critical thinking and academic success

• Departments, units, and programs
• College leadership
• Diversity, equity, and inclusion
• Faculty and staff resources
• LAS Strategic Plan

• Apply to LAS
• Liberal arts & sciences majors
• LAS Insider blog
• Admissions FAQs
• Parent resources
• Pre-college summer programs

Quick Links

Request info

• Academic policies and standing
• Advising and support
• College distinctions
• Dates and deadlines
• Intercollegiate transfers
• LAS Lineup student newsletter
• Programs of study
• Scholarships
• Certificates
• Student emergencies

Student resources

• Access and Achievement Program
• Career services
• First-Year Experience
• Honors program
• International programs
• Internship opportunities
• Paul M. Lisnek LAS Hub
• Student research opportunities
• Expertise in LAS
• Research facilities and centers
• Dean's Distinguished Lecture series
• Alumni advice
• Alumni award programs
• Get involved
• LAS Alumni Council
• LAS@Work: Alumni careers
• Study Abroad Alumni Networks
• Update your information
• Nominate an alumnus for an LAS award
• Faculty honors
• The Quadrangle Online
• LAS News email newsletter archive
• LAS social media
• Media contact in the College of LAS
• LAS Landmark Day of Giving
• About giving to LAS
• Building projects
• Corporate engagement
• Faculty support
• Lincoln Scholars Initiative
• Impact of giving

Why is critical thinking important?

What do lawyers, accountants, teachers, and doctors all have in common?

What is critical thinking?

The Oxford English Dictionary defines critical thinking as “The objective, systematic, and rational analysis and evaluation of factual evidence in order to form a judgment on a subject, issue, etc.” Critical thinking involves the use of logic and reasoning to evaluate available facts and/or evidence to come to a conclusion about a certain subject or topic. We use critical thinking every day, from decision-making to problem-solving, in addition to thinking critically in an academic context!

Why is critical thinking important for academic success?

You may be asking “why is critical thinking important for students?” Critical thinking appears in a diverse set of disciplines and impacts students’ learning every day, regardless of major.

Critical thinking skills are often associated with the value of studying the humanities. In majors such as English, students will be presented with a certain text—whether it’s a novel, short story, essay, or even film—and will have to use textual evidence to make an argument and then defend their argument about what they’ve read. However, the importance of critical thinking does not only apply to the humanities. In the social sciences, an economics major , for example, will use what they’ve learned to figure out solutions to issues as varied as land and other natural resource use, to how much people should work, to how to develop human capital through education. Problem-solving and critical thinking go hand in hand. Biology is a popular major within LAS, and graduates of the biology program often pursue careers in the medical sciences. Doctors use critical thinking every day, tapping into the knowledge they acquired from studying the biological sciences to diagnose and treat different diseases and ailments.

Students in the College of LAS take many courses that require critical thinking before they graduate. You may be asked in an Economics class to use statistical data analysis to evaluate the impact on home improvement spending when the Fed increases interest rates (read more about real-world experience with Datathon ). If you’ve ever been asked “How often do you think about the Roman Empire?”, you may find yourself thinking about the Roman Empire more than you thought—maybe in an English course, where you’ll use text from Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra to make an argument about Roman imperial desire.  No matter what the context is, critical thinking will be involved in your academic life and can take form in many different ways.

The benefits of critical thinking in everyday life

Building better communication.

One of the most important life skills that students learn as early as elementary school is how to give a presentation. Many classes require students to give presentations, because being well-spoken is a key skill in effective communication. This is where critical thinking benefits come into play: using the skills you’ve learned, you’ll be able to gather the information needed for your presentation, narrow down what information is most relevant, and communicate it in an engaging way. 

Typically, the first step in creating a presentation is choosing a topic. For example, your professor might assign a presentation on the Gilded Age and provide a list of figures from the 1870s—1890s to choose from. You’ll use your critical thinking skills to narrow down your choices. You may ask yourself:

• What figure am I most familiar with?
• Who am I most interested in? 
• Will I have to do additional research? 

After choosing your topic, your professor will usually ask a guiding question to help you form a thesis: an argument that is backed up with evidence. Critical thinking benefits this process by allowing you to focus on the information that is most relevant in support of your argument. By focusing on the strongest evidence, you will communicate your thesis clearly.

Finally, once you’ve finished gathering information, you will begin putting your presentation together. Creating a presentation requires a balance of text and visuals. Graphs and tables are popular visuals in STEM-based projects, but digital images and graphics are effective as well. Critical thinking benefits this process because the right images and visuals create a more dynamic experience for the audience, giving them the opportunity to engage with the material.

Presentation skills go beyond the classroom. Students at the University of Illinois will often participate in summer internships to get professional experience before graduation. Many summer interns are required to present about their experience and what they learned at the end of the internship. Jobs frequently also require employees to create presentations of some kind—whether it’s an advertising pitch to win an account from a potential client, or quarterly reporting, giving a presentation is a life skill that directly relates to critical thinking. 

Fostering independence and confidence

An important life skill many people start learning as college students and then finessing once they enter the “adult world” is how to budget. There will be many different expenses to keep track of, including rent, bills, car payments, and groceries, just to name a few! After developing your critical thinking skills, you’ll put them to use to consider your salary and budget your expenses accordingly. Here’s an example:

• You earn a salary of $75,000 a year. Assume all amounts are before taxes.
• 1,800 x 12 = 21,600
• 75,000 – 21,600 = 53,400
• This leaves you with $53,400
• 320 x 12 = 3,840 a year
• 53,400-3,840= 49,560
• 726 x 12 = 8,712
• 49,560 – 8,712= 40,848
• You’re left with $40,848 for miscellaneous expenses. You use your critical thinking skills to decide what to do with your $40,848. You think ahead towards your retirement and decide to put $500 a month into a Roth IRA, leaving $34,848. Since you love coffee, you try to figure out if you can afford a daily coffee run. On average, a cup of coffee will cost you $7. 7 x 365 = $2,555 a year for coffee. 34,848 – 2,555 = 32,293
• You have $32,293 left. You will use your critical thinking skills to figure out how much you would want to put into savings, how much you want to save to treat yourself from time to time, and how much you want to put aside for emergency funds. With the benefits of critical thinking, you will be well-equipped to budget your lifestyle once you enter the working world.

Enhancing decision-making skills

Choosing the right university for you.

One of the biggest decisions you’ll make in your life is what college or university to go to. There are many factors to consider when making this decision, and critical thinking importance will come into play when determining these factors.

Many high school seniors apply to colleges with the hope of being accepted into a certain program, whether it’s biology, psychology, political science, English, or something else entirely. Some students apply with certain schools in mind due to overall rankings. Students also consider the campus a school is set in. While some universities such as the University of Illinois are nestled within college towns, New York University is right in Manhattan, in a big city setting. Some students dream of going to large universities, and other students prefer smaller schools. The diversity of a university’s student body is also a key consideration. For many 17- and 18-year-olds, college is a time to meet peers from diverse racial and socio-economic backgrounds and learn about life experiences different than one’s own.

With all these factors in mind, you’ll use critical thinking to decide which are most important to you—and which school is the right fit for you.

Develop your critical thinking skills at the University of Illinois

At the University of Illinois, not only will you learn how to think critically, but you will put critical thinking into practice. In the College of LAS, you can choose from 70+ majors where you will learn the importance and benefits of critical thinking skills. The College of Liberal Arts & Sciences at U of I offers a wide range of undergraduate and graduate programs in life, physical, and mathematical sciences; humanities; and social and behavioral sciences. No matter which program you choose, you will develop critical thinking skills as you go through your courses in the major of your choice. And in those courses, the first question your professors may ask you is, “What is the goal of critical thinking?” You will be able to respond with confidence that the goal of critical thinking is to help shape people into more informed, more thoughtful members of society.

With such a vast representation of disciplines, an education in the College of LAS will prepare you for a career where you will apply critical thinking skills to real life, both in and outside of the classroom, from your undergraduate experience to your professional career. If you’re interested in becoming a part of a diverse set of students and developing skills for lifelong success, apply to LAS today!

Read more first-hand stories from our amazing students at the LAS Insider blog .

• Privacy Notice
• Accessibility

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Part Two: You are the President and CEO of You

Thinking Critically and Creatively

Dr. andrew robert baker.

Critical and creative thinking skills are perhaps the most fundamental skills involved in making judgments and solving problems. They are some of the most important skills I have ever developed. I use them everyday and continue to work to improve them both.

The ability to think critically about a matter—to analyze a question, situation, or problem down to its most basic parts—is what helps us evaluate the accuracy and truthfulness of statements, claims, and information we read and hear. It is the sharp knife that, when honed, separates fact from fiction, honesty from lies, and the accurate from the misleading. We all use this skill to one degree or another almost every day. For example, we use critical thinking every day as we consider the latest consumer products and why one particular product is the best among its peers. Is it a quality product because a celebrity endorses it? Because a lot of other people may have used it? Because it is made by one company versus another? Or perhaps because it is made in one country or another? These are questions representative of critical thinking.

The academic setting demands more of us in terms of critical thinking than everyday life. It demands that we evaluate information and analyze a myriad of issues. It is the environment where our critical thinking skills can be the difference between success and failure. In this environment we must consider information in an analytical, critical manner. We must ask questions—What is the source of this information? Is this source an expert one and what makes it so? Are there multiple perspectives to consider on an issue? Do multiple sources agree or disagree on an issue? Does quality research substantiate information or opinion? Do I have any personal biases that may affect my consideration of this information? It is only through purposeful, frequent, intentional questioning such as this that we can sharpen our critical thinking skills and improve as students, learners, and researchers. Developing my critical thinking skills over a twenty year period as a student in higher education enabled me to complete a quantitative dissertation, including analyzing research and completing statistical analysis, and earning my Ph.D. in 2014.

While critical thinking analyzes information and roots out the true nature and facets of problems, it is creative thinking that drives progress forward when it comes to solving these problems. Exceptional creative thinkers are people that invent new solutions to existing problems that do not rely on past or current solutions. They are the ones who invent solution C when everyone else is still arguing between A and B. Creative thinking skills involve using strategies to clear the mind so that our thoughts and ideas can transcend the current limitations of a problem and allow us to see beyond barriers that prevent new solutions from being found.

Brainstorming is the simplest example of intentional creative thinking that most people have tried at least once. With the quick generation of many ideas at once we can block-out our brain’s natural tendency to limit our solution-generating abilities so we can access and combine many possible solutions/thoughts and invent new ones. It is sort of like sprinting through a race’s finish line only to find there is new track on the other side and we can keep going, if we choose. As with critical thinking, higher education both demands creative thinking from us and is the perfect place to practice and develop the skill. Everything from word problems in a math class, to opinion or persuasive speeches and papers, call upon our creative thinking skills to generate new solutions and perspectives in response to our professor’s demands. Creative thinking skills ask questions such as—What if? Why not? What else is out there? Can I combine perspectives/solutions? What is something no one else has brought-up? What is being forgotten/ignored? What about ______? It is the opening of doors and options that follows problem-identification.

Consider an assignment that required you to compare two different authors on the topic of education and select and defend one as better. Now add to this scenario that your professor clearly prefers one author over the other. While critical thinking can get you as far as identifying the similarities and differences between these authors and evaluating their merits, it is creative thinking that you must use if you wish to challenge your professor’s opinion and invent new perspectives on the authors that have not previously been considered.

So, what can we do to develop our critical and creative thinking skills? Although many students may dislike it, group work is an excellent way to develop our thinking skills. Many times I have heard from students their disdain for working in groups based on scheduling, varied levels of commitment to the group or project, and personality conflicts too, of course. True—it’s not always easy, but that is why it is so effective. When we work collaboratively on a project or problem we bring many brains to bear on a subject. These different brains will naturally develop varied ways of solving or explaining problems and examining information. To the observant individual we see that this places us in a constant state of back and forth critical/creative thinking modes.

For example, in group work we are simultaneously analyzing information and generating solutions on our own, while challenging other’s analyses/ideas and responding to challenges to our own analyses/ideas. This is part of why students tend to avoid group work—it challenges us as thinkers and forces us to analyze others while defending ourselves, which is not something we are used to or comfortable with as most of our educational experiences involve solo work. Your professors know this—that’s why we assign it—to help you grow as students, learners, and thinkers!

Foundations of Academic Success: Words of Wisdom Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Priester is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a widely accepted educational goal. Its definition is contested, but the competing definitions can be understood as differing conceptions of the same basic concept: careful thinking directed to a goal. Conceptions differ with respect to the scope of such thinking, the type of goal, the criteria and norms for thinking carefully, and the thinking components on which they focus. Its adoption as an educational goal has been recommended on the basis of respect for students’ autonomy and preparing students for success in life and for democratic citizenship. “Critical thinkers” have the dispositions and abilities that lead them to think critically when appropriate. The abilities can be identified directly; the dispositions indirectly, by considering what factors contribute to or impede exercise of the abilities. Standardized tests have been developed to assess the degree to which a person possesses such dispositions and abilities. Educational intervention has been shown experimentally to improve them, particularly when it includes dialogue, anchored instruction, and mentoring. Controversies have arisen over the generalizability of critical thinking across domains, over alleged bias in critical thinking theories and instruction, and over the relationship of critical thinking to other types of thinking.

2.1 Dewey’s Three Main Examples

2.2 dewey’s other examples, 2.3 further examples, 2.4 non-examples, 3. the definition of critical thinking, 4. its value, 5. the process of thinking critically, 6. components of the process, 7. contributory dispositions and abilities, 8.1 initiating dispositions, 8.2 internal dispositions, 9. critical thinking abilities, 10. required knowledge, 11. educational methods, 12.1 the generalizability of critical thinking, 12.2 bias in critical thinking theory and pedagogy, 12.3 relationship of critical thinking to other types of thinking, other internet resources, related entries.

Use of the term ‘critical thinking’ to describe an educational goal goes back to the American philosopher John Dewey (1910), who more commonly called it ‘reflective thinking’. He defined it as

active, persistent and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it, and the further conclusions to which it tends. (Dewey 1910: 6; 1933: 9)

and identified a habit of such consideration with a scientific attitude of mind. His lengthy quotations of Francis Bacon, John Locke, and John Stuart Mill indicate that he was not the first person to propose development of a scientific attitude of mind as an educational goal.

In the 1930s, many of the schools that participated in the Eight-Year Study of the Progressive Education Association (Aikin 1942) adopted critical thinking as an educational goal, for whose achievement the study’s Evaluation Staff developed tests (Smith, Tyler, & Evaluation Staff 1942). Glaser (1941) showed experimentally that it was possible to improve the critical thinking of high school students. Bloom’s influential taxonomy of cognitive educational objectives (Bloom et al. 1956) incorporated critical thinking abilities. Ennis (1962) proposed 12 aspects of critical thinking as a basis for research on the teaching and evaluation of critical thinking ability.

Since 1980, an annual international conference in California on critical thinking and educational reform has attracted tens of thousands of educators from all levels of education and from many parts of the world. Also since 1980, the state university system in California has required all undergraduate students to take a critical thinking course. Since 1983, the Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking has sponsored sessions in conjunction with the divisional meetings of the American Philosophical Association (APA). In 1987, the APA’s Committee on Pre-College Philosophy commissioned a consensus statement on critical thinking for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (Facione 1990a). Researchers have developed standardized tests of critical thinking abilities and dispositions; for details, see the Supplement on Assessment . Educational jurisdictions around the world now include critical thinking in guidelines for curriculum and assessment.

For details on this history, see the Supplement on History .

2. Examples and Non-Examples

Before considering the definition of critical thinking, it will be helpful to have in mind some examples of critical thinking, as well as some examples of kinds of thinking that would apparently not count as critical thinking.

Dewey (1910: 68–71; 1933: 91–94) takes as paradigms of reflective thinking three class papers of students in which they describe their thinking. The examples range from the everyday to the scientific.

