percentage of those opposed to wearing masks? Such training would include considering the following questions with practice across a wide domain of knowledge: (a) Does the source have sufficient expertise? (b) Is the expertise recent and relevant? (c) Is there a potential for gain by the information source, such as financial gain? (d) What would the ideal information source be and how close is the current source to the ideal? (e) Does the information source offer evidence that what they are recommending is likely to be correct? (f) Have you traced URLs to determine if the information in front of you really came from the alleged source?, etc. Of course, not everyone will respond in the same way to each question, so there is little likelihood that we would all think alike, but these questions provide a framework for evaluating credibility. Donovan et al. ( 2015 ) were successful using a similar approach to improve dynamic decision-making by asking participants to reflect on questions that relate to the decision. Imagine the effect of rigorous large-scale education in CT from elementary through secondary schools, as well as at the university-level. As stated above, empirical evidence has shown that people can become better thinkers with appropriate instruction in CT. With training, could we encourage some portion of the population to become more astute at judging the credibility of a source of information? It is an experiment worth trying.

6. Making Cost—Benefit Assessments for Actions That Would Slow the Spread of COVID-19

Historical records show that refusal to wear a mask during a pandemic is not a new reaction. The epidemic of 1918 also included mandates to wear masks, which drew public backlash. Then, as now, many people refused, even when they were told that it was a symbol of “wartime patriotism” because the 1918 pandemic occurred during World War I ( Lovelace 2020 ). CT instruction would include instruction in why and how to compute cost–benefit analyses. Estimates of “lives saved” by wearing a mask can be made meaningful with graphical displays that allow more people to understand large numbers. Gigerenzer ( 2020 ) found that people can understand risk ratios in medicine when the numbers are presented as frequencies instead of probabilities. If this information were used when presenting the likelihood of illness and death from COVID-19, could we increase the numbers of people who understand the severity of this disease? Small scale studies by Gigerenzer have shown that it is possible.

Analyzing Arguments to Determine Degree of Support for a Conclusion

The process of analyzing arguments requires that individuals rate the strength of support for and against a conclusion. By engaging in this practice, they must consider evidence and reasoning that may run counter to a preferred outcome. Kozyreva et al. ( 2020 ) call the deliberate failure to consider both supporting and conflicting data “deliberate ignorance”—avoiding or failing to consider information that could be useful in decision-making because it may collide with an existing belief. When applied to COVID-19, people would have to decide if the evidence for and against wearing a face mask is a reasonable way to stop the spread of this disease, and if they conclude that it is not, what are the costs and benefits of not wearing masks at a time when governmental health organizations are making them mandatory in public spaces? Again, we wonder if rigorous and systematic instruction in argument analysis would result in more positive attitudes and behaviors that relate to wearing a mask or other real-world problems. We believe that it is an experiment worth doing.

7. Conclusions

We believe that teaching CT is a worthwhile approach for educating the general public in order to improve reasoning and motivate actions to address, avert, or ameliorate real-world problems like the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence suggests that CT can guide intelligent responses to societal and global problems. We are NOT claiming that CT skills will be a universal solution for the many real-world problems that we confront in contemporary society, or that everyone will substitute CT for other decision-making practices, but we do believe that systematic education in CT can help many people become better thinkers, and we believe that this is an important step toward creating a society that values and practices routine CT. The challenges are great, but the tools to tackle them are available, if we are willing to use them.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.F.H. and D.S.D.; resources, D.F.H.; data curation, writing—original draft preparation, D.F.H.; writing—review and editing, D.F.H. and D.S.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

No IRB Review.