Transit : “The other day, when I was down town on 16th Street, a clock caught my eye. I saw that the hands pointed to 12:20. This suggested that I had an engagement at 124th Street, at one o’clock. I reasoned that as it had taken me an hour to come down on a surface car, I should probably be twenty minutes late if I returned the same way. I might save twenty minutes by a subway express. But was there a station near? If not, I might lose more than twenty minutes in looking for one. Then I thought of the elevated, and I saw there was such a line within two blocks. But where was the station? If it were several blocks above or below the street I was on, I should lose time instead of gaining it. My mind went back to the subway express as quicker than the elevated; furthermore, I remembered that it went nearer than the elevated to the part of 124th Street I wished to reach, so that time would be saved at the end of the journey. I concluded in favor of the subway, and reached my destination by one o’clock.” (Dewey 1910: 68–69; 1933: 91–92)

Ferryboat : “Projecting nearly horizontally from the upper deck of the ferryboat on which I daily cross the river is a long white pole, having a gilded ball at its tip. It suggested a flagpole when I first saw it; its color, shape, and gilded ball agreed with this idea, and these reasons seemed to justify me in this belief. But soon difficulties presented themselves. The pole was nearly horizontal, an unusual position for a flagpole; in the next place, there was no pulley, ring, or cord by which to attach a flag; finally, there were elsewhere on the boat two vertical staffs from which flags were occasionally flown. It seemed probable that the pole was not there for flag-flying.

“I then tried to imagine all possible purposes of the pole, and to consider for which of these it was best suited: (a) Possibly it was an ornament. But as all the ferryboats and even the tugboats carried poles, this hypothesis was rejected. (b) Possibly it was the terminal of a wireless telegraph. But the same considerations made this improbable. Besides, the more natural place for such a terminal would be the highest part of the boat, on top of the pilot house. (c) Its purpose might be to point out the direction in which the boat is moving.

“In support of this conclusion, I discovered that the pole was lower than the pilot house, so that the steersman could easily see it. Moreover, the tip was enough higher than the base, so that, from the pilot’s position, it must appear to project far out in front of the boat. Moreover, the pilot being near the front of the boat, he would need some such guide as to its direction. Tugboats would also need poles for such a purpose. This hypothesis was so much more probable than the others that I accepted it. I formed the conclusion that the pole was set up for the purpose of showing the pilot the direction in which the boat pointed, to enable him to steer correctly.” (Dewey 1910: 69–70; 1933: 92–93)

Bubbles : “In washing tumblers in hot soapsuds and placing them mouth downward on a plate, bubbles appeared on the outside of the mouth of the tumblers and then went inside. Why? The presence of bubbles suggests air, which I note must come from inside the tumbler. I see that the soapy water on the plate prevents escape of the air save as it may be caught in bubbles. But why should air leave the tumbler? There was no substance entering to force it out. It must have expanded. It expands by increase of heat, or by decrease of pressure, or both. Could the air have become heated after the tumbler was taken from the hot suds? Clearly not the air that was already entangled in the water. If heated air was the cause, cold air must have entered in transferring the tumblers from the suds to the plate. I test to see if this supposition is true by taking several more tumblers out. Some I shake so as to make sure of entrapping cold air in them. Some I take out holding mouth downward in order to prevent cold air from entering. Bubbles appear on the outside of every one of the former and on none of the latter. I must be right in my inference. Air from the outside must have been expanded by the heat of the tumbler, which explains the appearance of the bubbles on the outside. But why do they then go inside? Cold contracts. The tumbler cooled and also the air inside it. Tension was removed, and hence bubbles appeared inside. To be sure of this, I test by placing a cup of ice on the tumbler while the bubbles are still forming outside. They soon reverse” (Dewey 1910: 70–71; 1933: 93–94).

Dewey (1910, 1933) sprinkles his book with other examples of critical thinking. We will refer to the following.

Weather : A man on a walk notices that it has suddenly become cool, thinks that it is probably going to rain, looks up and sees a dark cloud obscuring the sun, and quickens his steps (1910: 6–10; 1933: 9–13).

Disorder : A man finds his rooms on his return to them in disorder with his belongings thrown about, thinks at first of burglary as an explanation, then thinks of mischievous children as being an alternative explanation, then looks to see whether valuables are missing, and discovers that they are (1910: 82–83; 1933: 166–168).

Typhoid : A physician diagnosing a patient whose conspicuous symptoms suggest typhoid avoids drawing a conclusion until more data are gathered by questioning the patient and by making tests (1910: 85–86; 1933: 170).

Blur : A moving blur catches our eye in the distance, we ask ourselves whether it is a cloud of whirling dust or a tree moving its branches or a man signaling to us, we think of other traits that should be found on each of those possibilities, and we look and see if those traits are found (1910: 102, 108; 1933: 121, 133).

Suction pump : In thinking about the suction pump, the scientist first notes that it will draw water only to a maximum height of 33 feet at sea level and to a lesser maximum height at higher elevations, selects for attention the differing atmospheric pressure at these elevations, sets up experiments in which the air is removed from a vessel containing water (when suction no longer works) and in which the weight of air at various levels is calculated, compares the results of reasoning about the height to which a given weight of air will allow a suction pump to raise water with the observed maximum height at different elevations, and finally assimilates the suction pump to such apparently different phenomena as the siphon and the rising of a balloon (1910: 150–153; 1933: 195–198).

Diamond : A passenger in a car driving in a diamond lane reserved for vehicles with at least one passenger notices that the diamond marks on the pavement are far apart in some places and close together in others. Why? The driver suggests that the reason may be that the diamond marks are not needed where there is a solid double line separating the diamond lane from the adjoining lane, but are needed when there is a dotted single line permitting crossing into the diamond lane. Further observation confirms that the diamonds are close together when a dotted line separates the diamond lane from its neighbour, but otherwise far apart.

Rash : A woman suddenly develops a very itchy red rash on her throat and upper chest. She recently noticed a mark on the back of her right hand, but was not sure whether the mark was a rash or a scrape. She lies down in bed and thinks about what might be causing the rash and what to do about it. About two weeks before, she began taking blood pressure medication that contained a sulfa drug, and the pharmacist had warned her, in view of a previous allergic reaction to a medication containing a sulfa drug, to be on the alert for an allergic reaction; however, she had been taking the medication for two weeks with no such effect. The day before, she began using a new cream on her neck and upper chest; against the new cream as the cause was mark on the back of her hand, which had not been exposed to the cream. She began taking probiotics about a month before. She also recently started new eye drops, but she supposed that manufacturers of eye drops would be careful not to include allergy-causing components in the medication. The rash might be a heat rash, since she recently was sweating profusely from her upper body. Since she is about to go away on a short vacation, where she would not have access to her usual physician, she decides to keep taking the probiotics and using the new eye drops but to discontinue the blood pressure medication and to switch back to the old cream for her neck and upper chest. She forms a plan to consult her regular physician on her return about the blood pressure medication.

Candidate : Although Dewey included no examples of thinking directed at appraising the arguments of others, such thinking has come to be considered a kind of critical thinking. We find an example of such thinking in the performance task on the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+), which its sponsoring organization describes as

a performance-based assessment that provides a measure of an institution’s contribution to the development of critical-thinking and written communication skills of its students. (Council for Aid to Education 2017)

A sample task posted on its website requires the test-taker to write a report for public distribution evaluating a fictional candidate’s policy proposals and their supporting arguments, using supplied background documents, with a recommendation on whether to endorse the candidate.

Immediate acceptance of an idea that suggests itself as a solution to a problem (e.g., a possible explanation of an event or phenomenon, an action that seems likely to produce a desired result) is “uncritical thinking, the minimum of reflection” (Dewey 1910: 13). On-going suspension of judgment in the light of doubt about a possible solution is not critical thinking (Dewey 1910: 108). Critique driven by a dogmatically held political or religious ideology is not critical thinking; thus Paulo Freire (1968 [1970]) is using the term (e.g., at 1970: 71, 81, 100, 146) in a more politically freighted sense that includes not only reflection but also revolutionary action against oppression. Derivation of a conclusion from given data using an algorithm is not critical thinking.

What is critical thinking? There are many definitions. Ennis (2016) lists 14 philosophically oriented scholarly definitions and three dictionary definitions. Following Rawls (1971), who distinguished his conception of justice from a utilitarian conception but regarded them as rival conceptions of the same concept, Ennis maintains that the 17 definitions are different conceptions of the same concept. Rawls articulated the shared concept of justice as

a characteristic set of principles for assigning basic rights and duties and for determining… the proper distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation. (Rawls 1971: 5)

Bailin et al. (1999b) claim that, if one considers what sorts of thinking an educator would take not to be critical thinking and what sorts to be critical thinking, one can conclude that educators typically understand critical thinking to have at least three features.

• It is done for the purpose of making up one’s mind about what to believe or do.
• The person engaging in the thinking is trying to fulfill standards of adequacy and accuracy appropriate to the thinking.
• The thinking fulfills the relevant standards to some threshold level.

One could sum up the core concept that involves these three features by saying that critical thinking is careful goal-directed thinking. This core concept seems to apply to all the examples of critical thinking described in the previous section. As for the non-examples, their exclusion depends on construing careful thinking as excluding jumping immediately to conclusions, suspending judgment no matter how strong the evidence, reasoning from an unquestioned ideological or religious perspective, and routinely using an algorithm to answer a question.

If the core of critical thinking is careful goal-directed thinking, conceptions of it can vary according to its presumed scope, its presumed goal, one’s criteria and threshold for being careful, and the thinking component on which one focuses. As to its scope, some conceptions (e.g., Dewey 1910, 1933) restrict it to constructive thinking on the basis of one’s own observations and experiments, others (e.g., Ennis 1962; Fisher & Scriven 1997; Johnson 1992) to appraisal of the products of such thinking. Ennis (1991) and Bailin et al. (1999b) take it to cover both construction and appraisal. As to its goal, some conceptions restrict it to forming a judgment (Dewey 1910, 1933; Lipman 1987; Facione 1990a). Others allow for actions as well as beliefs as the end point of a process of critical thinking (Ennis 1991; Bailin et al. 1999b). As to the criteria and threshold for being careful, definitions vary in the term used to indicate that critical thinking satisfies certain norms: “intellectually disciplined” (Scriven & Paul 1987), “reasonable” (Ennis 1991), “skillful” (Lipman 1987), “skilled” (Fisher & Scriven 1997), “careful” (Bailin & Battersby 2009). Some definitions specify these norms, referring variously to “consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends” (Dewey 1910, 1933); “the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning” (Glaser 1941); “conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication” (Scriven & Paul 1987); the requirement that “it is sensitive to context, relies on criteria, and is self-correcting” (Lipman 1987); “evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations” (Facione 1990a); and “plus-minus considerations of the product in terms of appropriate standards (or criteria)” (Johnson 1992). Stanovich and Stanovich (2010) propose to ground the concept of critical thinking in the concept of rationality, which they understand as combining epistemic rationality (fitting one’s beliefs to the world) and instrumental rationality (optimizing goal fulfillment); a critical thinker, in their view, is someone with “a propensity to override suboptimal responses from the autonomous mind” (2010: 227). These variant specifications of norms for critical thinking are not necessarily incompatible with one another, and in any case presuppose the core notion of thinking carefully. As to the thinking component singled out, some definitions focus on suspension of judgment during the thinking (Dewey 1910; McPeck 1981), others on inquiry while judgment is suspended (Bailin & Battersby 2009, 2021), others on the resulting judgment (Facione 1990a), and still others on responsiveness to reasons (Siegel 1988). Kuhn (2019) takes critical thinking to be more a dialogic practice of advancing and responding to arguments than an individual ability.

In educational contexts, a definition of critical thinking is a “programmatic definition” (Scheffler 1960: 19). It expresses a practical program for achieving an educational goal. For this purpose, a one-sentence formulaic definition is much less useful than articulation of a critical thinking process, with criteria and standards for the kinds of thinking that the process may involve. The real educational goal is recognition, adoption and implementation by students of those criteria and standards. That adoption and implementation in turn consists in acquiring the knowledge, abilities and dispositions of a critical thinker.

Conceptions of critical thinking generally do not include moral integrity as part of the concept. Dewey, for example, took critical thinking to be the ultimate intellectual goal of education, but distinguished it from the development of social cooperation among school children, which he took to be the central moral goal. Ennis (1996, 2011) added to his previous list of critical thinking dispositions a group of dispositions to care about the dignity and worth of every person, which he described as a “correlative” (1996) disposition without which critical thinking would be less valuable and perhaps harmful. An educational program that aimed at developing critical thinking but not the correlative disposition to care about the dignity and worth of every person, he asserted, “would be deficient and perhaps dangerous” (Ennis 1996: 172).

Dewey thought that education for reflective thinking would be of value to both the individual and society; recognition in educational practice of the kinship to the scientific attitude of children’s native curiosity, fertile imagination and love of experimental inquiry “would make for individual happiness and the reduction of social waste” (Dewey 1910: iii). Schools participating in the Eight-Year Study took development of the habit of reflective thinking and skill in solving problems as a means to leading young people to understand, appreciate and live the democratic way of life characteristic of the United States (Aikin 1942: 17–18, 81). Harvey Siegel (1988: 55–61) has offered four considerations in support of adopting critical thinking as an educational ideal. (1) Respect for persons requires that schools and teachers honour students’ demands for reasons and explanations, deal with students honestly, and recognize the need to confront students’ independent judgment; these requirements concern the manner in which teachers treat students. (2) Education has the task of preparing children to be successful adults, a task that requires development of their self-sufficiency. (3) Education should initiate children into the rational traditions in such fields as history, science and mathematics. (4) Education should prepare children to become democratic citizens, which requires reasoned procedures and critical talents and attitudes. To supplement these considerations, Siegel (1988: 62–90) responds to two objections: the ideology objection that adoption of any educational ideal requires a prior ideological commitment and the indoctrination objection that cultivation of critical thinking cannot escape being a form of indoctrination.

Despite the diversity of our 11 examples, one can recognize a common pattern. Dewey analyzed it as consisting of five phases:

• suggestions , in which the mind leaps forward to a possible solution;
• an intellectualization of the difficulty or perplexity into a problem to be solved, a question for which the answer must be sought;
• the use of one suggestion after another as a leading idea, or hypothesis , to initiate and guide observation and other operations in collection of factual material;
• the mental elaboration of the idea or supposition as an idea or supposition ( reasoning , in the sense on which reasoning is a part, not the whole, of inference); and
• testing the hypothesis by overt or imaginative action. (Dewey 1933: 106–107; italics in original)

The process of reflective thinking consisting of these phases would be preceded by a perplexed, troubled or confused situation and followed by a cleared-up, unified, resolved situation (Dewey 1933: 106). The term ‘phases’ replaced the term ‘steps’ (Dewey 1910: 72), thus removing the earlier suggestion of an invariant sequence. Variants of the above analysis appeared in (Dewey 1916: 177) and (Dewey 1938: 101–119).

The variant formulations indicate the difficulty of giving a single logical analysis of such a varied process. The process of critical thinking may have a spiral pattern, with the problem being redefined in the light of obstacles to solving it as originally formulated. For example, the person in Transit might have concluded that getting to the appointment at the scheduled time was impossible and have reformulated the problem as that of rescheduling the appointment for a mutually convenient time. Further, defining a problem does not always follow after or lead immediately to an idea of a suggested solution. Nor should it do so, as Dewey himself recognized in describing the physician in Typhoid as avoiding any strong preference for this or that conclusion before getting further information (Dewey 1910: 85; 1933: 170). People with a hypothesis in mind, even one to which they have a very weak commitment, have a so-called “confirmation bias” (Nickerson 1998): they are likely to pay attention to evidence that confirms the hypothesis and to ignore evidence that counts against it or for some competing hypothesis. Detectives, intelligence agencies, and investigators of airplane accidents are well advised to gather relevant evidence systematically and to postpone even tentative adoption of an explanatory hypothesis until the collected evidence rules out with the appropriate degree of certainty all but one explanation. Dewey’s analysis of the critical thinking process can be faulted as well for requiring acceptance or rejection of a possible solution to a defined problem, with no allowance for deciding in the light of the available evidence to suspend judgment. Further, given the great variety of kinds of problems for which reflection is appropriate, there is likely to be variation in its component events. Perhaps the best way to conceptualize the critical thinking process is as a checklist whose component events can occur in a variety of orders, selectively, and more than once. These component events might include (1) noticing a difficulty, (2) defining the problem, (3) dividing the problem into manageable sub-problems, (4) formulating a variety of possible solutions to the problem or sub-problem, (5) determining what evidence is relevant to deciding among possible solutions to the problem or sub-problem, (6) devising a plan of systematic observation or experiment that will uncover the relevant evidence, (7) carrying out the plan of systematic observation or experimentation, (8) noting the results of the systematic observation or experiment, (9) gathering relevant testimony and information from others, (10) judging the credibility of testimony and information gathered from others, (11) drawing conclusions from gathered evidence and accepted testimony, and (12) accepting a solution that the evidence adequately supports (cf. Hitchcock 2017: 485).

Checklist conceptions of the process of critical thinking are open to the objection that they are too mechanical and procedural to fit the multi-dimensional and emotionally charged issues for which critical thinking is urgently needed (Paul 1984). For such issues, a more dialectical process is advocated, in which competing relevant world views are identified, their implications explored, and some sort of creative synthesis attempted.

If one considers the critical thinking process illustrated by the 11 examples, one can identify distinct kinds of mental acts and mental states that form part of it. To distinguish, label and briefly characterize these components is a useful preliminary to identifying abilities, skills, dispositions, attitudes, habits and the like that contribute causally to thinking critically. Identifying such abilities and habits is in turn a useful preliminary to setting educational goals. Setting the goals is in its turn a useful preliminary to designing strategies for helping learners to achieve the goals and to designing ways of measuring the extent to which learners have done so. Such measures provide both feedback to learners on their achievement and a basis for experimental research on the effectiveness of various strategies for educating people to think critically. Let us begin, then, by distinguishing the kinds of mental acts and mental events that can occur in a critical thinking process.

• Observing : One notices something in one’s immediate environment (sudden cooling of temperature in Weather , bubbles forming outside a glass and then going inside in Bubbles , a moving blur in the distance in Blur , a rash in Rash ). Or one notes the results of an experiment or systematic observation (valuables missing in Disorder , no suction without air pressure in Suction pump )
• Feeling : One feels puzzled or uncertain about something (how to get to an appointment on time in Transit , why the diamonds vary in spacing in Diamond ). One wants to resolve this perplexity. One feels satisfaction once one has worked out an answer (to take the subway express in Transit , diamonds closer when needed as a warning in Diamond ).
• Wondering : One formulates a question to be addressed (why bubbles form outside a tumbler taken from hot water in Bubbles , how suction pumps work in Suction pump , what caused the rash in Rash ).
• Imagining : One thinks of possible answers (bus or subway or elevated in Transit , flagpole or ornament or wireless communication aid or direction indicator in Ferryboat , allergic reaction or heat rash in Rash ).
• Inferring : One works out what would be the case if a possible answer were assumed (valuables missing if there has been a burglary in Disorder , earlier start to the rash if it is an allergic reaction to a sulfa drug in Rash ). Or one draws a conclusion once sufficient relevant evidence is gathered (take the subway in Transit , burglary in Disorder , discontinue blood pressure medication and new cream in Rash ).
• Knowledge : One uses stored knowledge of the subject-matter to generate possible answers or to infer what would be expected on the assumption of a particular answer (knowledge of a city’s public transit system in Transit , of the requirements for a flagpole in Ferryboat , of Boyle’s law in Bubbles , of allergic reactions in Rash ).
• Experimenting : One designs and carries out an experiment or a systematic observation to find out whether the results deduced from a possible answer will occur (looking at the location of the flagpole in relation to the pilot’s position in Ferryboat , putting an ice cube on top of a tumbler taken from hot water in Bubbles , measuring the height to which a suction pump will draw water at different elevations in Suction pump , noticing the spacing of diamonds when movement to or from a diamond lane is allowed in Diamond ).
• Consulting : One finds a source of information, gets the information from the source, and makes a judgment on whether to accept it. None of our 11 examples include searching for sources of information. In this respect they are unrepresentative, since most people nowadays have almost instant access to information relevant to answering any question, including many of those illustrated by the examples. However, Candidate includes the activities of extracting information from sources and evaluating its credibility.
• Identifying and analyzing arguments : One notices an argument and works out its structure and content as a preliminary to evaluating its strength. This activity is central to Candidate . It is an important part of a critical thinking process in which one surveys arguments for various positions on an issue.
• Judging : One makes a judgment on the basis of accumulated evidence and reasoning, such as the judgment in Ferryboat that the purpose of the pole is to provide direction to the pilot.
• Deciding : One makes a decision on what to do or on what policy to adopt, as in the decision in Transit to take the subway.

By definition, a person who does something voluntarily is both willing and able to do that thing at that time. Both the willingness and the ability contribute causally to the person’s action, in the sense that the voluntary action would not occur if either (or both) of these were lacking. For example, suppose that one is standing with one’s arms at one’s sides and one voluntarily lifts one’s right arm to an extended horizontal position. One would not do so if one were unable to lift one’s arm, if for example one’s right side was paralyzed as the result of a stroke. Nor would one do so if one were unwilling to lift one’s arm, if for example one were participating in a street demonstration at which a white supremacist was urging the crowd to lift their right arm in a Nazi salute and one were unwilling to express support in this way for the racist Nazi ideology. The same analysis applies to a voluntary mental process of thinking critically. It requires both willingness and ability to think critically, including willingness and ability to perform each of the mental acts that compose the process and to coordinate those acts in a sequence that is directed at resolving the initiating perplexity.

Consider willingness first. We can identify causal contributors to willingness to think critically by considering factors that would cause a person who was able to think critically about an issue nevertheless not to do so (Hamby 2014). For each factor, the opposite condition thus contributes causally to willingness to think critically on a particular occasion. For example, people who habitually jump to conclusions without considering alternatives will not think critically about issues that arise, even if they have the required abilities. The contrary condition of willingness to suspend judgment is thus a causal contributor to thinking critically.

Now consider ability. In contrast to the ability to move one’s arm, which can be completely absent because a stroke has left the arm paralyzed, the ability to think critically is a developed ability, whose absence is not a complete absence of ability to think but absence of ability to think well. We can identify the ability to think well directly, in terms of the norms and standards for good thinking. In general, to be able do well the thinking activities that can be components of a critical thinking process, one needs to know the concepts and principles that characterize their good performance, to recognize in particular cases that the concepts and principles apply, and to apply them. The knowledge, recognition and application may be procedural rather than declarative. It may be domain-specific rather than widely applicable, and in either case may need subject-matter knowledge, sometimes of a deep kind.

Reflections of the sort illustrated by the previous two paragraphs have led scholars to identify the knowledge, abilities and dispositions of a “critical thinker”, i.e., someone who thinks critically whenever it is appropriate to do so. We turn now to these three types of causal contributors to thinking critically. We start with dispositions, since arguably these are the most powerful contributors to being a critical thinker, can be fostered at an early stage of a child’s development, and are susceptible to general improvement (Glaser 1941: 175)

8. Critical Thinking Dispositions

Educational researchers use the term ‘dispositions’ broadly for the habits of mind and attitudes that contribute causally to being a critical thinker. Some writers (e.g., Paul & Elder 2006; Hamby 2014; Bailin & Battersby 2016a) propose to use the term ‘virtues’ for this dimension of a critical thinker. The virtues in question, although they are virtues of character, concern the person’s ways of thinking rather than the person’s ways of behaving towards others. They are not moral virtues but intellectual virtues, of the sort articulated by Zagzebski (1996) and discussed by Turri, Alfano, and Greco (2017).

On a realistic conception, thinking dispositions or intellectual virtues are real properties of thinkers. They are general tendencies, propensities, or inclinations to think in particular ways in particular circumstances, and can be genuinely explanatory (Siegel 1999). Sceptics argue that there is no evidence for a specific mental basis for the habits of mind that contribute to thinking critically, and that it is pedagogically misleading to posit such a basis (Bailin et al. 1999a). Whatever their status, critical thinking dispositions need motivation for their initial formation in a child—motivation that may be external or internal. As children develop, the force of habit will gradually become important in sustaining the disposition (Nieto & Valenzuela 2012). Mere force of habit, however, is unlikely to sustain critical thinking dispositions. Critical thinkers must value and enjoy using their knowledge and abilities to think things through for themselves. They must be committed to, and lovers of, inquiry.

A person may have a critical thinking disposition with respect to only some kinds of issues. For example, one could be open-minded about scientific issues but not about religious issues. Similarly, one could be confident in one’s ability to reason about the theological implications of the existence of evil in the world but not in one’s ability to reason about the best design for a guided ballistic missile.

Facione (1990a: 25) divides “affective dispositions” of critical thinking into approaches to life and living in general and approaches to specific issues, questions or problems. Adapting this distinction, one can usefully divide critical thinking dispositions into initiating dispositions (those that contribute causally to starting to think critically about an issue) and internal dispositions (those that contribute causally to doing a good job of thinking critically once one has started). The two categories are not mutually exclusive. For example, open-mindedness, in the sense of willingness to consider alternative points of view to one’s own, is both an initiating and an internal disposition.

Using the strategy of considering factors that would block people with the ability to think critically from doing so, we can identify as initiating dispositions for thinking critically attentiveness, a habit of inquiry, self-confidence, courage, open-mindedness, willingness to suspend judgment, trust in reason, wanting evidence for one’s beliefs, and seeking the truth. We consider briefly what each of these dispositions amounts to, in each case citing sources that acknowledge them.

• Attentiveness : One will not think critically if one fails to recognize an issue that needs to be thought through. For example, the pedestrian in Weather would not have looked up if he had not noticed that the air was suddenly cooler. To be a critical thinker, then, one needs to be habitually attentive to one’s surroundings, noticing not only what one senses but also sources of perplexity in messages received and in one’s own beliefs and attitudes (Facione 1990a: 25; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001).
• Habit of inquiry : Inquiry is effortful, and one needs an internal push to engage in it. For example, the student in Bubbles could easily have stopped at idle wondering about the cause of the bubbles rather than reasoning to a hypothesis, then designing and executing an experiment to test it. Thus willingness to think critically needs mental energy and initiative. What can supply that energy? Love of inquiry, or perhaps just a habit of inquiry. Hamby (2015) has argued that willingness to inquire is the central critical thinking virtue, one that encompasses all the others. It is recognized as a critical thinking disposition by Dewey (1910: 29; 1933: 35), Glaser (1941: 5), Ennis (1987: 12; 1991: 8), Facione (1990a: 25), Bailin et al. (1999b: 294), Halpern (1998: 452), and Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo (2001).
• Self-confidence : Lack of confidence in one’s abilities can block critical thinking. For example, if the woman in Rash lacked confidence in her ability to figure things out for herself, she might just have assumed that the rash on her chest was the allergic reaction to her medication against which the pharmacist had warned her. Thus willingness to think critically requires confidence in one’s ability to inquire (Facione 1990a: 25; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001).
• Courage : Fear of thinking for oneself can stop one from doing it. Thus willingness to think critically requires intellectual courage (Paul & Elder 2006: 16).
• Open-mindedness : A dogmatic attitude will impede thinking critically. For example, a person who adheres rigidly to a “pro-choice” position on the issue of the legal status of induced abortion is likely to be unwilling to consider seriously the issue of when in its development an unborn child acquires a moral right to life. Thus willingness to think critically requires open-mindedness, in the sense of a willingness to examine questions to which one already accepts an answer but which further evidence or reasoning might cause one to answer differently (Dewey 1933; Facione 1990a; Ennis 1991; Bailin et al. 1999b; Halpern 1998, Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001). Paul (1981) emphasizes open-mindedness about alternative world-views, and recommends a dialectical approach to integrating such views as central to what he calls “strong sense” critical thinking. In three studies, Haran, Ritov, & Mellers (2013) found that actively open-minded thinking, including “the tendency to weigh new evidence against a favored belief, to spend sufficient time on a problem before giving up, and to consider carefully the opinions of others in forming one’s own”, led study participants to acquire information and thus to make accurate estimations.
• Willingness to suspend judgment : Premature closure on an initial solution will block critical thinking. Thus willingness to think critically requires a willingness to suspend judgment while alternatives are explored (Facione 1990a; Ennis 1991; Halpern 1998).
• Trust in reason : Since distrust in the processes of reasoned inquiry will dissuade one from engaging in it, trust in them is an initiating critical thinking disposition (Facione 1990a, 25; Bailin et al. 1999b: 294; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001; Paul & Elder 2006). In reaction to an allegedly exclusive emphasis on reason in critical thinking theory and pedagogy, Thayer-Bacon (2000) argues that intuition, imagination, and emotion have important roles to play in an adequate conception of critical thinking that she calls “constructive thinking”. From her point of view, critical thinking requires trust not only in reason but also in intuition, imagination, and emotion.
• Seeking the truth : If one does not care about the truth but is content to stick with one’s initial bias on an issue, then one will not think critically about it. Seeking the truth is thus an initiating critical thinking disposition (Bailin et al. 1999b: 294; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001). A disposition to seek the truth is implicit in more specific critical thinking dispositions, such as trying to be well-informed, considering seriously points of view other than one’s own, looking for alternatives, suspending judgment when the evidence is insufficient, and adopting a position when the evidence supporting it is sufficient.

Some of the initiating dispositions, such as open-mindedness and willingness to suspend judgment, are also internal critical thinking dispositions, in the sense of mental habits or attitudes that contribute causally to doing a good job of critical thinking once one starts the process. But there are many other internal critical thinking dispositions. Some of them are parasitic on one’s conception of good thinking. For example, it is constitutive of good thinking about an issue to formulate the issue clearly and to maintain focus on it. For this purpose, one needs not only the corresponding ability but also the corresponding disposition. Ennis (1991: 8) describes it as the disposition “to determine and maintain focus on the conclusion or question”, Facione (1990a: 25) as “clarity in stating the question or concern”. Other internal dispositions are motivators to continue or adjust the critical thinking process, such as willingness to persist in a complex task and willingness to abandon nonproductive strategies in an attempt to self-correct (Halpern 1998: 452). For a list of identified internal critical thinking dispositions, see the Supplement on Internal Critical Thinking Dispositions .

Some theorists postulate skills, i.e., acquired abilities, as operative in critical thinking. It is not obvious, however, that a good mental act is the exercise of a generic acquired skill. Inferring an expected time of arrival, as in Transit , has some generic components but also uses non-generic subject-matter knowledge. Bailin et al. (1999a) argue against viewing critical thinking skills as generic and discrete, on the ground that skilled performance at a critical thinking task cannot be separated from knowledge of concepts and from domain-specific principles of good thinking. Talk of skills, they concede, is unproblematic if it means merely that a person with critical thinking skills is capable of intelligent performance.

Despite such scepticism, theorists of critical thinking have listed as general contributors to critical thinking what they variously call abilities (Glaser 1941; Ennis 1962, 1991), skills (Facione 1990a; Halpern 1998) or competencies (Fisher & Scriven 1997). Amalgamating these lists would produce a confusing and chaotic cornucopia of more than 50 possible educational objectives, with only partial overlap among them. It makes sense instead to try to understand the reasons for the multiplicity and diversity, and to make a selection according to one’s own reasons for singling out abilities to be developed in a critical thinking curriculum. Two reasons for diversity among lists of critical thinking abilities are the underlying conception of critical thinking and the envisaged educational level. Appraisal-only conceptions, for example, involve a different suite of abilities than constructive-only conceptions. Some lists, such as those in (Glaser 1941), are put forward as educational objectives for secondary school students, whereas others are proposed as objectives for college students (e.g., Facione 1990a).