Informed Consent Statement

No Informed Consent.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Abrami Philip C., Bernard Robert M., Borokhovski Evgueni, Wade C. Anne, Surkes Michael A., Tamim Rana, Zhang Dai. Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A Stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2008; 78 :1102–34. doi: 10.3102/0034654308326084. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Abrami Philip C., Bernard Robert M., Borokhovski Evgueni, Waddington David I., Wade C. Anne. Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2015; 85 :275–341. doi: 10.3102/0034654314551063. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Burhan Nik Ahmad Sufian, Kurniawan Yohan, Sidek Abdul Halim, Mohamad Mohd Rosli. Crimes and the Bell curve: Th e role of people with high, average, and low intelligence. Intelligence. 2014; 47 :12–22. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.08.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Butler Heather A., Pentoney Christopher, Bong Maebelle P. Predicting real-world outcomes: Critical thinking ability is a better predictor of life decisions than intelligence. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2017; 25 :38–46. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.06.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cheng Vincent Chi-Chung, Wong Shuk-Ching, Chuang Vivien Wai-Man, So Simon Yung-Chun, Chen Jonathan Hon-Kwan, Sridhar Sidharth, To Kelvin Kai-Wwang, Chan Jasper Fuk-Wu, Hung Ivan Fan-Ngai, Ho Pak-Leung, et al. The role of community-wide wearing of face mask for control of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic due to SARS-CoV-2. Journal of Infectious Disease. 2020; 81 :107–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.024. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Chu Derek K., Aki Elie A., Duda Stephanie, Solo Karla, Yaacoub Sally, Schunemann Holger J. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: A system atic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2020; 395 :1973–87. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31142-9. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Donovan Sarah J., Guss C. Dominick, Naslund Dag. Improving dynamic decision-making through training and self-re flection. Judgment and Decision Making. 2015; 10 :284–95. [ Google Scholar ]
Drozdick Lisa Whipple, Wahlstrom Dustin, Zhu Jianjun, Weiss Lawrence G. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition and the Wechsler Memory Scale—Fourth Edition. In: Flanagan Dawn P., Harrison Patti L., editors. Contemporary Intellectual as Sessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues. The Guilford Press; New York: 2012. pp. 197–223. [ Google Scholar ]
Gigerenzer Gerd. When all is just a click away: Is critical thinking obsolete in the digital age? In: Sternberg Robert J., Halpern Diane F., editors. Critical Thinking IN Psychology. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 197–223. [ Google Scholar ]
Gottfredson Linda S. Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence. 1997; 24 :79–132. doi: 10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90014-3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Grossmann Igor, Varnum Michael E. W., Na Jinkyung, Kitayama Shinobu, Nisbett Richard E. A route to well-being: Intelligence ver sus wise reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2013; 142 :944–53. doi: 10.1037/a0029560. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Halpern Diane F. Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment. Schuhfried Test Publishers; Modling: 2018. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]. Available online: www.schuhfried.com [ Google Scholar ]
Halpern Diane F., Butler Heather A. Is critical thinking a better model of intelligence? In: Sternberg Robert J., editor. The nature of Intelligence. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 183–96. [ Google Scholar ]
Halpern Diane F., Dunn Dana S. Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. 6th ed. Taylor & Francis; New York: Forthcoming. in press. [ Google Scholar ]
Halpern Diane F., Millis Keith, Graesser Arthur, Butler Heather, Forsyth Carol, Cai Zhiqiang. Operation ARA: A computerized learn ing game that teaches critical thinking and scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2012; 7 :93–100. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.03.006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hart Research Associates [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Employers Express Confidence in Colleges and Universities: See College as Worth the Investment, New Research Finds. 2018 Aug 29; Available online: https://hartresearch.com/employers-express-confidence-in-colleges-and-universities-see-college-as-worth-the-investment-new-research-finds/
Heijltjes Anita, Gog Tamara van, Lippink Jimmie, Paas Fred. Unraveling the effects of critical thinking instructions, practice, and self-explanation on students’ reasoning performance. Instructional Science. 2015; 43 :487–506. doi: 10.1007/s11251-015-9347-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Holmes Natasha G., Wieman Carl E., Bonn DougA. Teaching critical thinking. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015; 112 :11199–204. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1505329112. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hunter John E., Schmidt Frank L. Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 1996; 2 :447–72. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.2.3-4.447. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kozyreva Anastasia, Lewandowsky Stephan, Hertwig Ralph. Citizens versus the internet: Confronting digital challenges with cognitive tools. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2020 21 doi: 10.1177/1529100620946707. Available online: https://www.psychologi calscience.org/publications/confronting-digital-challenges-with-cognitive-tools.html [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kretzschmar Andre, Neubert Jonas C., Wusternberg Sascha, Greiff Samuel. Construct validity of complex problem- solv ing: A comprehensive view on different facts of intelligence and school grades. Intelligence. 2016; 54 :55–69. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2015.11.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lang Jonas W.B., Kell Harrison J. General mental ability and specific abilities: Their relative importance for extrinsic career success. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2020; 105 :1047–61. doi: 10.1037/apl0000472. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lovelace Berkeley., Jr. Medical Historians Compare the Coronavirus to the 1918 Flu Pandemic: Both Were Highly Political. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; CNBC. 2020 Available online: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/28/comparing-1918-flu-vs-corona virus.html?fbclid=IwAR1RAVRUOIdN9qqvNnMPimf5Q4XfV-pn_qdC3DwcfnPu9kavwumDI2zq9Xs
Marr Rhuaridh. Iranian Cleric Claims COVID-19 Vaccine Can Make People Gay. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Metro Weekly. 2021 Available online: https://www.metroweekly.com/2021/02/iranian-cleric-claims-covid-19-vaccine-can-make-people-gay/
McCabe Kira O., Lubinski David, Benbow Camilla P. Who shines most among the brightest?: A 25-year longitudinal study of elite STEM graduate students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2020; 119 :390–416. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000239. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Mega Emiliano R. COVID Has Killed more than One Million People. How Many more will Die? [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Nature. 2020 Available online: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02762-y [ PubMed ]
Nickerson Raymond S. Developing intelligence through instruction. In: Sternberg Robert J., editor. The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 205–37. [ Google Scholar ]
OECD . The Survey of Adult Skills: Reader’s Companion. 3rd ed. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2019. OECD Skills Studies. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Smith Matthew. Why won’t Britons Wear Face Masks? [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; YouGov. 2020 Available online: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/health/articles-reports/2020/07/15/why-wont-britons-wear-face-masks
Stanovich Keith E. What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought. Yale University Press; New Haven: 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
Stanovich Keith E., West Richard F. On the failure of cognitive ability to predict my-side bias and one-sided thinking biases. Thinking & Reasoning. 2008; 14 :129–67. doi: 10.1080/13546780701679764. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Stanovich Keith E., West Richard F. What intelligence tests miss. The Psychologist. 2014; 27 :80–83. doi: 10.5840/inquiryctnews201126216. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Sternberg Robert J. A theory of adaptive intelligence and its relation to general intelligence. Journal of Intelligence. 2019; 7 :23. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence7040023. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Tang Julian W. COVID-19: Interpreting scientific evidence—Uncertainty, confusion, and delays. BMC Infectious Diseases. 2020; 20 :653. doi: 10.1186/s12879-020-05387-8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wirthwein Linda, Rost Detlef H. Giftedness and subjective well-being: A study with adults. Learning and Individuals Differences. 2011; 21 :182–86. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

More From Forbes

Is critical thinking a superpower in the ai era.

Share to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to Linkedin

Critical thinking skills are crucial for AI.

AI, particularly generative AI, is having an immediate and dramatic impact on our lives, both personally and professionally. AI enables everyone to become better writers, content creators, coders, and artists. Interestingly, to derive effective value from AI systems, we must also develop our "soft skills”, of which critical thinking becomes one of the most important.

Just a few years ago, to get real benefit from AI, you needed to build and train AI systems which required “hard” skills such as math, programming, or data engineering skills. Now, because of generative AI, you no longer need to be an expert in statistics & probability, calculus, or linear algebra to get value from using Generative AI. You also don’t need knowledge of different algorithms & modeling skills. Instead, you need to use soft skills such as communication, curiosity, problem solving, adaptability, and critical thinking.

Why Critical Thinking is Crucial for AI

There’s no doubt that in today's fast-paced business environment, workers will need to use AI tools to stay ahead in the market. While AI systems will let anyone get a basic grasp of hard skills, the soft skills are proving to be the most important to get value from AI systems. In particular, the soft skill of critical thinking is proving indispensable. Put simply, critical thinking is the ability to get a solid, reliable, and as truthful as possible understanding of information, and then use that understanding to make sound decisions based on that knowledge. This means scrutinizing information, questioning assumptions, and ensuring that conclusions are supported by solid evidence.

When it comes to using generative AI systems, being able to observe, analyze, discern, and ask the right questions is what not only allows you to get the required results from the AI, but also to determine if the outputs are credible, lack bias, and truthful. Critical thinking approaches provide the necessary mental tools to iteratively refine prompts and hone in to get more effective results. Trying different approaches using thinking skills leads to clearer, more accurate results. The ability to analyze complex requirements helps in designing effective prompts and assessing the quality of AI-generated responses.

How To Develop Critical Thinking Skills

Critical thinking skills will only become more important in our AI-driven organizations. This means that people of all ages will need to make sure to develop and use critical thinking skills to be able to stay ahead of the pack. A key approach to develop and refine critical thinking skills is to always approach interactions with AI systems with a healthy dose of skepticism, and question assumptions, especially your own. Ask yourself whether the information going into and out of AI systems make sense and what assumptions are being made. Look for evidence to support or refute these assumptions.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

Additionally, you’ll want to seek evidence. It goes without saying that especially in an AI-generated world, you can’t take what you see, hear, or read at face value. Large language models are known to hallucinate, or confidently provide you with the wrong information. Verify the sources of your information and ensure that your conclusions are backed by solid proof, research, or findings, and dive deeper to find supporting evidence.

Critical thinking also requires you to be aware of potential informational and data biases. Those biases could be represented in your thinking, data, analyses, outputs of LLM systems, or the way in which you utilize or scrutinize AI outputs. Work to observe and identify patterns and trends in data. This involves not just looking at the data, but understanding the context and relationships between different variables.