The abilities described in the remaining paragraphs of this section emerge from reflection on the general abilities needed to do well the thinking activities identified in section 6 as components of the critical thinking process described in section 5 . The derivation of each collection of abilities is accompanied by citation of sources that list such abilities and of standardized tests that claim to test them.

Observational abilities : Careful and accurate observation sometimes requires specialist expertise and practice, as in the case of observing birds and observing accident scenes. However, there are general abilities of noticing what one’s senses are picking up from one’s environment and of being able to articulate clearly and accurately to oneself and others what one has observed. It helps in exercising them to be able to recognize and take into account factors that make one’s observation less trustworthy, such as prior framing of the situation, inadequate time, deficient senses, poor observation conditions, and the like. It helps as well to be skilled at taking steps to make one’s observation more trustworthy, such as moving closer to get a better look, measuring something three times and taking the average, and checking what one thinks one is observing with someone else who is in a good position to observe it. It also helps to be skilled at recognizing respects in which one’s report of one’s observation involves inference rather than direct observation, so that one can then consider whether the inference is justified. These abilities come into play as well when one thinks about whether and with what degree of confidence to accept an observation report, for example in the study of history or in a criminal investigation or in assessing news reports. Observational abilities show up in some lists of critical thinking abilities (Ennis 1962: 90; Facione 1990a: 16; Ennis 1991: 9). There are items testing a person’s ability to judge the credibility of observation reports in the Cornell Critical Thinking Tests, Levels X and Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005). Norris and King (1983, 1985, 1990a, 1990b) is a test of ability to appraise observation reports.

Emotional abilities : The emotions that drive a critical thinking process are perplexity or puzzlement, a wish to resolve it, and satisfaction at achieving the desired resolution. Children experience these emotions at an early age, without being trained to do so. Education that takes critical thinking as a goal needs only to channel these emotions and to make sure not to stifle them. Collaborative critical thinking benefits from ability to recognize one’s own and others’ emotional commitments and reactions.

Questioning abilities : A critical thinking process needs transformation of an inchoate sense of perplexity into a clear question. Formulating a question well requires not building in questionable assumptions, not prejudging the issue, and using language that in context is unambiguous and precise enough (Ennis 1962: 97; 1991: 9).

Imaginative abilities : Thinking directed at finding the correct causal explanation of a general phenomenon or particular event requires an ability to imagine possible explanations. Thinking about what policy or plan of action to adopt requires generation of options and consideration of possible consequences of each option. Domain knowledge is required for such creative activity, but a general ability to imagine alternatives is helpful and can be nurtured so as to become easier, quicker, more extensive, and deeper (Dewey 1910: 34–39; 1933: 40–47). Facione (1990a) and Halpern (1998) include the ability to imagine alternatives as a critical thinking ability.

Inferential abilities : The ability to draw conclusions from given information, and to recognize with what degree of certainty one’s own or others’ conclusions follow, is universally recognized as a general critical thinking ability. All 11 examples in section 2 of this article include inferences, some from hypotheses or options (as in Transit , Ferryboat and Disorder ), others from something observed (as in Weather and Rash ). None of these inferences is formally valid. Rather, they are licensed by general, sometimes qualified substantive rules of inference (Toulmin 1958) that rest on domain knowledge—that a bus trip takes about the same time in each direction, that the terminal of a wireless telegraph would be located on the highest possible place, that sudden cooling is often followed by rain, that an allergic reaction to a sulfa drug generally shows up soon after one starts taking it. It is a matter of controversy to what extent the specialized ability to deduce conclusions from premisses using formal rules of inference is needed for critical thinking. Dewey (1933) locates logical forms in setting out the products of reflection rather than in the process of reflection. Ennis (1981a), on the other hand, maintains that a liberally-educated person should have the following abilities: to translate natural-language statements into statements using the standard logical operators, to use appropriately the language of necessary and sufficient conditions, to deal with argument forms and arguments containing symbols, to determine whether in virtue of an argument’s form its conclusion follows necessarily from its premisses, to reason with logically complex propositions, and to apply the rules and procedures of deductive logic. Inferential abilities are recognized as critical thinking abilities by Glaser (1941: 6), Facione (1990a: 9), Ennis (1991: 9), Fisher & Scriven (1997: 99, 111), and Halpern (1998: 452). Items testing inferential abilities constitute two of the five subtests of the Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (Watson & Glaser 1980a, 1980b, 1994), two of the four sections in the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005), three of the seven sections in the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005), 11 of the 34 items on Forms A and B of the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (Facione 1990b, 1992), and a high but variable proportion of the 25 selected-response questions in the Collegiate Learning Assessment (Council for Aid to Education 2017).

Experimenting abilities : Knowing how to design and execute an experiment is important not just in scientific research but also in everyday life, as in Rash . Dewey devoted a whole chapter of his How We Think (1910: 145–156; 1933: 190–202) to the superiority of experimentation over observation in advancing knowledge. Experimenting abilities come into play at one remove in appraising reports of scientific studies. Skill in designing and executing experiments includes the acknowledged abilities to appraise evidence (Glaser 1941: 6), to carry out experiments and to apply appropriate statistical inference techniques (Facione 1990a: 9), to judge inductions to an explanatory hypothesis (Ennis 1991: 9), and to recognize the need for an adequately large sample size (Halpern 1998). The Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005) includes four items (out of 52) on experimental design. The Collegiate Learning Assessment (Council for Aid to Education 2017) makes room for appraisal of study design in both its performance task and its selected-response questions.

Consulting abilities : Skill at consulting sources of information comes into play when one seeks information to help resolve a problem, as in Candidate . Ability to find and appraise information includes ability to gather and marshal pertinent information (Glaser 1941: 6), to judge whether a statement made by an alleged authority is acceptable (Ennis 1962: 84), to plan a search for desired information (Facione 1990a: 9), and to judge the credibility of a source (Ennis 1991: 9). Ability to judge the credibility of statements is tested by 24 items (out of 76) in the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005) and by four items (out of 52) in the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005). The College Learning Assessment’s performance task requires evaluation of whether information in documents is credible or unreliable (Council for Aid to Education 2017).

Argument analysis abilities : The ability to identify and analyze arguments contributes to the process of surveying arguments on an issue in order to form one’s own reasoned judgment, as in Candidate . The ability to detect and analyze arguments is recognized as a critical thinking skill by Facione (1990a: 7–8), Ennis (1991: 9) and Halpern (1998). Five items (out of 34) on the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (Facione 1990b, 1992) test skill at argument analysis. The College Learning Assessment (Council for Aid to Education 2017) incorporates argument analysis in its selected-response tests of critical reading and evaluation and of critiquing an argument.

Judging skills and deciding skills : Skill at judging and deciding is skill at recognizing what judgment or decision the available evidence and argument supports, and with what degree of confidence. It is thus a component of the inferential skills already discussed.

Lists and tests of critical thinking abilities often include two more abilities: identifying assumptions and constructing and evaluating definitions.

In addition to dispositions and abilities, critical thinking needs knowledge: of critical thinking concepts, of critical thinking principles, and of the subject-matter of the thinking.

We can derive a short list of concepts whose understanding contributes to critical thinking from the critical thinking abilities described in the preceding section. Observational abilities require an understanding of the difference between observation and inference. Questioning abilities require an understanding of the concepts of ambiguity and vagueness. Inferential abilities require an understanding of the difference between conclusive and defeasible inference (traditionally, between deduction and induction), as well as of the difference between necessary and sufficient conditions. Experimenting abilities require an understanding of the concepts of hypothesis, null hypothesis, assumption and prediction, as well as of the concept of statistical significance and of its difference from importance. They also require an understanding of the difference between an experiment and an observational study, and in particular of the difference between a randomized controlled trial, a prospective correlational study and a retrospective (case-control) study. Argument analysis abilities require an understanding of the concepts of argument, premiss, assumption, conclusion and counter-consideration. Additional critical thinking concepts are proposed by Bailin et al. (1999b: 293), Fisher & Scriven (1997: 105–106), Black (2012), and Blair (2021).

According to Glaser (1941: 25), ability to think critically requires knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning. If we review the list of abilities in the preceding section, however, we can see that some of them can be acquired and exercised merely through practice, possibly guided in an educational setting, followed by feedback. Searching intelligently for a causal explanation of some phenomenon or event requires that one consider a full range of possible causal contributors, but it seems more important that one implements this principle in one’s practice than that one is able to articulate it. What is important is “operational knowledge” of the standards and principles of good thinking (Bailin et al. 1999b: 291–293). But the development of such critical thinking abilities as designing an experiment or constructing an operational definition can benefit from learning their underlying theory. Further, explicit knowledge of quirks of human thinking seems useful as a cautionary guide. Human memory is not just fallible about details, as people learn from their own experiences of misremembering, but is so malleable that a detailed, clear and vivid recollection of an event can be a total fabrication (Loftus 2017). People seek or interpret evidence in ways that are partial to their existing beliefs and expectations, often unconscious of their “confirmation bias” (Nickerson 1998). Not only are people subject to this and other cognitive biases (Kahneman 2011), of which they are typically unaware, but it may be counter-productive for one to make oneself aware of them and try consciously to counteract them or to counteract social biases such as racial or sexual stereotypes (Kenyon & Beaulac 2014). It is helpful to be aware of these facts and of the superior effectiveness of blocking the operation of biases—for example, by making an immediate record of one’s observations, refraining from forming a preliminary explanatory hypothesis, blind refereeing, double-blind randomized trials, and blind grading of students’ work. It is also helpful to be aware of the prevalence of “noise” (unwanted unsystematic variability of judgments), of how to detect noise (through a noise audit), and of how to reduce noise: make accuracy the goal, think statistically, break a process of arriving at a judgment into independent tasks, resist premature intuitions, in a group get independent judgments first, favour comparative judgments and scales (Kahneman, Sibony, & Sunstein 2021). It is helpful as well to be aware of the concept of “bounded rationality” in decision-making and of the related distinction between “satisficing” and optimizing (Simon 1956; Gigerenzer 2001).

Critical thinking about an issue requires substantive knowledge of the domain to which the issue belongs. Critical thinking abilities are not a magic elixir that can be applied to any issue whatever by somebody who has no knowledge of the facts relevant to exploring that issue. For example, the student in Bubbles needed to know that gases do not penetrate solid objects like a glass, that air expands when heated, that the volume of an enclosed gas varies directly with its temperature and inversely with its pressure, and that hot objects will spontaneously cool down to the ambient temperature of their surroundings unless kept hot by insulation or a source of heat. Critical thinkers thus need a rich fund of subject-matter knowledge relevant to the variety of situations they encounter. This fact is recognized in the inclusion among critical thinking dispositions of a concern to become and remain generally well informed.

Experimental educational interventions, with control groups, have shown that education can improve critical thinking skills and dispositions, as measured by standardized tests. For information about these tests, see the Supplement on Assessment .

What educational methods are most effective at developing the dispositions, abilities and knowledge of a critical thinker? In a comprehensive meta-analysis of experimental and quasi-experimental studies of strategies for teaching students to think critically, Abrami et al. (2015) found that dialogue, anchored instruction, and mentoring each increased the effectiveness of the educational intervention, and that they were most effective when combined. They also found that in these studies a combination of separate instruction in critical thinking with subject-matter instruction in which students are encouraged to think critically was more effective than either by itself. However, the difference was not statistically significant; that is, it might have arisen by chance.

Most of these studies lack the longitudinal follow-up required to determine whether the observed differential improvements in critical thinking abilities or dispositions continue over time, for example until high school or college graduation. For details on studies of methods of developing critical thinking skills and dispositions, see the Supplement on Educational Methods .

12. Controversies

Scholars have denied the generalizability of critical thinking abilities across subject domains, have alleged bias in critical thinking theory and pedagogy, and have investigated the relationship of critical thinking to other kinds of thinking.

McPeck (1981) attacked the thinking skills movement of the 1970s, including the critical thinking movement. He argued that there are no general thinking skills, since thinking is always thinking about some subject-matter. It is futile, he claimed, for schools and colleges to teach thinking as if it were a separate subject. Rather, teachers should lead their pupils to become autonomous thinkers by teaching school subjects in a way that brings out their cognitive structure and that encourages and rewards discussion and argument. As some of his critics (e.g., Paul 1985; Siegel 1985) pointed out, McPeck’s central argument needs elaboration, since it has obvious counter-examples in writing and speaking, for which (up to a certain level of complexity) there are teachable general abilities even though they are always about some subject-matter. To make his argument convincing, McPeck needs to explain how thinking differs from writing and speaking in a way that does not permit useful abstraction of its components from the subject-matters with which it deals. He has not done so. Nevertheless, his position that the dispositions and abilities of a critical thinker are best developed in the context of subject-matter instruction is shared by many theorists of critical thinking, including Dewey (1910, 1933), Glaser (1941), Passmore (1980), Weinstein (1990), Bailin et al. (1999b), and Willingham (2019).

McPeck’s challenge prompted reflection on the extent to which critical thinking is subject-specific. McPeck argued for a strong subject-specificity thesis, according to which it is a conceptual truth that all critical thinking abilities are specific to a subject. (He did not however extend his subject-specificity thesis to critical thinking dispositions. In particular, he took the disposition to suspend judgment in situations of cognitive dissonance to be a general disposition.) Conceptual subject-specificity is subject to obvious counter-examples, such as the general ability to recognize confusion of necessary and sufficient conditions. A more modest thesis, also endorsed by McPeck, is epistemological subject-specificity, according to which the norms of good thinking vary from one field to another. Epistemological subject-specificity clearly holds to a certain extent; for example, the principles in accordance with which one solves a differential equation are quite different from the principles in accordance with which one determines whether a painting is a genuine Picasso. But the thesis suffers, as Ennis (1989) points out, from vagueness of the concept of a field or subject and from the obvious existence of inter-field principles, however broadly the concept of a field is construed. For example, the principles of hypothetico-deductive reasoning hold for all the varied fields in which such reasoning occurs. A third kind of subject-specificity is empirical subject-specificity, according to which as a matter of empirically observable fact a person with the abilities and dispositions of a critical thinker in one area of investigation will not necessarily have them in another area of investigation.

The thesis of empirical subject-specificity raises the general problem of transfer. If critical thinking abilities and dispositions have to be developed independently in each school subject, how are they of any use in dealing with the problems of everyday life and the political and social issues of contemporary society, most of which do not fit into the framework of a traditional school subject? Proponents of empirical subject-specificity tend to argue that transfer is more likely to occur if there is critical thinking instruction in a variety of domains, with explicit attention to dispositions and abilities that cut across domains. But evidence for this claim is scanty. There is a need for well-designed empirical studies that investigate the conditions that make transfer more likely.

It is common ground in debates about the generality or subject-specificity of critical thinking dispositions and abilities that critical thinking about any topic requires background knowledge about the topic. For example, the most sophisticated understanding of the principles of hypothetico-deductive reasoning is of no help unless accompanied by some knowledge of what might be plausible explanations of some phenomenon under investigation.