Key Benefits Of Critical Thinking in an AI-Centric World

As you continue to work on your critical thinking skills, you’ll see many key benefits, especially as more people make use of AI to augment or assist their work. Professionals are often required to make decisions based on various data points and pieces of information. Critical thinking enables you to sift through the mountains of AI-generated information, identify what is relevant, and then make decisions based on accurate interpretations. This is especially the case with generative AI. Without critical thinking, there is a risk of making decisions based on incomplete or incorrect information, which can lead to erroneous, suboptimal, or misleading results.

A key to critical thinking is problem solving skills. Critical thinking helps professionals approach problems systematically, considering all possible solutions and their implications before making decisions. This thorough approach reduces the likelihood of overlooking important factors and increases the chances of finding effective solutions. It also helps you become a better prompt engineer as you’ll not stop until you get a satisfactory response. You are able to evaluate complex situations to make informed decisions. This analytical ability helps in designing effective prompts and assessing the quality of AI-generated responses.

Setting Yourself Apart With Critical Thinking

Individuals who excel in critical thinking will stand out when it comes to the use of AI. These individuals can navigate complex information landscapes, create better results and responses from LLMs, make better informed decisions, iterate more effectively to get desired outcomes, and be more effective when it comes to communicating and sharing results.

The ability to critically evaluate and interpret information is a strategic advantage for those who are working with AI systems. As AI becomes an increasing part of our every day business processes, tools, and interactions, those with strong critical thinking abilities will be better equipped to harness AI’s full potential, driving innovation, better insights, and answers.

Editorial Standards
Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts.

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's Terms of Service. We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
Content that otherwise violates our site's terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
Actions that otherwise violate our site's terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

Stay on topic and share your insights
Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
Protect your community.
Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's Terms of Service.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base
Working with sources
What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Published on May 30, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan . Revised on May 31, 2023.

Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment .

To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources .

Critical thinking skills help you to:

Identify credible sources
Evaluate and respond to arguments
Assess alternative viewpoints
Test hypotheses against relevant criteria

Why is critical thinking important, critical thinking examples, how to think critically, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about critical thinking.

Critical thinking is important for making judgments about sources of information and forming your own arguments. It emphasizes a rational, objective, and self-aware approach that can help you to identify credible sources and strengthen your conclusions.

Critical thinking is important in all disciplines and throughout all stages of the research process . The types of evidence used in the sciences and in the humanities may differ, but critical thinking skills are relevant to both.

In academic writing , critical thinking can help you to determine whether a source:

Is free from research bias
Provides evidence to support its research findings
Considers alternative viewpoints

Outside of academia, critical thinking goes hand in hand with information literacy to help you form opinions rationally and engage independently and critically with popular media.

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

Missing commas and periods
Incorrect usage of “et al.”
Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
Missing reference entries

Critical thinking can help you to identify reliable sources of information that you can cite in your research paper . It can also guide your own research methods and inform your own arguments.

Outside of academia, critical thinking can help you to be aware of both your own and others’ biases and assumptions.

Academic examples

However, when you compare the findings of the study with other current research, you determine that the results seem improbable. You analyze the paper again, consulting the sources it cites.

You notice that the research was funded by the pharmaceutical company that created the treatment. Because of this, you view its results skeptically and determine that more independent research is necessary to confirm or refute them. Example: Poor critical thinking in an academic context You’re researching a paper on the impact wireless technology has had on developing countries that previously did not have large-scale communications infrastructure. You read an article that seems to confirm your hypothesis: the impact is mainly positive. Rather than evaluating the research methodology, you accept the findings uncritically.

Nonacademic examples

However, you decide to compare this review article with consumer reviews on a different site. You find that these reviews are not as positive. Some customers have had problems installing the alarm, and some have noted that it activates for no apparent reason.

You revisit the original review article. You notice that the words “sponsored content” appear in small print under the article title. Based on this, you conclude that the review is advertising and is therefore not an unbiased source. Example: Poor critical thinking in a nonacademic context You support a candidate in an upcoming election. You visit an online news site affiliated with their political party and read an article that criticizes their opponent. The article claims that the opponent is inexperienced in politics. You accept this without evidence, because it fits your preconceptions about the opponent.

There is no single way to think critically. How you engage with information will depend on the type of source you’re using and the information you need.

However, you can engage with sources in a systematic and critical way by asking certain questions when you encounter information. Like the CRAAP test , these questions focus on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

When encountering information, ask:

Who is the author? Are they an expert in their field?
What do they say? Is their argument clear? Can you summarize it?
When did they say this? Is the source current?
Where is the information published? Is it an academic article? Is it peer-reviewed ?
Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence? Does it rely on opinion, speculation, or appeals to emotion ? Do they address alternative arguments?

Critical thinking also involves being aware of your own biases, not only those of others. When you make an argument or draw your own conclusions, you can ask similar questions about your own writing:

Am I only considering evidence that supports my preconceptions?
Is my argument expressed clearly and backed up with credible sources?
Would I be convinced by this argument coming from someone else?

If you want to know more about ChatGPT, AI tools , citation , and plagiarism , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

ChatGPT vs human editor
ChatGPT citations
Is ChatGPT trustworthy?
Using ChatGPT for your studies
What is ChatGPT?
Chicago style
Paraphrasing

Plagiarism

Types of plagiarism
Self-plagiarism
Avoiding plagiarism
Academic integrity
Consequences of plagiarism
Common knowledge

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

You can assess information and arguments critically by asking certain questions about the source. You can use the CRAAP test , focusing on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

Ask questions such as:

Who is the author? Are they an expert?
How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

A credible source should pass the CRAAP test and follow these guidelines:

The information should be up to date and current.
The author and publication should be a trusted authority on the subject you are researching.
The sources the author cited should be easy to find, clear, and unbiased.
For a web source, the URL and layout should signify that it is trustworthy.

Information literacy refers to a broad range of skills, including the ability to find, evaluate, and use sources of information effectively.

Being information literate means that you:

Know how to find credible sources
Use relevant sources to inform your research
Understand what constitutes plagiarism
Know how to cite your sources correctly

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search, interpret, and recall information in a way that aligns with our pre-existing values, opinions, or beliefs. It refers to the ability to recollect information best when it amplifies what we already believe. Relatedly, we tend to forget information that contradicts our opinions.

Although selective recall is a component of confirmation bias, it should not be confused with recall bias.

On the other hand, recall bias refers to the differences in the ability between study participants to recall past events when self-reporting is used. This difference in accuracy or completeness of recollection is not related to beliefs or opinions. Rather, recall bias relates to other factors, such as the length of the recall period, age, and the characteristics of the disease under investigation.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved June 24, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, student guide: information literacy | meaning & examples, what are credible sources & how to spot them | examples, applying the craap test & evaluating sources, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Have a thesis expert improve your writing

Check your thesis for plagiarism in 10 minutes, generate your apa citations for free.

Knowledge Base
Working with sources
What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Published on 25 September 2022 by Eoghan Ryan .

Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyse information and form a judgement.

To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources .

Critical thinking skills help you to:

Identify credible sources
Evaluate and respond to arguments
Assess alternative viewpoints
Test hypotheses against relevant criteria

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Why is critical thinking important, critical thinking examples, how to think critically, frequently asked questions.

Critical thinking is important for making judgements about sources of information and forming your own arguments. It emphasises a rational, objective, and self-aware approach that can help you to identify credible sources and strengthen your conclusions.

In an academic context, critical thinking can help you to determine whether a source:

Is free from research bias
Provides evidence to support its findings
Considers alternative viewpoints

Outside of academia, critical thinking goes hand in hand with information literacy to help you form opinions rationally and engage independently and critically with popular media.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

Critical thinking can help you to identify reliable sources of information that you can cite in your research paper . It can also guide your own research methods and inform your own arguments.

Outside of academia, critical thinking can help you to be aware of both your own and others’ biases and assumptions.

Academic examples

However, when you compare the findings of the study with other current research, you determine that the results seem improbable. You analyse the paper again, consulting the sources it cites.

Nonacademic examples

You revisit the original review article. You notice that the words ‘sponsored content’ appear in small print under the article title. Based on this, you conclude that the review is advertising and is therefore not an unbiased source. Example: Poor critical thinking in a nonacademic context You support a candidate in an upcoming election. You visit an online news site affiliated with their political party and read an article that criticizes their opponent. The article claims that the opponent is inexperienced in politics. You accept this without evidence, because it fits your preconceptions about the opponent.

There is no single way to think critically. How you engage with information will depend on the type of source you’re using and the information you need.

When encountering information, ask:

Who is the author? Are they an expert in their field?
What do they say? Is their argument clear? Can you summarise it?
When did they say this? Is the source current?
Where is the information published? Is it an academic article? Is it a blog? A newspaper article?
Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence? Does it rely on opinion, speculation, or appeals to emotion ? Do they address alternative arguments?

Critical thinking also involves being aware of your own biases, not only those of others. When you make an argument or draw your own conclusions, you can ask similar questions about your own writing:

Am I only considering evidence that supports my preconceptions?
Is my argument expressed clearly and backed up with credible sources?
Would I be convinced by this argument coming from someone else?

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

Ask questions such as:

Who is the author? Are they an expert?
How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

A credible source should pass the CRAAP test and follow these guidelines:

The information should be up to date and current.
The author and publication should be a trusted authority on the subject you are researching.
The sources the author cited should be easy to find, clear, and unbiased.
For a web source, the URL and layout should signify that it is trustworthy.

Information literacy refers to a broad range of skills, including the ability to find, evaluate, and use sources of information effectively.

Being information literate means that you:

Know how to find credible sources
Use relevant sources to inform your research
Understand what constitutes plagiarism
Know how to cite your sources correctly

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

Ryan, E. (2022, September 25). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 24 June 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/working-sources/critical-thinking-meaning/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, how to paraphrase | step-by-step guide & examples, tertiary sources explained | quick guide & examples, how to quote | citing quotes in harvard & apa.

Events Calendar
Featured Story

Maryanne Wolf: Skimming While Reading Changes Critical Thinking and Empathy

Maryanne Wolf, renowned scholar of literacy and the brain, joins UCLA’s Graduate School of Education & Information Studies this fall…

Maryanne Wolf, renowned scholar of literacy and the brain, joins UCLA’s Graduate School of Education & Information Studies this fall as a visiting professor and director of the Center for Dyslexia, Diverse Learners, and Social Justice at UCLA Ed & IS . She will speak on her new book, Reader Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital World , on Thursday, Sept. 13 from 5-7 p.m. in UCLA’s Northwest Auditorium.

Wolf published a recent commentary in The Guardian titled, “Skim reading is the new normal. The effect on society is profound.” In it, she delineates the need for the development of a “bi-literate reading brain capable of the deepest forms of thought in either digital or traditional mediums . ” to navigate the complex and ephemeral landscape of digital information that surrounds humans today.

“A great deal hangs on it: the ability of citizens in a vibrant democracy to try on other perspectives and discern truth; the capacity of our children and grandchildren to appreciate and create beauty; and the ability in ourselves to go beyond our present glut of information to reach the knowledge and wisdom necessary to sustain a good society,” Wolf writes.

“As MIT scholar Sherry Turkle has written, we do not err as a society when we innovate, but when we ignore what we disrupt or diminish while innovating. In this hinge moment between print and digital cultures, society needs to confront what is diminishing in the expert reading circuit, what our children and older students are not developing, and what we can do about it.”

Wolf posits that the “’ collateral damage” of the digital culture is not only an issue of print vs digital or that it only affects the young.

“The subtle atrophy of critical analysis and empathy affects us all. It affects our ability to navigate a constant bombardment of information,” she writes. “It incentivizes a retreat to the most familiar silos of unchecked information, which require and receive no analysis, leaving us susceptible to false information and demagoguery.”

Wolf is the author of the critically acclaimed and best-selling Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain (HarperCollins), Tales of Literacy for the 21st Century: The Literary Agenda (Oxford University Press), and over 150 scientific publications. She lectures around the world, including multiple presentations on global literacy for disenfranchised children at the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

Wolf was the John DiBiaggio Professor of Citizenship and Public Service at Tufts University, and the Director of the Center for Reading and Language Development in the Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Study and Human Development. She is affiliated with the Dyslexia Center in the UCSF Medical School and with Curious Learning: A Global Literacy Initiative, which she co-founded.

Professor Wolf is the recipient of multiple research and teaching honors, including the Fulbright Fellowship, the American Psychological Association Teaching Award, a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study for the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford, the NICHD Innovative Research Award, and the highest awards by the International Dyslexia Association and the Australian Learning Disabilities Association.

Wolf is a sought-after resource for international media, including The Verge , The Hindu , Good E Reader, Free Beacon , and The San Francisco Chronicle , as well as various NPR interviews.

Admission to the Sept. 13 event is free; however, seating is limited and registration is required to attend. Complimentary parking is available in the Sunset Village parking structure.

To RSVP or for more information, visit this link .

To read “Skim reading is the new normal” in The Guardian, visit this link .

Photo by Ron Searcey

Department of Information Studies
Maryanne Wolf
UCLA Department of Education

Big-Picture Scenarios Guide Law Associates’ Critical Thinking

A deficit of critical thinking among law firm associates is now a recurrent theme in legal practice. This deficiency impairs an attorney’s individual effectiveness—and it also impacts law firms’ overall efficiency. As firms more frequently integrate sophisticated tools such as generative AI, they must take extra care to ensure associates using these programs assess their output critically.

How should law firms tackle a critical thinking crisis? It may be a challenge, but using strategies such as comprehensive guidance, experiential training, and data-driven feedback can go a long way.

Big Picture

A key step in fostering critical thinking is to give associates a comprehensive lay of the land in a given case. This requires helping them first understand the basic structure of a deal or litigation matter before immersing them in the business realities and context that shape legal outcomes.

Associates can get lost in the weeds of their day-to-day work assignments. Set them up for success by giving them a strong foundational understanding of the practice.

So much of what associates miss is due to a failure to ask “why?” Ensuring associates understand where their assignments fit in the overall deal or lawsuit will sharpen their ability to know when to pursue lines of inquiry.

Experiential Learning

The traditional “lunch and learn” training format, while convenient and well-intended, often fails to engage associates in meaningful learning. Training should be interactive and demanding, requiring active participation rather than passive absorption.