Critics have objected to bias in the theory, pedagogy and practice of critical thinking. Commentators (e.g., Alston 1995; Ennis 1998) have noted that anyone who takes a position has a bias in the neutral sense of being inclined in one direction rather than others. The critics, however, are objecting to bias in the pejorative sense of an unjustified favoring of certain ways of knowing over others, frequently alleging that the unjustly favoured ways are those of a dominant sex or culture (Bailin 1995). These ways favour:

• reinforcement of egocentric and sociocentric biases over dialectical engagement with opposing world-views (Paul 1981, 1984; Warren 1998)
• distancing from the object of inquiry over closeness to it (Martin 1992; Thayer-Bacon 1992)
• indifference to the situation of others over care for them (Martin 1992)
• orientation to thought over orientation to action (Martin 1992)
• being reasonable over caring to understand people’s ideas (Thayer-Bacon 1993)
• being neutral and objective over being embodied and situated (Thayer-Bacon 1995a)
• doubting over believing (Thayer-Bacon 1995b)
• reason over emotion, imagination and intuition (Thayer-Bacon 2000)
• solitary thinking over collaborative thinking (Thayer-Bacon 2000)
• written and spoken assignments over other forms of expression (Alston 2001)
• attention to written and spoken communications over attention to human problems (Alston 2001)
• winning debates in the public sphere over making and understanding meaning (Alston 2001)

A common thread in this smorgasbord of accusations is dissatisfaction with focusing on the logical analysis and evaluation of reasoning and arguments. While these authors acknowledge that such analysis and evaluation is part of critical thinking and should be part of its conceptualization and pedagogy, they insist that it is only a part. Paul (1981), for example, bemoans the tendency of atomistic teaching of methods of analyzing and evaluating arguments to turn students into more able sophists, adept at finding fault with positions and arguments with which they disagree but even more entrenched in the egocentric and sociocentric biases with which they began. Martin (1992) and Thayer-Bacon (1992) cite with approval the self-reported intimacy with their subject-matter of leading researchers in biology and medicine, an intimacy that conflicts with the distancing allegedly recommended in standard conceptions and pedagogy of critical thinking. Thayer-Bacon (2000) contrasts the embodied and socially embedded learning of her elementary school students in a Montessori school, who used their imagination, intuition and emotions as well as their reason, with conceptions of critical thinking as

thinking that is used to critique arguments, offer justifications, and make judgments about what are the good reasons, or the right answers. (Thayer-Bacon 2000: 127–128)

Alston (2001) reports that her students in a women’s studies class were able to see the flaws in the Cinderella myth that pervades much romantic fiction but in their own romantic relationships still acted as if all failures were the woman’s fault and still accepted the notions of love at first sight and living happily ever after. Students, she writes, should

be able to connect their intellectual critique to a more affective, somatic, and ethical account of making risky choices that have sexist, racist, classist, familial, sexual, or other consequences for themselves and those both near and far… critical thinking that reads arguments, texts, or practices merely on the surface without connections to feeling/desiring/doing or action lacks an ethical depth that should infuse the difference between mere cognitive activity and something we want to call critical thinking. (Alston 2001: 34)

Some critics portray such biases as unfair to women. Thayer-Bacon (1992), for example, has charged modern critical thinking theory with being sexist, on the ground that it separates the self from the object and causes one to lose touch with one’s inner voice, and thus stigmatizes women, who (she asserts) link self to object and listen to their inner voice. Her charge does not imply that women as a group are on average less able than men to analyze and evaluate arguments. Facione (1990c) found no difference by sex in performance on his California Critical Thinking Skills Test. Kuhn (1991: 280–281) found no difference by sex in either the disposition or the competence to engage in argumentative thinking.

The critics propose a variety of remedies for the biases that they allege. In general, they do not propose to eliminate or downplay critical thinking as an educational goal. Rather, they propose to conceptualize critical thinking differently and to change its pedagogy accordingly. Their pedagogical proposals arise logically from their objections. They can be summarized as follows:

• Focus on argument networks with dialectical exchanges reflecting contesting points of view rather than on atomic arguments, so as to develop “strong sense” critical thinking that transcends egocentric and sociocentric biases (Paul 1981, 1984).
• Foster closeness to the subject-matter and feeling connected to others in order to inform a humane democracy (Martin 1992).
• Develop “constructive thinking” as a social activity in a community of physically embodied and socially embedded inquirers with personal voices who value not only reason but also imagination, intuition and emotion (Thayer-Bacon 2000).
• In developing critical thinking in school subjects, treat as important neither skills nor dispositions but opening worlds of meaning (Alston 2001).
• Attend to the development of critical thinking dispositions as well as skills, and adopt the “critical pedagogy” practised and advocated by Freire (1968 [1970]) and hooks (1994) (Dalgleish, Girard, & Davies 2017).

A common thread in these proposals is treatment of critical thinking as a social, interactive, personally engaged activity like that of a quilting bee or a barn-raising (Thayer-Bacon 2000) rather than as an individual, solitary, distanced activity symbolized by Rodin’s The Thinker . One can get a vivid description of education with the former type of goal from the writings of bell hooks (1994, 2010). Critical thinking for her is open-minded dialectical exchange across opposing standpoints and from multiple perspectives, a conception similar to Paul’s “strong sense” critical thinking (Paul 1981). She abandons the structure of domination in the traditional classroom. In an introductory course on black women writers, for example, she assigns students to write an autobiographical paragraph about an early racial memory, then to read it aloud as the others listen, thus affirming the uniqueness and value of each voice and creating a communal awareness of the diversity of the group’s experiences (hooks 1994: 84). Her “engaged pedagogy” is thus similar to the “freedom under guidance” implemented in John Dewey’s Laboratory School of Chicago in the late 1890s and early 1900s. It incorporates the dialogue, anchored instruction, and mentoring that Abrami (2015) found to be most effective in improving critical thinking skills and dispositions.

What is the relationship of critical thinking to problem solving, decision-making, higher-order thinking, creative thinking, and other recognized types of thinking? One’s answer to this question obviously depends on how one defines the terms used in the question. If critical thinking is conceived broadly to cover any careful thinking about any topic for any purpose, then problem solving and decision making will be kinds of critical thinking, if they are done carefully. Historically, ‘critical thinking’ and ‘problem solving’ were two names for the same thing. If critical thinking is conceived more narrowly as consisting solely of appraisal of intellectual products, then it will be disjoint with problem solving and decision making, which are constructive.

Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives used the phrase “intellectual abilities and skills” for what had been labeled “critical thinking” by some, “reflective thinking” by Dewey and others, and “problem solving” by still others (Bloom et al. 1956: 38). Thus, the so-called “higher-order thinking skills” at the taxonomy’s top levels of analysis, synthesis and evaluation are just critical thinking skills, although they do not come with general criteria for their assessment (Ennis 1981b). The revised version of Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson et al. 2001) likewise treats critical thinking as cutting across those types of cognitive process that involve more than remembering (Anderson et al. 2001: 269–270). For details, see the Supplement on History .

As to creative thinking, it overlaps with critical thinking (Bailin 1987, 1988). Thinking about the explanation of some phenomenon or event, as in Ferryboat , requires creative imagination in constructing plausible explanatory hypotheses. Likewise, thinking about a policy question, as in Candidate , requires creativity in coming up with options. Conversely, creativity in any field needs to be balanced by critical appraisal of the draft painting or novel or mathematical theory.