The best way to achieve this is to have associates complete mock assignments and receive feedback.

For transactional associates, this could mean reviewing and marking up agreements in anticipation of negotiation, or orchestrating a closing with timelines and deal documents. For litigators, it could involve writing sections of a motion to dismiss or drafting a meet-and-confer email to opposing counsel about a discovery dispute.

Firms should create a dynamic learning environment where associates can learn by doing—and make mistakes in a safe environment where they may question, discuss, and interact with both the material and their peers.

This method reinforces legal concepts, improves retention, and encourages critical thinking by immersing associates in real-world scenarios that require problem-solving and decision-making skills. Active participation can also build confidence in newer attorneys, which empowers them to handle their everyday tasks more effectively.

As much as possible, training should use actual deal documents, complex procedural histories, and messy fact patterns that typify actual client work.

Rather than rely on simplified or simulated scenarios, training should require new associates to grapple with the square peg, round hole problems that lawyers face every day. Mock assignments should require associates to synthesize different, imperfect, and often conflicting pieces of information—and then actually complete the assignment.

While reviewing mock deal documents and issue-spotting is better than having associates listen to a lecture, it’s still too passive and doesn’t allow associates the practice needed to develop their critical thinking muscles. Having associates work with these real deal documents to complete mock assignments is crucial.

Data-Driven Feedback

In addition to having associates go through mock assignments, firms should review those assignments and provide meaningful feedback. They should base their assessment structure on a consistent rubric and watch out for any gaps in crucial critical thinking skills.

While the rubric isn’t for the purpose of giving grades, it will help firms gather key data on associate performance and fairly inform evaluator feedback. Firms can use this rubric both to give individual associate feedback and to inform observations on trends across associate classes.

A sample rubric for these assessments could determine whether the associate:

● Followed specific instructions

● Applied the correct concept and adapted it for the given situation

● Identified all legal and practical issues

● Devised a unique business solution

● Used best practices (such as best drafting techniques and approach)

Feedback from partners and other supervisors should be constructive, focusing on encouraging questions, deeper analysis, and reflection.

Firms can also have associates self-assess their performance on the assignments. Comparing the associate self-assessments with instructors’ feedback will help create awareness for associates on how others are viewing their work.

Interactive group review sessions can be especially effective for fostering critical thinking. Partners or reviewers can discuss the assignment in small groups, weave in tailored feedback, war stories, and best practices, while encouraging associates to ask “why” and discuss gray areas.

These review sessions should nurture inquiry and critical thinking by encouraging associates to question assumptions, explore alternative solutions, and discuss business context.

Developing critical thinking skills in law firm associates isn’t just about enhancing individual capabilities—it’s also about keeping up with the demands of modern legal practice. By adopting these strategies, firms can position themselves as leaders and mentors to a new generation of lawyers.

This article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg Industry Group, Inc., the publisher of Bloomberg Law and Bloomberg Tax, or its owners.

Author Information

Patricia Libby is executive legal editor at AltaClaro, an experiential learning platform that bridges the training gap between law school and legal practice for large firm associates.

Write for Us: Author Guidelines

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Melanie Cohen at [email protected] ; Jessie Kokrda Kamens at [email protected]

Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:

Learn about bloomberg law.

AI-powered legal analytics, workflow tools and premium legal & business news.

Already a subscriber?

Call for Volunteers!
Our Team of Presenters
Fellows of the Foundation
Dr. Richard Paul
Dr. Linda Elder
Dr. Gerald Nosich
Contact Us - Office Information
Permission to Use Our Work
Create a CriticalThinking.Org Account
Contributions to the Foundation for Critical Thinking
Testimonials
Center for Critical Thinking
The National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking
International Center for the Assessment of Higher Order Thinking
Library of Critical Thinking Resources
Professional Development
Inservice Information Request Form
The State of Critical Thinking Today
Higher Education
K-12 Instruction
Customized Webinars and Online Courses for Faculty
Business & Professional Groups
The Center for Critical Thinking Community Online
Certification in the Paul-Elder Approach to Critical Thinking
Certification Online Course
Professional Development Model - College and University
Professional Development Model for K-12
Workshop Descriptions
Online Courses in Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking Training for Law Enforcement
Consulting for Leaders and Key Personnel at Your Organization
Critical Thinking Therapy
Conferences & Events
Upcoming Learning Opportunities
44th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Focal Session Descriptions
Daily Schedule
Presuppositions of the 44th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Recommended Reading
2024 Fall Academy on Critical Thinking
Transportation, Lodging, and Leisure
Call for Proposals
Academy Presuppositions
Conference Archives
43rd Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Guest Presentation Program
Register as an Ambassador
Testimonials from Past Attendees
Thank You to Our Donors
Presuppositions of the Conference
42nd Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Overview of Sessions (Flyer)
Presuppositions of the Annual International Conference
Testimonials from Past Conferences
41st Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Recommended Publications
Dedication to Our Donors
40th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Session Descriptions
Testimonials from Prior Conferences
International Critical Thinking Manifesto
Scholarships Available
39th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Travel and Lodging Info
FAQ & General Announcements
Focal and Plenary Session Descriptions
Program and Proceedings of the 39th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
The Venue: KU Leuven
Call for Critical Thinking Ambassadors
Conference Background Information
38th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Call for Ambassadors for Critical Thinking
Conference Focal Session Descriptions
Conference Concurrent Session Descriptions
Conference Roundtable Discussions
Conference Announcements and FAQ
Conference Program and Proceedings
Conference Daily Schedule
Conference Hotel Information
Conference Academic Credit
Conference Presuppositions
What Participants Have Said About the Conference
37th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking
Registration & Fees
FAQ and Announcements
Conference Presenters
37th Conference Flyer
Program and Proceedings of the 37th Conference
36th International Conference
Conference Sessions
Conference Flyer
Program and Proceedings
Academic Credit
35th International Conference
Conference Session Descriptions
Available Online Sessions
Bertrand Russell Distinguished Scholar - Daniel Ellsberg
35th International Conference Program
Concurrent Sessions
Posthumous Bertrand Russell Scholar
Hotel Information
Conference FAQs
Visiting UC Berkeley
34th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
Bertrand Russell Distinguished Scholar - Ralph Nader
Conference Concurrent Presenters
Conference Program
Conference Theme
Roundtable Discussions
Flyer for Bulletin Boards
33rd INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
33rd International Conference Program
33rd International Conference Sessions
33rd International Conference Presenters
The Bertrand Russell Distinguished Scholars Critical Thinking Conversations
33rd International Conference - Fees & Registration
33rd International Conference Concurrent Presenters
33rd International Conference - Hotel Information
33rd International Conference Flyer
32nd INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
32nd Annual Conference Sessions
32nd Annual Conference Presenter Information
32nd Conference Program
The Bertrand Russell Distinguished Scholars Critical Thinking Lecture Series
32nd Annual Conference Concurrent Presenters
32nd Annual Conference Academic Credit
31st INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
31st Conference Sessions
Comments about previous conferences
Conference Hotel (2011)
31st Concurrent Presenters
Registration Fees
31st International Conference
30th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CRITICAL THINKING
30th International Conference Theme
30th Conference Sessions
PreConference Sessions
30th Concurrent Presenters
30th Conference Presuppositions
Hilton Garden Inn
29th International Conference
29th Conference Theme
29th Conference Sessions
29th Preconference Sessions
29th Conference Concurrent Sessions
2008 International Conference on Critical Thinking
2008 Preconference Sessions (28th Intl. Conference)
2007 Conference on Critical Thinking (Main Page)
2007 Conference Theme and sessions
2007 Pre-Conference Workshops
2006 Annual International Conference (archived)
2006 International Conference Theme
2005 International Conference (archived)
Prior Conference Programs (Pre 2000)
Workshop Archives
Spring 2022 Online Workshops
2021 Online Workshops for Winter & Spring
2019 Seminar for Military and Intelligence Trainers and Instructors
Transportation, Lodging, and Recreation
Seminar Flyer
2013 Spring Workshops
Our Presenters
2013 Spring Workshops - Hotel Information
2013 Spring Workshops Flyer
2013 Spring Workshops - Schedule
Spring Workshop 2012
2012 Spring Workshop Strands
2012 Spring Workshop Flier
2011 Spring Workshop
Spring 2010 Workshop Strands
2009 Spring Workshops on Critical Thinking
2008 SPRING Workshops and Seminars on Critical Thinking
2008 Ethical Reasoning Workshop
2008 - On Richard Paul's Teaching Design
2008 Engineering Reasoning Workshop
2008 Academia sobre Formulando Preguntas Esenciales
Fellows Academy Archives
2017 Fall International Fellows Academy
4th International Fellows Academy - 2016
3rd International Fellows Academy
2nd International Fellows Academy
1st International Fellows Academy
Academy Archives
October 2019 Critical Thinking Academy for Educators and Administrators
Advanced Seminar: Oxford Tutorial
Recreational Group Activities
Limited Scholarships Available
September 2019 Critical Thinking Educators and Administrators Academy
2019 Critical Thinking Training for Trainers and Advanced Academy
Academy Flyer
Seattle, WA 2017 Spring Academy
San Diego, CA 2017 Spring Academy
2016 Spring Academy -- Washington D.C.
2016 Spring Academy -- Houston, TX
The 2nd International Academy on Critical Thinking (Oxford 2008)
2007 National Academy on Critical Thinking Testing and Assessment
2006 Cambridge Academy (archived)
2006 Cambridge Academy Theme
2006 Cambridge Academy Sessions
Accommodations at St. John's College
Assessment & Testing
A Model for the National Assessment of Higher Order Thinking
International Critical Thinking Essay Test
Online Critical Thinking Basic Concepts Test
Online Critical Thinking Basic Concepts Sample Test
Consequential Validity: Using Assessment to Drive Instruction
News & Announcements
Newest Pages Added to CriticalThinking.Org
Online Learning
Critical Thinking Online Courses
Critical Thinking Blog
2019 Blog Entries
2020 Blog Entries
2021 Blog Entries
2022 Blog Entries
2023 Blog Entries
Online Courses for Your Students
2023 Webinar Archives
2022 Webinar Archives
2021 Webinar Archive
2020 Webinar Archive
Guided Study Groups
Critical Thinking Channel on YouTube