• Abrami, Philip C., Robert M. Bernard, Eugene Borokhovski, David I. Waddington, C. Anne Wade, and Tonje Person, 2015, “Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-analysis”, Review of Educational Research , 85(2): 275–314. doi:10.3102/0034654314551063
• Aikin, Wilford M., 1942, The Story of the Eight-year Study, with Conclusions and Recommendations , Volume I of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers. [ Aikin 1942 available online ]
• Alston, Kal, 1995, “Begging the Question: Is Critical Thinking Biased?”, Educational Theory , 45(2): 225–233. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00225.x
• –––, 2001, “Re/Thinking Critical Thinking: The Seductions of Everyday Life”, Studies in Philosophy and Education , 20(1): 27–40. doi:10.1023/A:1005247128053
• American Educational Research Association, 2014, Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing / American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education , Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
• Anderson, Lorin W., David R. Krathwohl, Peter W. Airiasian, Kathleen A. Cruikshank, Richard E. Mayer, Paul R. Pintrich, James Raths, and Merlin C. Wittrock, 2001, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , New York: Longman, complete edition.
• Bailin, Sharon, 1987, “Critical and Creative Thinking”, Informal Logic , 9(1): 23–30. [ Bailin 1987 available online ]
• –––, 1988, Achieving Extraordinary Ends: An Essay on Creativity , Dordrecht: Kluwer. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-2780-3
• –––, 1995, “Is Critical Thinking Biased? Clarifications and Implications”, Educational Theory , 45(2): 191–197. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00191.x
• Bailin, Sharon and Mark Battersby, 2009, “Inquiry: A Dialectical Approach to Teaching Critical Thinking”, in Juho Ritola (ed.), Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 09 , CD-ROM (pp. 1–10), Windsor, ON: OSSA. [ Bailin & Battersby 2009 available online ]
• –––, 2016a, “Fostering the Virtues of Inquiry”, Topoi , 35(2): 367–374. doi:10.1007/s11245-015-9307-6
• –––, 2016b, Reason in the Balance: An Inquiry Approach to Critical Thinking , Indianapolis: Hackett, 2nd edition.
• –––, 2021, “Inquiry: Teaching for Reasoned Judgment”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 31–46. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_003
• Bailin, Sharon, Roland Case, Jerrold R. Coombs, and Leroi B. Daniels, 1999a, “Common Misconceptions of Critical Thinking”, Journal of Curriculum Studies , 31(3): 269–283. doi:10.1080/002202799183124
• –––, 1999b, “Conceptualizing Critical Thinking”, Journal of Curriculum Studies , 31(3): 285–302. doi:10.1080/002202799183133
• Blair, J. Anthony, 2021, Studies in Critical Thinking , Windsor, ON: Windsor Studies in Argumentation, 2nd edition. [Available online at https://windsor.scholarsportal.info/omp/index.php/wsia/catalog/book/106]
• Berman, Alan M., Seth J. Schwartz, William M. Kurtines, and Steven L. Berman, 2001, “The Process of Exploration in Identity Formation: The Role of Style and Competence”, Journal of Adolescence , 24(4): 513–528. doi:10.1006/jado.2001.0386
• Black, Beth (ed.), 2012, An A to Z of Critical Thinking , London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
• Bloom, Benjamin Samuel, Max D. Engelhart, Edward J. Furst, Walter H. Hill, and David R. Krathwohl, 1956, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , New York: David McKay.
• Boardman, Frank, Nancy M. Cavender, and Howard Kahane, 2018, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life , Boston: Cengage, 13th edition.
• Browne, M. Neil and Stuart M. Keeley, 2018, Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking , Hoboken, NJ: Pearson, 12th edition.
• Center for Assessment & Improvement of Learning, 2017, Critical Thinking Assessment Test , Cookeville, TN: Tennessee Technological University.
• Cleghorn, Paul. 2021. “Critical Thinking in the Elementary School: Practical Guidance for Building a Culture of Thinking”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessmen t, Leiden: Brill, pp. 150–167. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_010
• Cohen, Jacob, 1988, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2nd edition.
• College Board, 1983, Academic Preparation for College. What Students Need to Know and Be Able to Do , New York: College Entrance Examination Board, ERIC document ED232517.
• Commission on the Relation of School and College of the Progressive Education Association, 1943, Thirty Schools Tell Their Story , Volume V of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers.
• Council for Aid to Education, 2017, CLA+ Student Guide . Available at http://cae.org/images/uploads/pdf/CLA_Student_Guide_Institution.pdf ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• Dalgleish, Adam, Patrick Girard, and Maree Davies, 2017, “Critical Thinking, Bias and Feminist Philosophy: Building a Better Framework through Collaboration”, Informal Logic , 37(4): 351–369. [ Dalgleish et al. available online ]
• Dewey, John, 1910, How We Think , Boston: D.C. Heath. [ Dewey 1910 available online ]
• –––, 1916, Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education , New York: Macmillan.
• –––, 1933, How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process , Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
• –––, 1936, “The Theory of the Chicago Experiment”, Appendix II of Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 463–477.
• –––, 1938, Logic: The Theory of Inquiry , New York: Henry Holt and Company.
• Dominguez, Caroline (coord.), 2018a, A European Collection of the Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions Needed in Different Professional Fields for the 21st Century , Vila Real, Portugal: UTAD. Available at http://bit.ly/CRITHINKEDUO1 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• ––– (coord.), 2018b, A European Review on Critical Thinking Educational Practices in Higher Education Institutions , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http://bit.ly/CRITHINKEDUO2 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• ––– (coord.), 2018c, The CRITHINKEDU European Course on Critical Thinking Education for University Teachers: From Conception to Delivery , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http:/bit.ly/CRITHINKEDU03; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• Dominguez Caroline and Rita Payan-Carreira (eds.), 2019, Promoting Critical Thinking in European Higher Education Institutions: Towards an Educational Protocol , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http:/bit.ly/CRITHINKEDU04; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• Ennis, Robert H., 1958, “An Appraisal of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal”, The Journal of Educational Research , 52(4): 155–158. doi:10.1080/00220671.1958.10882558
• –––, 1962, “A Concept of Critical Thinking: A Proposed Basis for Research on the Teaching and Evaluation of Critical Thinking Ability”, Harvard Educational Review , 32(1): 81–111.
• –––, 1981a, “A Conception of Deductive Logical Competence”, Teaching Philosophy , 4(3/4): 337–385. doi:10.5840/teachphil198143/429
• –––, 1981b, “Eight Fallacies in Bloom’s Taxonomy”, in C. J. B. Macmillan (ed.), Philosophy of Education 1980: Proceedings of the Thirty-seventh Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society , Bloomington, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, pp. 269–273.
• –––, 1984, “Problems in Testing Informal Logic, Critical Thinking, Reasoning Ability”, Informal Logic , 6(1): 3–9. [ Ennis 1984 available online ]
• –––, 1987, “A Taxonomy of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities”, in Joan Boykoff Baron and Robert J. Sternberg (eds.), Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice , New York: W. H. Freeman, pp. 9–26.
• –––, 1989, “Critical Thinking and Subject Specificity: Clarification and Needed Research”, Educational Researcher , 18(3): 4–10. doi:10.3102/0013189X018003004
• –––, 1991, “Critical Thinking: A Streamlined Conception”, Teaching Philosophy , 14(1): 5–24. doi:10.5840/teachphil19911412
• –––, 1996, “Critical Thinking Dispositions: Their Nature and Assessability”, Informal Logic , 18(2–3): 165–182. [ Ennis 1996 available online ]
• –––, 1998, “Is Critical Thinking Culturally Biased?”, Teaching Philosophy , 21(1): 15–33. doi:10.5840/teachphil19982113
• –––, 2011, “Critical Thinking: Reflection and Perspective Part I”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 26(1): 4–18. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews20112613
• –––, 2013, “Critical Thinking across the Curriculum: The Wisdom CTAC Program”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 28(2): 25–45. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20132828
• –––, 2016, “Definition: A Three-Dimensional Analysis with Bearing on Key Concepts”, in Patrick Bondy and Laura Benacquista (eds.), Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 18–21 May 2016 , Windsor, ON: OSSA, pp. 1–19. Available at http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/105 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• –––, 2018, “Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum: A Vision”, Topoi , 37(1): 165–184. doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4
• Ennis, Robert H., and Jason Millman, 1971, Manual for Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level X, and Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level Z , Urbana, IL: Critical Thinking Project, University of Illinois.
• Ennis, Robert H., Jason Millman, and Thomas Norbert Tomko, 1985, Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual , Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publication, 3rd edition.
• –––, 2005, Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual , Seaside, CA: Critical Thinking Company, 5th edition.
• Ennis, Robert H. and Eric Weir, 1985, The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test: Test, Manual, Criteria, Scoring Sheet: An Instrument for Teaching and Testing , Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
• Facione, Peter A., 1990a, Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction , Research Findings and Recommendations Prepared for the Committee on Pre-College Philosophy of the American Philosophical Association, ERIC Document ED315423.
• –––, 1990b, California Critical Thinking Skills Test, CCTST – Form A , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
• –––, 1990c, The California Critical Thinking Skills Test--College Level. Technical Report #3. Gender, Ethnicity, Major, CT Self-Esteem, and the CCTST , ERIC Document ED326584.
• –––, 1992, California Critical Thinking Skills Test: CCTST – Form B, Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
• –––, 2000, “The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking: Its Character, Measurement, and Relationship to Critical Thinking Skill”, Informal Logic , 20(1): 61–84. [ Facione 2000 available online ]
• Facione, Peter A. and Noreen C. Facione, 1992, CCTDI: A Disposition Inventory , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
• Facione, Peter A., Noreen C. Facione, and Carol Ann F. Giancarlo, 2001, California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory: CCTDI: Inventory Manual , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
• Facione, Peter A., Carol A. Sánchez, and Noreen C. Facione, 1994, Are College Students Disposed to Think? , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press. ERIC Document ED368311.
• Fisher, Alec, and Michael Scriven, 1997, Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment , Norwich: Centre for Research in Critical Thinking, University of East Anglia.
• Freire, Paulo, 1968 [1970], Pedagogia do Oprimido . Translated as Pedagogy of the Oppressed , Myra Bergman Ramos (trans.), New York: Continuum, 1970.
• Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2001, “The Adaptive Toolbox”, in Gerd Gigerenzer and Reinhard Selten (eds.), Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 37–50.
• Glaser, Edward Maynard, 1941, An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking , New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
• Groarke, Leo A. and Christopher W. Tindale, 2012, Good Reasoning Matters! A Constructive Approach to Critical Thinking , Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press, 5th edition.
• Halpern, Diane F., 1998, “Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer Across Domains: Disposition, Skills, Structure Training, and Metacognitive Monitoring”, American Psychologist , 53(4): 449–455. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449
• –––, 2016, Manual: Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment , Mödling, Austria: Schuhfried. Available at https://pdfcoffee.com/hcta-test-manual-pdf-free.html; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• Hamby, Benjamin, 2014, The Virtues of Critical Thinkers , Doctoral dissertation, Philosophy, McMaster University. [ Hamby 2014 available online ]
• –––, 2015, “Willingness to Inquire: The Cardinal Critical Thinking Virtue”, in Martin Davies and Ronald Barnett (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education , New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 77–87.
• Haran, Uriel, Ilana Ritov, and Barbara A. Mellers, 2013, “The Role of Actively Open-minded Thinking in Information Acquisition, Accuracy, and Calibration”, Judgment and Decision Making , 8(3): 188–201.
• Hatcher, Donald and Kevin Possin, 2021, “Commentary: Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking Assessment”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 298–322. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_017
• Haynes, Ada, Elizabeth Lisic, Kevin Harris, Katie Leming, Kyle Shanks, and Barry Stein, 2015, “Using the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT) as a Model for Designing Within-Course Assessments: Changing How Faculty Assess Student Learning”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 30(3): 38–48. doi:10.5840/inquiryct201530316
• Haynes, Ada and Barry Stein, 2021, “Observations from a Long-Term Effort to Assess and Improve Critical Thinking”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 231–254. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_014
• Hiner, Amanda L. 2021. “Equipping Students for Success in College and Beyond: Placing Critical Thinking Instruction at the Heart of a General Education Program”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 188–208. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_012
• Hitchcock, David, 2017, “Critical Thinking as an Educational Ideal”, in his On Reasoning and Argument: Essays in Informal Logic and on Critical Thinking , Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 477–497. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-53562-3_30
• –––, 2021, “Seven Philosophical Implications of Critical Thinking: Themes, Variations, Implications”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 9–30. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_002
• hooks, bell, 1994, Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom , New York and London: Routledge.
• –––, 2010, Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom , New York and London: Routledge.
• Johnson, Ralph H., 1992, “The Problem of Defining Critical Thinking”, in Stephen P, Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking , New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 38–53.
• Kahane, Howard, 1971, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life , Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Kahneman, Daniel, 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow , New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• Kahneman, Daniel, Olivier Sibony, & Cass R. Sunstein, 2021, Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment , New York: Little, Brown Spark.
• Kenyon, Tim, and Guillaume Beaulac, 2014, “Critical Thinking Education and Debasing”, Informal Logic , 34(4): 341–363. [ Kenyon & Beaulac 2014 available online ]
• Krathwohl, David R., Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bertram B. Masia, 1964, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook II: Affective Domain , New York: David McKay.
• Kuhn, Deanna, 1991, The Skills of Argument , New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511571350
• –––, 2019, “Critical Thinking as Discourse”, Human Development, 62 (3): 146–164. doi:10.1159/000500171
• Lipman, Matthew, 1987, “Critical Thinking–What Can It Be?”, Analytic Teaching , 8(1): 5–12. [ Lipman 1987 available online ]
• –––, 2003, Thinking in Education , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition.
• Loftus, Elizabeth F., 2017, “Eavesdropping on Memory”, Annual Review of Psychology , 68: 1–18. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044138
• Makaiau, Amber Strong, 2021, “The Good Thinker’s Tool Kit: How to Engage Critical Thinking and Reasoning in Secondary Education”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 168–187. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_011
• Martin, Jane Roland, 1992, “Critical Thinking for a Humane World”, in Stephen P. Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking , New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 163–180.
• Mayhew, Katherine Camp, and Anna Camp Edwards, 1936, The Dewey School: The Laboratory School of the University of Chicago, 1896–1903 , New York: Appleton-Century. [ Mayhew & Edwards 1936 available online ]
• McPeck, John E., 1981, Critical Thinking and Education , New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• Moore, Brooke Noel and Richard Parker, 2020, Critical Thinking , New York: McGraw-Hill, 13th edition.
• Nickerson, Raymond S., 1998, “Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises”, Review of General Psychology , 2(2): 175–220. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
• Nieto, Ana Maria, and Jorge Valenzuela, 2012, “A Study of the Internal Structure of Critical Thinking Dispositions”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 27(1): 31–38. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20122713
• Norris, Stephen P., 1985, “Controlling for Background Beliefs When Developing Multiple-choice Critical Thinking Tests”, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice , 7(3): 5–11. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1988.tb00437.x
• Norris, Stephen P. and Robert H. Ennis, 1989, Evaluating Critical Thinking (The Practitioners’ Guide to Teaching Thinking Series), Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
• Norris, Stephen P. and Ruth Elizabeth King, 1983, Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
• –––, 1984, The Design of a Critical Thinking Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland. ERIC Document ED260083.
• –––, 1985, Test on Appraising Observations: Manual , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
• –––, 1990a, Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2nd edition.
• –––, 1990b, Test on Appraising Observations: Manual , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2nd edition.
• OCR [Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations], 2011, AS/A Level GCE: Critical Thinking – H052, H452 , Cambridge: OCR. Past papers available at https://pastpapers.co/ocr/?dir=A-Level/Critical-Thinking-H052-H452; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• Ontario Ministry of Education, 2013, The Ontario Curriculum Grades 9 to 12: Social Sciences and Humanities . Available at http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/ssciences9to122013.pdf ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• Passmore, John Arthur, 1980, The Philosophy of Teaching , London: Duckworth.
• Paul, Richard W., 1981, “Teaching Critical Thinking in the ‘Strong’ Sense: A Focus on Self-Deception, World Views, and a Dialectical Mode of Analysis”, Informal Logic , 4(2): 2–7. [ Paul 1981 available online ]
• –––, 1984, “Critical Thinking: Fundamental to Education for a Free Society”, Educational Leadership , 42(1): 4–14.
• –––, 1985, “McPeck’s Mistakes”, Informal Logic , 7(1): 35–43. [ Paul 1985 available online ]
• Paul, Richard W. and Linda Elder, 2006, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools , Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, 4th edition.
• Payette, Patricia, and Edna Ross, 2016, “Making a Campus-Wide Commitment to Critical Thinking: Insights and Promising Practices Utilizing the Paul-Elder Approach at the University of Louisville”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 31(1): 98–110. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20163118
• Possin, Kevin, 2008, “A Field Guide to Critical-Thinking Assessment”, Teaching Philosophy , 31(3): 201–228. doi:10.5840/teachphil200831324
• –––, 2013a, “Some Problems with the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA) Test”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 28(3): 4–12. doi:10.5840/inquiryct201328313
• –––, 2013b, “A Serious Flaw in the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) Test”, Informal Logic , 33(3): 390–405. [ Possin 2013b available online ]
• –––, 2013c, “A Fatal Flaw in the Collegiate Learning Assessment Test”, Assessment Update , 25 (1): 8–12.
• –––, 2014, “Critique of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Test: The More You Know, the Lower Your Score”, Informal Logic , 34(4): 393–416. [ Possin 2014 available online ]
• –––, 2020, “CAT Scan: A Critical Review of the Critical-Thinking Assessment Test”, Informal Logic , 40 (3): 489–508. [Available online at https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/6243]
• Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Rear, David, 2019, “One Size Fits All? The Limitations of Standardised Assessment in Critical Thinking”, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education , 44(5): 664–675. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1526255
• Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1762, Émile , Amsterdam: Jean Néaulme.
• Scheffler, Israel, 1960, The Language of Education , Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
• Scriven, Michael, and Richard W. Paul, 1987, Defining Critical Thinking , Draft statement written for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction. Available at http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
• Sheffield, Clarence Burton Jr., 2018, “Promoting Critical Thinking in Higher Education: My Experiences as the Inaugural Eugene H. Fram Chair in Applied Critical Thinking at Rochester Institute of Technology”, Topoi , 37(1): 155–163. doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9392-1
• Siegel, Harvey, 1985, “McPeck, Informal Logic and the Nature of Critical Thinking”, in David Nyberg (ed.), Philosophy of Education 1985: Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society , Normal, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, pp. 61–72.
• –––, 1988, Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking, and Education , New York: Routledge.
• –––, 1999, “What (Good) Are Thinking Dispositions?”, Educational Theory , 49(2): 207–221. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1999.00207.x
• Simon, Herbert A., 1956, “Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment”, Psychological Review , 63(2): 129–138. doi: 10.1037/h0042769
• Simpson, Elizabeth, 1966–67, “The Classification of Educational Objectives: Psychomotor Domain”, Illinois Teacher of Home Economics , 10(4): 110–144, ERIC document ED0103613. [ Simpson 1966–67 available online ]
• Skolverket, 2018, Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class and School-age Educare , Stockholm: Skolverket, revised 2018. Available at https://www.skolverket.se/download/18.31c292d516e7445866a218f/1576654682907/pdf3984.pdf; last accessed 2022 07 15.
• Smith, B. Othanel, 1953, “The Improvement of Critical Thinking”, Progressive Education , 30(5): 129–134.
• Smith, Eugene Randolph, Ralph Winfred Tyler, and the Evaluation Staff, 1942, Appraising and Recording Student Progress , Volume III of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers.
• Splitter, Laurance J., 1987, “Educational Reform through Philosophy for Children”, Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children , 7(2): 32–39. doi:10.5840/thinking1987729
• Stanovich Keith E., and Paula J. Stanovich, 2010, “A Framework for Critical Thinking, Rational Thinking, and Intelligence”, in David D. Preiss and Robert J. Sternberg (eds), Innovations in Educational Psychology: Perspectives on Learning, Teaching and Human Development , New York: Springer Publishing, pp 195–237.
• Stanovich Keith E., Richard F. West, and Maggie E. Toplak, 2011, “Intelligence and Rationality”, in Robert J. Sternberg and Scott Barry Kaufman (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3rd edition, pp. 784–826. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511977244.040
• Tankersley, Karen, 2005, Literacy Strategies for Grades 4–12: Reinforcing the Threads of Reading , Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Thayer-Bacon, Barbara J., 1992, “Is Modern Critical Thinking Theory Sexist?”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 10(1): 3–7. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews199210123
• –––, 1993, “Caring and Its Relationship to Critical Thinking”, Educational Theory , 43(3): 323–340. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1993.00323.x
• –––, 1995a, “Constructive Thinking: Personal Voice”, Journal of Thought , 30(1): 55–70.
• –––, 1995b, “Doubting and Believing: Both are Important for Critical Thinking”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 15(2): 59–66. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews199515226
• –––, 2000, Transforming Critical Thinking: Thinking Constructively , New York: Teachers College Press.
• Toulmin, Stephen Edelston, 1958, The Uses of Argument , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Turri, John, Mark Alfano, and John Greco, 2017, “Virtue Epistemology”, in Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition). URL = < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/epistemology-virtue/ >
• Vincent-Lancrin, Stéphan, Carlos González-Sancho, Mathias Bouckaert, Federico de Luca, Meritxell Fernández-Barrerra, Gwénaël Jacotin, Joaquin Urgel, and Quentin Vidal, 2019, Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking: What It Means in School. Educational Research and Innovation , Paris: OECD Publishing.
• Warren, Karen J. 1988. “Critical Thinking and Feminism”, Informal Logic , 10(1): 31–44. [ Warren 1988 available online ]
• Watson, Goodwin, and Edward M. Glaser, 1980a, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Form A , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
• –––, 1980b, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal: Forms A and B; Manual , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation,
• –––, 1994, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Form B , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
• Weinstein, Mark, 1990, “Towards a Research Agenda for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking”, Informal Logic , 12(3): 121–143. [ Weinstein 1990 available online ]
• –––, 2013, Logic, Truth and Inquiry , London: College Publications.
• Willingham, Daniel T., 2019, “How to Teach Critical Thinking”, Education: Future Frontiers , 1: 1–17. [Available online at https://prod65.education.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/main-education/teaching-and-learning/education-for-a-changing-world/media/documents/How-to-teach-critical-thinking-Willingham.pdf.]
• Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus, 1996, Virtues of the Mind: An Inquiry into the Nature of Virtue and the Ethical Foundations of Knowledge , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139174763

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking (AILACT)
• Critical Thinking Across the European Higher Education Curricula (CRITHINKEDU)
• Critical Thinking Definition, Instruction, and Assessment: A Rigorous Approach
• Critical Thinking Research (RAIL)
• Foundation for Critical Thinking
• Insight Assessment
• Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21)
• The Critical Thinking Consortium
• The Nature of Critical Thinking: An Outline of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities , by Robert H. Ennis

abilities | bias, implicit | children, philosophy for | civic education | decision-making capacity | Dewey, John | dispositions | education, philosophy of | epistemology: virtue | logic: informal

Copyright © 2022 by David Hitchcock < hitchckd @ mcmaster . ca >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2024 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Critical Thinking in Academic Research - Second Edition

(4 reviews)

Cindy Gruwell, University of West Florida

Robin Ewing, St. Cloud State University

Copyright Year: 2022

Last Update: 2023

Publisher: Minnesota State Colleges and Universities

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Julie Jaszkowiak, Community Faculty, Metropolitan State University on 12/22/23

Organized in 11 parts, this his textbook includes introductory information about critical thinking and details about the academic research process. The basics of critical thinking related to doing academic research in Parts I and II. Parts III –... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

Organized in 11 parts, this his textbook includes introductory information about critical thinking and details about the academic research process. The basics of critical thinking related to doing academic research in Parts I and II. Parts III – XI provide specifics on various steps in doing academic research including details on finding and citing source material. There is a linked table of contents so the reader is able to jump to a specific section as needed. There is also a works cited page with information and links to works used for this textbook.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

The content of this textbook is accurate and error free. It contains examples that demonstrate concepts from a variety of disciplines such as “hard science” or “popular culture” that assist in eliminating bias. The authors are librarians so it is clear that their experience as such leads to clear and unbiased content.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

General concepts about critical thinking and academic research methodology is well defined and should not become obsolete. Specific content regarding use of citation tools and attribution structure may change but the links to various research sites allow for simple updates.

Clarity rating: 5

This textbook is written in a conversational manner that allows for a more personal interaction with the textbook. It is like the reader is having a conversation with a librarian. Each part has an introduction section that fully defines concepts and terms used for that part.

Consistency rating: 5

In addition to the written content, this textbook contains links to short quizzes at the end of each section. This is consistent throughout each part. Embedded links to additional information are included as necessary.

Modularity rating: 4

This textbook is arranged in 11 modular parts with each part having multiple sections. All of these are linked so a reader can go to a distinct part or section to find specific information. There are some links that refer back to previous sections in the document. It can be challenging to return to where you were once you have jumped to a different section.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

There is clear definition as to what information is contained within each of the parts and subsequent sections. The textbook follows the logical flow of the process of researching and writing a research paper.

Interface rating: 4

The pictures have alternative text that appears when you hover over the text. There is one picture on page 102 that is a link to where the downloaded picture is from. The pictures are clear and supportive of the text for a visual learner. All the links work and go to either the correct area of the textbook or to a valid website. If you are going to use the embedded links to go to other sections of the textbook you need to keep track of where you are as it can sometimes get confusing as to where you went based on clicking links.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

This is not really a grammatical error but I did notice on some of the quizzes if you misspelled a work for fill in the blank it was incorrect. It was also sometimes challenging to come up with the correct word for the fill in the blanks.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

There are no examples or text that are culturally insensitive or offensive. The examples are general and would be applicable to a variety of students study many different academic subjects. There are references and information to many research tools from traditional such as checking out books and articles from the library to more current such as blogs and other electronic sources. This information appeals to a wide expanse of student populations.

I really enjoyed the quizzes at the end of each section. It is very beneficial to test your knowledge and comprehension of what you just read. Often I had to return and reread the content more critically based on my quiz results! They are just the right length to not disrupt the overall reading of the textbook and cover the important content and learning objectives.

Reviewed by Sara Stigberg, Adjunct Reference Librarian, Truman College, City Colleges of Chicago on 3/15/23

Critical Thinking in Academic Research thoroughly covers the basics of academic research for undergraduates, including well-guided deeper dives into relevant areas. The authors root their introduction to academic research principles and practices... read more

Critical Thinking in Academic Research thoroughly covers the basics of academic research for undergraduates, including well-guided deeper dives into relevant areas. The authors root their introduction to academic research principles and practices in the Western philosophical tradition, focused on developing students' critical thinking skills and habits around inquiry, rationales, and frameworks for research.

This text conforms to the principles and frames of the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, published by the Association of College and Research Libraries. It includes excellent, clear, step-by-step guides to help students understand rationales and techniques for academic research.

Essential for our current information climate, the authors present relevant information for students who may be new to academic research, in ways and with content that is not too broad or too narrow, or likely to change drastically in the near future.

The authors use clear and well-considered language and explanations of ideas and terms, contextualizing the scholarly research process and tools in a relatable manner. As mentioned earlier, this text includes excellent step-by-step guides, as well as illustrations, visualizations, and videos to instruct students in conducting academic research.

(4.75) The terminology and framework of this text are consistent. Early discussions of critical thinking skills are tied in to content in later chapters, with regard to selecting different types of sources and search tools, as well as rationales for choosing various formats of source references. Consciously making the theme of critical thinking as applied to the stages of academic research more explicit and frequent within the text would further strengthen it, however.

Modularity rating: 5

Chapters are divided in a logical, progressive manner throughout the text. The use of embedded links to further readings and some other relevant sections of the text are an excellent way of providing references and further online information, without overwhelming or side-tracking the reader.

Topics in the text are organized in logical, progressive order, transitioning cleanly from one focus to the next. Each chapter begins with a helpful outline of topics that will be covered within it.

There are no technical issues with the interface for this text. Interactive learning tools such as the many self-checks and short quizzes that are included throughout the text are a great bonus for reinforcing student learning, and the easily-accessible table of contents was very helpful. There are some slight inconsistencies across chapters, however, relative to formatting images and text and spacing, and an image was missing in the section on Narrowing a Topic. Justifying copy rather than aligning-left would prevent hyphenation, making the text more streamlined.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

(4.75) A few minor punctuation errors are present.

The authors of this text use culturally-relevant examples and inclusive language. The chapter on Barriers to Critical Thinking works directly to break down bias and preconceived notions.

Overall, Critical Thinking in Academic Research is an excellent general textbook for teaching the whys and hows of academic research to undergraduates. A discussion of annotated bibliographies would be a great addition for future editions of the text. ---- (As an aside for the authors, I am curious if the anonymous data from the self-checks and quizzes is being collected and analyzed for assessment purposes. I'm sure it would be interesting!)

Reviewed by Ann Bell-Pfeifer, Program Director/ Instructor, Minnesota State Community and Technical College on 2/15/23

The book has in depth coverage of academic research. A formal glossary and index were not included. read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

The book has in depth coverage of academic research. A formal glossary and index were not included.

The book appears error free and factual.

The content is current and would support students who are pursuing writing academic research papers.

Excellent explanations for specific terms were included throughout the text.

The text is easy to follow with a standardized format and structure.

The text contains headings and topics in each section.

It is easy to follow the format and review each section.

Interface rating: 5

The associated links were useful and not distracting.

No evidence of grammatical errors were found in the book.

The book is inclusive.

The book was informative, easy to follow, and sequential allowing the reader to digest each section before moving into another.

Reviewed by Jenny Inker, Assistant Professor, Virginia Commonwealth University on 8/23/22

This book provides a comprehensive yet easily comprehensible introduction to critical thinking in academic research. The author lays a foundation with an introduction to the concepts of critical thinking and analyzing and making arguments, and... read more

This book provides a comprehensive yet easily comprehensible introduction to critical thinking in academic research. The author lays a foundation with an introduction to the concepts of critical thinking and analyzing and making arguments, and then moves into the details of developing research questions and identifying and appropriately using research sources. There are many wonderful links to other open access publications for those who wish to read more or go deeper.

The content of the book appears to be accurate and free of bias.

The examples used throughout the book are relevant and up-to-date, making it easy to see how to apply the concepts in real life.

The text is very accessibly written and the content is presented in a simple, yet powerful way that helps the reader grasp the concepts easily. There are many short, interactive exercises scattered throughout each chapter of the book so that the reader can test their own knowledge as they go along. It would be even better if the author had provided some simple feedback explaining why quiz answers are correct or incorrect in order to bolster learning, but this is a very minor point and the interactive exercises still work well without this.

The book appears consistent throughout with regard to use of terminology and tone of writing. The basic concepts introduced in the early chapters are used consistently throughout the later chapters.

This book has been wonderfully designed into bite sized chunks that do not overwhelm the reader. This is perhaps its best feature, as this encourages the reader to take in a bit of information, digest it, check their understanding of it, and then move on to the next concept. I loved this!

The book is organized in a manner that introduces the basic architecture of critical thinking first, and then moves on to apply it to the subject of academic research. While the entire book would be helpful for college students (undergraduates particularly), the earlier chapters on critical thinking and argumentation also stand well on their own and would be of great utility to students in general.

This book was extremely easy to navigate with a clear, drop down list of chapters and subheadings on the left side of the screen. When the reader clicks on links to additional material, these open up in a new tab which keeps things clear and organized. Images and charts were clear and the overall organization is very easy to follow.

I came across no grammatical errors in the text.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

This is perhaps an area where the book could do a little more. I did not come across anything that seemed culturally insensitive or offensive but on the other hand, the book might have taken more opportunities to represent a greater diversity of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds.

This book seems tailor made for undergraduate college students and I would highly recommend it. I think it has some use for graduate students as well, although some of the examples are perhaps little basic for this purpose. As well as using this book to guide students on doing academic research, I think it could also be used as a very helpful introduction to the concept of critical thinking by focusing solely on chapters 1-4.

Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Part I. What is Critical Thinking?
• Part II. Barriers to Critical Thinking
• Part III. Analyzing Arguments
• Part IV. Making an Argument
• Part V. Research Questions
• Part VI. Sources and Information Needs
• Part VII. Types of Sources
• Part VIII. Precision Searching
• Part IX. Evaluating Sources
• Part X. Ethical Use and Citing Sources
• Part XI. Copyright Basics
• Works Cited
• About the Authors

Ancillary Material

About the book.

Critical Thinking in Academic Research - 2nd Edition provides examples and easy-to-understand explanations to equip students with the skills to develop research questions, evaluate and choose the right sources, search for information, and understand arguments. This 2nd Edition includes new content based on student feedback as well as additional interactive elements throughout the text.

About the Contributors

Cindy Gruwell is an Assistant Librarian/Coordinator of Scholarly Communication at the University of West Florida. She is the library liaison to the department of biology and the College of Health which has extensive nursing programs, public health, health administration, movement, and medical laboratory sciences. In addition to supporting health sciences faculty, she oversees the Argo IRCommons (Institutional Repository) and provides scholarly communication services to faculty across campus. Cindy graduated with her BA (history) and MLS from the University of California, Los Angeles and has a Masters in Education from Bemidji State University. Cindy’s research interests include academic research support, publishing, and teaching.

Robin Ewing is a Professor/Collections Librarian at St. Cloud State University. Robin is the liaison to the College of Education and Learning Design. She oversees content selection for the Library’s collections. Robin graduated with her BBA (Management) and MLIS from the University of Oklahoma. She also has a Masters of Arts in Teaching from Bemidji State University. Robin’s research interests include collection analysis, assessment, and online teaching.

Contribute to this Page

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

The effect of cognitive ability on academic achievement: The mediating role of self-discipline and the moderating role of planning

Associated data.

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/ Supplementary material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

In this study, 572 secondary school students aged 15–18 years old stage were selected to study the effect of their cognitive ability and self-discipline and planning on academic achievement. Cognitive ability was classified into memory ability, representational ability, information processing ability, logical reasoning ability, and thinking conversion ability, and analyzed the effects of these five ability values on academic achievement. The mediating effect of self-discipline ability between cognitive ability and academic achievement was analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM), and the moderating role of planning in the mediating effect was analyzed using planning as a moderating variable. The results showed that cognitive ability can have a significant positive effect on academic achievement, while self-discipline plays a partially mediating role between cognitive ability and academic achievement, and the moderating effect of Planning is significant in the second half of the mediating effect, i.e., the effect of self-discipline on academic achievement changes as the level of planning increases, and the mediating effect is stronger in the condition of higher planning, and the mediating model with moderating effect holds.

Introduction

According to Zhao (2017) , academic achievement refers to the actual performance of students’ mastery of academic knowledge and skills as demonstrated through examinations after systematic knowledge and skills learning. In the Chinese educational student evaluation system, universities usually classify students by academic achievement. Liu (2019) argued that academic achievement, especially in China’s college entrance exams, determines students’ future development, so studying the factors that enhance academic achievement will help each student’s learning and development. Under the educational selection system that is being implemented in China, academic achievement is the measure of students’ academic achievement and the most important reference factor for admission to colleges and universities.

Both cognitive ability and self-discipline have been key factors affecting students’ academic achievement ( Liang et al., 2020 ). Self-discipline has become one of the key factors governing students’ academic achievement, especially since schools adopted online instruction following the outbreak of COVID-19 ( Schulz, 2021 ). However, it is not clear the way in which cognitive ability and self-discipline work together to influence students’ overall academic achievement. Also, planning, an important factor influencing academic achievement ( Cao and Cao, 2004 ), has rarely been examined alongside cognitive ability and self-discipline for its impact on academic achievement.

In this study, the cognitive ability, self-discipline, planning, and academic achievement of high school students were studied, and a structural equation with a moderating mediating effect was constructed with self-discipline as the mediating variable and planning as the moderating variable to analyze the mediating effect of self-discipline between cognitive ability and academic achievement, and the moderating effect of planning under the mediating effect.

The effect of cognitive ability

Cognitive ability refers to the human brain’s ability to store memory, process and extraction of information, includes attention, memory and logical reasoning, and thinking transformation. It is a key factor that research can consistently predict Academic Achievement ( Stadler et al., 2016 ). Past research has centered on the direct effect of personal decent cognitive abilities of students on Academic Achievement ( Kuncel et al., 2004 ; Miriam et al., 2011 ). Rohde and Thompson (2007) concluded that cognitive ability can directly affect academic achievement with a correlation of 0.38. Ian et al. (2006) , in a study of over 70,000 British students A 5-year follow-up study found a correlation between cognitive ability and academic achievement of 0.81. Grass step-by-step analysis through multivariate analysis obtained that logical reasoning skills can significantly affect students’ performance in science and chemistry ( Grass et al., 2017 ). Liu et al. (2021) measured the cognitive abilities of spatial imagination, computation, and information processing in 499 Chinese children and teamed up to analyze the association between students’ academic achievement in mathematics and Chinese for two consecutive school years and found significant correlations between visual-spatial imagination, computation, and information processing abilities and academic achievement. Most such previous studies have examined the single effect of cognitive ability on academic achievement at the individual student level ( Kuncel et al., 2004 ; Miriam et al., 2011 ). In addition, the above findings support the knowledge process theory ( Deary et al., 2006 ; Xu and Li, 2015 ), which concludes that when students’ cognitive abilities are high, they are able to encode key information more quickly and accurately in memory, thus enabling the brain to output more and more effective information, resulting in better academic achievement on exams ( Liu and Wang, 2000 ; Zhang and Zhang, 2011 ). Conversely, at lower levels of cognitive ability, some knowledge is missed in the knowledge process, which further reduces effective information output and leads to lower academic achievement ( Miriam et al., 2011 ). These findings also support the results of previous analyses indicating that cognitive ability usually contributes significantly to academic achievement.

Although there is a significant relationship between cognitive abilities and Academic Achievement, existing research is difficult to model the effect of cognitive abilities on Academic Achievement. In fact, in terms of student learning, cognitive abilities are very important in students’ learning activities, and it is not only about different cognitive abilities, but also relates to the ways in which these different abilities function together ( David, 2005 ). There are many controversies about the pattern of influence of cognitive ability on Academic Achievement in different studies ( Formazin et al., 2011 ). Zhang (2008) found that logical reasoning ability (LRA) had a correlation coefficient of about 0.3 with Chinese and mathematics scores, while thinking transformation ability (TCA) had no significant correlation with scores in these two subjects. However, Xu and Li (2015) found a significant correlation between thinking transformation ability and performance in these two subjects. These results suggest that the complex role of cognitive ability is difficult to reveal comprehensively and systematically when only the effect of a single cognitive factor on Academic Achievement is examined.

Through the research of many scholars, we can find that the effect of students’ cognitive ability on academic achievement is significant, but the complex mechanisms of their influence remain very ambiguous. The importance of cognitive abilities in students’ learning activities is only reflected in the researcher’s predetermined scope of investigation, which contains one or more cognitive abilities specific to the researcher, while outside the scope of investigation, these cognitive abilities still operate in an unpredictable manner ( David, 2005 ), thus, scholars still do not reach a consensus on why cognitive abilities affect academic achievement due to the inconsistent scope of investigation of students’ cognitive abilities ( Formazin et al., 2011 ).

In addition, Past research has tended to examine the impact of a single cognitive ability, while research under the combined influence of multiple cognitive abilities is lacking. Therefore, in this study, according to classification of cognitive abilities by Wo and Lin (2000) and Liang et al. (2020) , these researchers conducted numerous studies and explored five categories of cognitive abilities, namely, information processing, logical reasoning, working memory, thought transformation, and representation, getting scientific and valid conclusions and summarizing the test methods for different cognitive abilities. Specifically, they developed a software system to measure these five cognitive abilities, which has measured more than 2 million students in mainland China, and obtained normative data applicable to measure the cognitive ability of students in mainland China at this stage. This cognitive ability assessment system has been fully tested for its reliability and validity, and can assess students’ cognitive ability very accurately. In addition, the Chinese invention patent of this cognitive ability assessment system has been obtained by Wo (2010) . Therefore, this study explored the specific effects of different cognitive abilities on academic achievement and proposed the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1: Cognitive ability can positively predict students’ academic achievement.