Translate this page from English...

*Machine translated pages not guaranteed for accuracy. Click Here for our professional translations.

Critical Thinking: Where to Begin

For College and University Faculty
For College and University Students
For High School Teachers
For Jr. High School Teachers
For Elementary Teachers (Grades 4-6)
For Elementary Teachers (Kindergarten - 3rd Grade)
For Science and Engineering Instruction
For Business and Professional Development
For Nursing and Health Care
For Home Schooling and Home Study

If you are new to critical thinking or wish to deepen your conception of it, we recommend you review the content below and bookmark this page for future reference.

Our Conception of Critical Thinking...

"Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness..."

"Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fairminded way. People who think critically attempt, with consistent and conscious effort, to live rationally, reasonably, and empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked. They strive to diminish the power of their egocentric and sociocentric tendencies. They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking offers – concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking. They work diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual humility, intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and confidence in reason. They realize that no matter how skilled they are as thinkers, they can always improve their reasoning abilities and they will at times fall prey to mistakes in reasoning, human irrationality, prejudices, biases, distortions, uncritically accepted social rules and taboos, self-interest, and vested interest.

They strive to improve the world in whatever ways they can and contribute to a more rational, civilized society. At the same time, they recognize the complexities often inherent in doing so. They strive never to think simplistically about complicated issues and always to consider the rights and needs of relevant others. They recognize the complexities in developing as thinkers, and commit themselves to life-long practice toward self-improvement. They embody the Socratic principle: The unexamined life is not worth living , because they realize that many unexamined lives together result in an uncritical, unjust, dangerous world."

Why Critical Thinking?

The Problem:

Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so. But much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial, uninformed, or down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of our lives and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life. Excellence in thought, however, must be systematically cultivated.

A Brief Definition:

Critical thinking is the art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it. The Result:

A well-cultivated critical thinker:

raises vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely;
gathers and assesses relevant information, using abstract ideas to interpret it effectively;
comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards;
thinks openmindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and
communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems.

Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It requires rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem-solving abilities, and a commitment to overcoming our native egocentrism and sociocentrism. Read more about our concept of critical thinking .

The Essential Dimensions of Critical Thinking

Our conception of critical thinking is based on the substantive approach developed by Dr. Richard Paul and his colleagues at the Center and Foundation for Critical Thinking over multiple decades. It is relevant to every subject, discipline, and profession, and to reasoning through the problems of everyday life. It entails five essential dimensions of critical thinking:

At the left is an overview of the first three dimensions. In sum, the elements or structures of thought enable us to "take our thinking apart" and analyze it. The intellectual standards are used to assess and evaluate the elements. The intellectual traits are dispositions of mind embodied by the fairminded critical thinker. To cultivate the mind, we need command of these essential dimensions, and we need to consistently apply them as we think through the many problems and issues in our lives.

The Elements of Reasoning and Intellectual Standards

To learn more about the elements of thought and how to apply the intellectual standards, check out our interactive model. Simply click on the link below, scroll to the bottom of the page, and explore the model with your mouse.

Why the Analysis of Thinking Is Important If you want to think well, you must understand at least the rudiments of thought, the most basic structures out of which all thinking is made. You must learn how to take thinking apart. Analyzing the Logic of a Subject When we understand the elements of reasoning, we realize that all subjects, all disciplines, have a fundamental logic defined by the structures of thought embedded within them. Therefore, to lay bare a subject’s most fundamental logic, we should begin with these questions:

Going Deeper...

The Critical Thinking Bookstore

Our online bookstore houses numerous books and teacher's manuals , Thinker's Guides , videos , and other educational materials .

Learn From Our Fellows and Scholars

Watch our Event Calendar , which provides an overview of all upcoming conferences and academies hosted by the Foundation for Critical Thinking. Clicking an entry on the Event Calendar will bring up that event's details, and the option to register. For those interested in online learning, the Foundation offers accredited online courses in critical thinking for both educators and the general public, as well as an online test for evaluating basic comprehension of critical thinking concepts . We are in the process of developing more online learning tools and tests to offer the community.

Utilizing this Website

This website contains large amounts research and an online library of articles , both of which are freely available to the public. We also invite you to become a member of the Critical Thinking Community , where you will gain access to more tools and materials. If you cannot locate a resource on a specific topic or concept, try searching for it using our Search Tool . The Search Tool is at the upper-right of every page on the website.

Critical thinking definition

Critical thinking, as described by Oxford Languages, is the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement.

Active and skillful approach, evaluation, assessment, synthesis, and/or evaluation of information obtained from, or made by, observation, knowledge, reflection, acumen or conversation, as a guide to belief and action, requires the critical thinking process, which is why it's often used in education and academics.

Some even may view it as a backbone of modern thought.

However, it's a skill, and skills must be trained and encouraged to be used at its full potential.

People turn up to various approaches in improving their critical thinking, like:

Developing technical and problem-solving skills
Engaging in more active listening
Actively questioning their assumptions and beliefs
Seeking out more diversity of thought
Opening up their curiosity in an intellectual way etc.

Is critical thinking useful in writing?

Critical thinking can help in planning your paper and making it more concise, but it's not obvious at first. We carefully pinpointed some the questions you should ask yourself when boosting critical thinking in writing:

What information should be included?
Which information resources should the author look to?
What degree of technical knowledge should the report assume its audience has?
What is the most effective way to show information?
How should the report be organized?
How should it be designed?
What tone and level of language difficulty should the document have?

Usage of critical thinking comes down not only to the outline of your paper, it also begs the question: How can we use critical thinking solving problems in our writing's topic?

Let's say, you have a Powerpoint on how critical thinking can reduce poverty in the United States. You'll primarily have to define critical thinking for the viewers, as well as use a lot of critical thinking questions and synonyms to get them to be familiar with your methods and start the thinking process behind it.

Are there any services that can help me use more critical thinking?

We understand that it's difficult to learn how to use critical thinking more effectively in just one article, but our service is here to help.

We are a team specializing in writing essays and other assignments for college students and all other types of customers who need a helping hand in its making. We cover a great range of topics, offer perfect quality work, always deliver on time and aim to leave our customers completely satisfied with what they ordered.

The ordering process is fully online, and it goes as follows:

Select the topic and the deadline of your essay.
Provide us with any details, requirements, statements that should be emphasized or particular parts of the essay writing process you struggle with.
Leave the email address, where your completed order will be sent to.
Select your prefered payment type, sit back and relax!

With lots of experience on the market, professionally degreed essay writers , online 24/7 customer support and incredibly low prices, you won't find a service offering a better deal than ours.

Suggestions

About the dearth of critical thinking.

April 1, 2024

A key distinguishing feature between man/woman and the lower animals is the capacity to reason and fathom matters to a fairly objective extent. It is called critical thinking. It gives fillip to the coinage ‘homo sapiens’. At a higher level, it would be called ‘perception’; which then brings in the intuitive capacity of the human being, as spiritual entities, into the equation. The lower animals do not possess these qualities. They possess instincts.

In other words, the injunction ‘man, know thyself’ is meant to halt every person on his or her track, permitting moments to take in fresh air and admire the beauty of the natural environment entrusted to our care, and to generally reflect on key questions about life and existence. Questions such as ‘where have I come from?’, ‘why am I here on earth?’, ‘where do I go from here?’, ‘what or where is the source of the apparent order I perceive in nature? In seeking answers to these questions or puzzles of life, man must be sensitive to the dangers of dousing the drive with the delusionary and mass hallucinatory coinages of religious dogmas and doctrines fabricated over the ages.

Belief must be allowed to grow to become personal conviction. The doctrines handed down by parents and grand-parents must be subjected to critical analysis and questioning. There should be no mysteries about life, for as long as enlightenment exists about such subject matters. Each person must freely seek in order to find!

Nature and her orderliness give us constant hints about the Will of The Creator.

Understanding this Will of the Creator and aligning with it is man’s highest goal. The Natural Laws of creation which we have the inherent abilities to perceive represent the language of the Creator. When a bean seed is put in the suitable soil conditions, and sprouts after some days, it would never yield a harvest of yam, but beans.

You may also term it the law of ‘cause’ and ‘effect’. Some, rightly call it the law of karma. It is actually a law that calls to mind the need to accept responsibility, and be prepared to take reciprocal consequences over ones thoughts, words and deeds. No society can progress if it does not provide consequences for actions of her citizens. The consequences may simply be to consciously honour good behavior and punish bad behavior, without partiality.

Wherever this ability is subdued through false indoctrinations and other hallucinatory tactics of many spiritual highway men, man becomes a useful tool of the darkness, and brings the earth plane, as well as the immediate ethereal surroundings to the embrace of evil and decay. That is the main reason there is so much havoc and chaos upon the earth plane today.

Through the suffocating effects of this evil, man’s ability to perceive rightly also becomes severely subdued and hampered; and the roller coaster downfall of all things become the order of the day. All problems of mankind are caused by men and women themselves, therefore it is foolery to always seek to solve them through prayers and petitioning to God; we should rather take well measured steps to clear the mess by ourselves.

View all posts

Critical thinking

Barau, open grazing causes terrorism

Kano games of the throne – History repeating Itself

Unpacking the logic of labour union activism in Nigeria – Part 2

Mobile money, card as Africa’s access to global finance

Sogolo’s moral values and social change in Nigeria – Part 2

Kumuyi at 83: Beyond the preacher’s cassock

Unsung heroes: Celebrating fathers beyond father’s day

Multigenerational wealth: The power of documenting the past

National anthem: Deconstructing the military legacy – Part 3

Resource management and capacity development a major pathway to economic growth in Nigeria

Please enable javascript in your browser to visit this site..

Group trains students on critical thinking in Ondo

Questionstorm: Why critical thinking matters in Africa

IMAGES

Critical thinking
41+ Critical Thinking Examples (Definition + Practices)
February 08 2019
Critical thinking: how to help your students become better learners
The 2024 Post-Sona Critical Thinking Forum
February 08 2019

COMMENTS

The Guardian
We would like to show you a description here but the site won't allow us.
The big idea: the simple trick that can sabotage your critical thinking
The Guardian (USA) The big idea: the simple trick that can sabotage your critical thinking. 2024-05-21 - Amanda Montell. Since the moment I learned about the concept of the "thought-terminating cliche" I've been seeing them everywhere I look: in televised political debates, in flouncily stencilled motivational posters, in the hashtag ...
Critical Thinking: A Model of Intelligence for Solving Real-World
4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence. One definition of intelligence that directly addresses the question about intelligence and real-world problem solving comes from Nickerson (2020, p. 205): "the ability to learn, to reason well, to solve novel problems, and to deal effectively with novel problems—often unpredictable—that confront one in daily life."
Is Critical Thinking A Superpower In The AI Era?
Share to Linkedin. Critical thinking skills are crucial for AI. getty. AI, particularly generative AI, is having an immediate and dramatic impact on our lives, both personally and professionally ...
Defining Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcome our native egocentrism and sociocentrism.
What Are Critical Thinking Skills and Why Are They Important?
According to the University of the People in California, having critical thinking skills is important because they are [ 1 ]: Universal. Crucial for the economy. Essential for improving language and presentation skills. Very helpful in promoting creativity. Important for self-reflection.
Critical thinking
Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments in order to form a judgement by the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation. The application of critical thinking includes self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective habits of the mind; thus, a critical thinker is a person who practices the ...
What Is Critical Thinking?
Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment. To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources. Critical thinking skills help you to: Identify credible sources. Evaluate and respond to arguments.
What critical thinking is and how it's taught
In schools, critical thinking is mostly treated as a general skill that can be taught in a generic way. The academic load sure makes adding the teaching of critical thinking a challenge, let alone teaching the specific skills for each subject and area of knowledge. However, there is evidence that it's very difficult for students to transfer ...
The Guardian
EnglishРусский. EnglishРусский. EnglishРусский. EnglishРусский. EnglishРусский
What Is Critical Thinking?
Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyse information and form a judgement. To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources. Critical thinking skills help you to: Identify credible sources.
Maryanne Wolf: Skimming While Reading Changes Critical Thinking and Empathy
Wolf published a recent commentary in The Guardian titled, "Skim reading is the new normal. The effect on society is profound.". In it, she delineates the need for the development of a "bi-literate reading brain capable of the deepest forms of thought in either digital or traditional mediums. " to navigate the complex and ephemeral ...
The big idea: the simple trick that can sabotage your critical thinking
The Guardian Australia. The big idea: the simple trick that can sabotage your critical thinking. 2024-05-21 - Amanda Montell. Since the moment I learned about the concept of the "thought-terminating cliche" I've been seeing them everywhere I look: in televised political debates, in flouncily stencilled motivational posters, in the ...
Big-Picture Scenarios Guide Law Associates' Critical Thinking
A deficit of critical thinking among law firm associates is now a recurrent theme in legal practice. This deficiency impairs an attorney's individual effectiveness—and it also impacts law firms' overall efficiency. As firms more frequently integrate sophisticated tools such as generative AI, they must take extra care to ensure associates ...
Critical Thinking: Where to Begin
A Brief Definition: Critical thinking is the art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it. A well-cultivated critical thinker: communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems. Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking.
Critical thinking and our school system
Critical thinking is an intellectual habit that is urgently needed in Nigeria. Critical reasoning skills are required to navigate a world characterised by a rapid flow of information. They are ...
Perspective: Need for Critical Thinking in Police Training
Need for Critical Thinking in Police Training. By Michelle Ridlehoover. As you read this sentence, you hear the rapid-fire sound of gunshots in your building. The time it took to read that first sentence is about 5 seconds faster than the average perception-reaction of an officer deciding to shoot or to stop shooting. 1 Officers' response ...
About the dearth of critical thinking
About the dearth of critical thinking. Guardian Nigeria. April 1, 2024. Like all organs of the human body, if the faculty of critical reasoning is not regularly engaged into purposeful use by a ...
'Expose pupils to analytical, critical thinking'
An educational expert, Mrs. Ada Omoijiade, has tasked teachers to expose pupils to analytical thinking as the society is exposed to exceptional change and rapid technological advancement ...
Using Critical Thinking in Essays and other Assignments
Critical thinking, as described by Oxford Languages, is the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement. Active and skillful approach, evaluation, assessment, synthesis, and/or evaluation of information obtained from, or made by, observation, knowledge, reflection, acumen or conversation, as a guide to belief and action, requires the critical thinking process ...
Army launches curriculum on basic critical thinking, judgment
Unveiling the books, Buratai, who was represented by Chief of Policy and Plans (Army), Maj. Gen Chris Jemitola, said top military and management experts have rated critical thinking as the most ...
About the dearth of critical thinking
It is called critical thinking. It gives fillip to the coinage 'homo sapiens'. At a higher level, it would be called 'perception'; which then brings in the intuitive capacity of the human being, as spiritual entities, into the equation. The lower animals do not possess these qualities. They possess instincts.
The Death of Critical Thinking
The Death of Critical Thinking. fg_admin May 27, 2020. Critical thinking does not require intelligence so much as intellectual honesty. Of course intelligence matters, as it does with everything. But the most important factor is honesty. It's not just an honesty with others. It starts as an honesty with yourself.

The big idea: the simple trick that can sabotage your critical thinking

Further reading

Most viewed

Critical Thinking: A Model of Intelligence for Solving Real-World Problems

Dana S. Dunn

1. Introduction

2. The Problem with Using Standardized IQ Measures for Real-World Problems

3. Which Theories of Intelligence Are Relevant to the Question?

4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence

5. Pandemics: COVID-19 as a Consequential Real-World Problem

Reasoning by Analogy and Judging the Credibility of the Source of Information

6. Making Cost—Benefit Assessments for Actions That Would Slow the Spread of COVID-19

Analyzing Arguments to Determine Degree of Support for a Conclusion

7. Conclusions

Author Contributions

Institutional Review Board Statement

Informed Consent Statement

Conflicts of Interest

More From Forbes

Why Critical Thinking is Crucial for AI

How To Develop Critical Thinking Skills

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Key Benefits Of Critical Thinking in an AI-Centric World

Setting Yourself Apart With Critical Thinking

Join The Conversation

Forbes Community Guidelines

Have a language expert improve your writing

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Table of contents

Scribbr Citation Checker New

Academic examples

Nonacademic examples

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Have a thesis expert improve your writing

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Table of contents

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

Academic examples

Nonacademic examples

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Maryanne Wolf: Skimming While Reading Changes Critical Thinking and Empathy

Big-Picture Scenarios Guide Law Associates’ Critical Thinking

Big Picture

Experiential Learning

Data-Driven Feedback

Author Information

Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:

Already a subscriber?

Translate this page from English...

Critical Thinking: Where to Begin

Our Conception of Critical Thinking...

Why Critical Thinking?

The Essential Dimensions of Critical Thinking

The Elements of Reasoning and Intellectual Standards

Going Deeper...

Critical thinking definition

Is critical thinking useful in writing?

Are there any services that can help me use more critical thinking?

Suggestions

More Stories On Guardian

Barau, open grazing causes terrorism

Kano games of the throne – History repeating Itself

Unpacking the logic of labour union activism in Nigeria – Part 2

Mobile money, card as Africa’s access to global finance

Sogolo’s moral values and social change in Nigeria – Part 2

Kumuyi at 83: Beyond the preacher’s cassock

Unsung heroes: Celebrating fathers beyond father’s day

Multigenerational wealth: The power of documenting the past

National anthem: Deconstructing the military legacy – Part 3

Resource management and capacity development a major pathway to economic growth in Nigeria

Group trains students on critical thinking in Ondo

Questionstorm: Why critical thinking matters in Africa

IMAGES

COMMENTS