The mediating role of self-discipline

Many studies are generally agreed by researchers that cognitively competent students have better Academic Achievement ( Kuncel et al., 2004 ; Miriam et al., 2011 ; Stadler et al., 2016 ). However, there are several other researchers’ studies that suggest that cognitive ability is only one of many determinants of high academic achievement of students ( Shao, 1983 ). Several studies find that self-discipline is also a factor that influences how well students achieve academically, and self-discipline is the ability of students to manage their self-perceptions, emotions, and behaviors consciously according to learning requirements or their own goal expectations without external supervision or restrictions ( Xie, 2009 ). Dai (2013) examined the correlation between self-regulation, emotional stability, and academic achievement and found a significant positive relationship between self-discipline and academic achievement. Duckworth and Seligman (2010) used American eighth-grade students as studied the effect of self-regulation on academic achievement and found that self-regulation had a positive effect on student achievement. Zhao (2017) found that self-discipline significantly predicted academic achievement in upper elementary school students. Wang (2003) designed his own self-discipline questionnaire and surveyed 885 middle to high school students in Shanghai and showed that self-discipline was a significant positive predictor of academic achievement. Many previous studies have shown a significant positive correlation between students’ self-discipline and academic achievement. However, the mechanism by which self-discipline affects academic achievement remains unclear.

Cognitive ability and self-discipline are both independent and interrelated elements of individual students’ psychology ( Li and Zhang, 2015 ), since cognitive ability and self-discipline are indicators of different dimensions of students in the learning process, many scholars have different opinions about their relevance ( James et al., 2006 ). Most studies have concluded that the correlation between self-discipline and cognitive ability is small, and therefore, cognitive ability and self-discipline are often used as independent variables affecting students’ academic achievement ( Roemer et al., 2022 ); however, some scholars have argued that cognitive ability and self-discipline influence each other ( Borghans et al., 2008 ), and Ruffing, in conducting an analysis of factors influencing academic achievement, found that both cognitive ability and self-discipline can significantly and positively influence academic achievement, and that cognitive ability and self-discipline have a correlation ( Ruffing et al., 2015 ).

In recent years, the correlation relationship between cognitive ability and self-discipline has received more attention, and some researchers have used long-term follow-up survey data to confirm the influence relationship between cognitive ability and self-discipline both theoretically and empirically, and found that cognitive ability can significantly influence self-discipline ( Heckman et al., 2018 ). Self-discipline enables students to focus more on tasks and achieve better academic achievement ( Nesayan et al., 2018 ). Therefore, the following hypotheses were formulated in this study.

Hypothesis 2: Self-discipline mediates the relationship between cognitive ability and academic achievement.

Moderating effect of planning

Planning is the psychological and behavioral characteristics of an individual’s use of time and has a multidimensional and multilevel psychological structure ( Zhang et al., 2001 ). Planning can directly affect students’ motivation, effort, thought processes and mental processes. Wang (2007) found that planning has a significant effect on the academic achievement of secondary school students. Good planning can better achieve the balance between wanting to learn and personality ( Mirzaei et al., 2012 ), control and arrange their study and life rationally, and improve academic achievement ( Li et al., 2016 ). Cao and Cao (2004) found that the ability to manage and organize time effectively greatly influenced the academic achievement of high school students through a study of their planning. Further research on the relationship between planning and students’ academic achievement found that planning had some predictive power on academic achievement, but it was only modeled from a single-factor perspective, without further research on multi-factor modeling ( Zhang et al., 2001 ).

After considering cognitive abilities and personality traits, it was found that planning does not directly affect academic achievement, but rather acts as a moderator between academic achievement. Claessens et al. (2010) argued that although planning is related to academic achievement, the extent and form of its effect is not in a direct manner. Meanwhile, Claessens found, after a study, that planning, although it can generate a sense of control over time, only moderates academic achievement, because planning was related to factors such as cognitive variables and personality differences, the study found that there was no significant positive relationship between planning and academic achievement ( Claessens et al., 2007 ). In addition, Macan (1994) proposed a time management process model based on an emphasis on task execution mechanisms (time planning, scheduling) and learning goals, and argued that planning as a latent variable moderates learning attitudes within learners.

In terms of self-discipline theory, planning regulates the implementation of individual goals and tasks, and effort management, including perseverance in performing tasks and self-motivation, ensures that goals are accomplished. Malte et al. (2009) also suggest that students regulate their own efforts through planning to achieve better performance. Studies have found that planning is a personality disposition that reflects or regulates cognitive activity ( Dickson, 1981 ) and is a regulation of cognition. Cognitive activities can directly enable cognitive subjects to make progress in cognitive activities; whereas planning can only indirectly make progress in cognitive activities through the regulation of cognitive activities ( Wang, 1999 ). Meanwhile, cognitive theory suggests that cognitive processes determine the production of emotions and behaviors, and changes in emotions and behaviors can also affect cognitive changes ( Li, 1999 ). Based on the above findings, it is hypothesized that planning moderates the effect of cognitive ability on academic achievement when it affects academic achievement.

In addition, laxity in planning is the most obvious external manifestation of academic procrastination ( Wu et al., 2014 ), which is often caused by individuals’ inability to control their own behavior and their inability to plan their time rationally, thus leading to lower learning efficiency and affecting academic achievement. Self-discipline is a stable and reliable personality trait, but self-discipline is a manifestation of students’ internal self-discipline, which cannot be mapped to the external study plan, and the lack of a scientific and reasonable study plan can also lead to academic procrastination and reduce study efficiency. For example, Fang and Wang (2003) found that there was no significant difference in self-discipline between students with good academic achievement and students with poor academic achievement, but there were significant or highly significant differences in five dimensions of time management: conceptual, planning, strategic, integrated, and immediate. Based on the above studies, it is hypothesized that planning moderates the effect of self-discipline on academic achievement when it affects academic achievement. It is hypothesized that planning moderates the effect of self-discipline on academic achievement.

Therefore, this study hypothesizes that self-discipline mediates between cognitive ability and academic achievement, and that planning moderates the mediating effect of self-discipline between cognitive ability and academic achievement, and proposes the following research hypothesis.

Hypothesis 3: planning can positively moderate the effect of cognitive ability on self-discipline.

Hypothesis 4: Planning can positively regulate the effect of self-discipline on academic achievement.

Hypothesis 5: planning can moderate the mediating role of self-discipline ability between cognitive ability and academic achievement.

The main research relationships of the structural equation model are shown in Figure 1 .

Structural equation relationship diagram. MA, Memory ability; IPA, Information processing ability; RA, Representation ability; LRA, Logical reasoning ability; TCA, Thinking conversion ability.

Materials and methods

Participants.

The ethical examination of this study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Science and Technology Beijing, and the study was conducted in accordance with the regulations for the protection of human subjects. This study selected 572 students as samples, all aged 15–18 years old, As shown in Table 1 .

Distribution of participating students.

Both the cognitive ability, Self-discipline and Planning measures in this research were conducted on campus. The students who took the test were organized by staff and tested in a separate classroom. The entire test lasted for 2 h.

Structural equation models were developed based on the obtained students’ cognitive ability, self-discipline, planning ability, and academic achievement, and composite achievement models and sub-subject models were developed for Chinese, mathematics, and English, respectively. Each model was first tested for common method bias in the analysis process, and then the fit of the model was tested according to the CFA test procedure. When all tests were passed, the mediating effect analysis process with moderation was followed by first bringing cognitive ability, self-discipline and planning ability into the structural equation model to see the model fit, then bringing the interaction term of planning on cognitive ability and self-discipline ability into the model to compare whether the model fit was optimized, and finally testing the mediating effect of self-discipline ability with the bootstrap method and analyzing the planning with the simple slope test moderation effect.

Cognitive ability

A stimulus-informed cognitive ability system designed by Wo (2010) was used for the cognitive ability test. The stimulus information cognitive ability value test system adopts the world’s leading EEG ultra-low frequency fluctuation analyzer and ASL504/501 eye movement instrument as the basic research means, from the brain mechanism of individual psychological development, combining laboratory experiments and field experiments, using subtractive reaction time and additive reaction time (accurate to nanoseconds), microgenetics and other techniques, and adopting the form of microcomputer manual operation. The discriminative power and accuracy of the test results were greatly improved, and the accumulated sample norms of more than 2 million people were used to make the individual quantitative indicators of the subjects comparable with their peers.

The test questions of information processing ability include three parts: image selection response, graphic comparison response, and image matching response. Test questions for memory ability included two parts: Number forward and reverse memory and image matching response. Test questions of expressive ability include three parts: Spatial image manipulation, spatial image reasoning, and spatial image comparison. The test question of thought conversion ability is text-image matching test. The test questions for logical reasoning ability are conceptual reasoning and logical method reasoning.

The cognitive accuracy of the tested students was obtained by statistical methods, and their corresponding cognitive ability values were quantified and the quantified values were converted into T-scores to obtain the final cognitive ability values of the tested students. The final cognitive ability values contain five ability values: MA, LRA, RA, IPA, and TCA. The test method has been patented as an invention, and the sample size of the general test exceeds 2 million. The values of students’ cognitive abilities obtained from the test were normally distributed with a range of trends of ± 50 centered at 100, with high discriminant validity. The Cronbach’s alpha of the test ranged among 0.80–0.90.

Self-discipline

This study used the Self-discipline Scale designed by Zhang et al. (2005) for secondary school students. The scale has six questions on self-discipline. The positive questions were evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale: 5 (very much the same), 4 (comparatively the same), 3 (uncertain), 2 (relatively different), and1 (very different)—this test will test the score of each item. For example, the scores for each item of self-discipline were recorded as A1 to A6, where A4 was the reverse-scored questions. The total score for self-control was then A = (A1 + A2 + …… + 6)/6. The calculated total score is then converted into a Z-score based on the mean and standard deviation, and then the Z-score is converted into a T-score with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10, then the T-score is the value of the test student’s self-discipline ability. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the dimensions ranged from 0.60 to 0.93, with a validity of 0.91 and a test regression reliability of 0.85.

The planning scale was designed by Huang and Zhang (2001) . The scale uses a 5-point Likert scale: 5 (very much the same), 4 (comparatively the same), 3 (uncertain), 2 (relatively different), and1 (very different). There were 24 questions. After assessing the students, the corresponding planning values were obtained by accumulating the scores of each question and converting them into T-scores as the values of students’ planning. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the dimensions was 0.88.

Academic achievement

In the current research, in order to reduce the influence due to the level of students’ test performance, the average of the students’ four test scores in the semester when the cognitive ability was tested to be worthy was used as the academic score for each subject, and the raw scores were standardized (scores were assigned according to levels, with the highest score being 100 and the lowest being 0. In this study, three subjects, Chinese, Math and English, were selected for the study, and the composite academic score was the sum of the three subject’s total scores.

Data analysis

This study first analyzed the correlations between cognitive ability, Self-disciplines, planning, and academic achievement, and then analyzed the mediating role of s self-disciplines and the moderating effect of planning using structural equation modeling according to the moderated mediating utility modeling procedure proposed by Wen and Ye (2014) , and analyzed the pattern of the moderating role through a simple slope test. SPSS 25.0 and Mplus 8.3 software were used to analyze the data.

Common method deviation test

The Harman one-way test was used to statistically control for common method bias, and the items of all variables were subjected to unrotated principal component factor analysis ( Podsakoff et al., 2003 ), and an exploratory factor analysis of three variables (cognitive ability, Self-disciplines and planning) was conducted. According to the results, the three factors had eigenroots greater than 1 after factor rotation, with the first factor explaining 29.74% of the variance (less than 40% of the critical value) ( Wang et al., 2016 ).

Descriptive and bivariate analyses

The structural equation modeling was used in this study to examine the effects of cognitive ability, self-discipline, and planning on academic achievement, and the results are shown in Table 2 . Cognitive ability, Self-disciplines, planning, and academic achievement all showed significant positive correlations. For more data, see Supplementary material .

Means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations for variables.

N = 572, * p < 0.05,** p < 0.001.

Measurement model check

An exploratory factor analysis was required to check the quality of the model before conducting a moderated mediated effects analysis. This study included one latent variable, namely cognitive ability, and two explicit variables, self-discipline and planning. The results of the test showed a good fit of the model with χ 2 (7) = 12.092, CFI = 0.992, TLI = 0.983, SRMR = 0.018, RMESA = 0.050, 90% CI = [0.013, 0.086], indicating that the fitted indicators were within the normal reception range. Table 3 also shows that the latent variable indicators have significant standardized loadings on the corresponding factors ( p < 0.001).

Factor loading coefficient table.

*** p < 0.001.

Moderating model checking

In this study, structural equation modeling was used to examine the effects of cognitive ability, self-discipline, and planning on academic achievement, and the results are shown in Figure 2 . The effects of cognitive ability on academic achievement, the mediating role of self-discipline, and the moderating role of planning were analyzed according to the mediated modeling process with regulation proposed by Wen and Ye (2014) .

Structural equation modeling results diagram (Comprehensive Academic Achievement). MA, Memory ability; IPA, Information processing ability; RA, Representation ability; LRA, Logical reasoning ability; TCA, Thinking conversion ability. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

Model 1: Impact on comprehensive academic achievement

Referring to the steps of analysis of mediated model with moderation summarized by Wen and Ye (2014) and combined with the hypotheses of this study, Cognitive ability (X), Self-discipline (W), Comprehensive Academic achievement (Y), and Planning (U) were used as variables. In addition, all indicators were standardized to reduce the effect of multicollinearity. First, a direct effect model was developed with Cognitive ability(X) as the independent variable and Comprehensive Academic achievement(Y) as the dependent variable, and the direct effect was tested to see if it was moderated by Planning(U). The results show that the model without the interaction term fits well: χ 2 /df = 4.71, CFI = 0.942, TLI = 0.909, RMESA = 0.119, and SRMR = 0.065. For the mediated model with the interaction term, AIC = 73948.290, compared to the AIC value of the baseline model (74672.583), which is reduced by 724.293, indicating that the mediated model with adjustment has improved compared with the baseline model; At the same time, For the mediated model with the interaction term, Log Likelihood = –36931.145, which is 370.147 higher than the Log Likelihood of the baseline model (–37301.292), that is, the value of –2LL is 370.147, the degree of freedom of the model is increased by 8, and the chi-square test of –2LL value is significant ( p < 0.05), so the mediated model with adjustment fits better than the baseline model.

Cognitive ability was a positive predictor of Comprehensive Academic achievement (β = 0.612, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.532, 0.681]; the interaction term of Cognitive ability and Planning was a significant predictor of Comprehensive Academic achievement (β = 0.144, p < 0.01), 95% CI = [0.064, 0.226]. It indicates that the direct relationship between Cognitive ability and Comprehensive Academic achievement is moderated by Planning.

Second, the effect of Cognitive ability (X) on Comprehensive Academic achievement (Y) through Self-discipline (W) was tested to see if it was moderated by Planning (U), and the results are shown in Figure 2 . The data show that the model fit index is well: χ 2 /df = 5.15, CFI = 0.935, TLI = 0.899, RMESA = 0.126, and SRMR = 0.073. For the mediated model with adjustment including the interaction term, AIC = 65973.542, compared to the AIC value of the baseline model (74533.415), which is reduced by 8559.873, indicating an improvement of the mediated model with adjustment compared to the baseline model; meanwhile, the Log Likelihood of the mediated model with adjustment = –32943.771, compared to the Log Likelihood of the baseline model (–37230.708), increased by 4286.937, which means that the –2LL value is 4286.937. The increase in the degrees of freedom of the model is 8, and the chi-square test for the –2LL value is significant ( p < 0.05), so the mediated model with adjustment fits better than the baseline model.

Cognitive ability (X) significantly predicts comprehensive Academic Achievement (Y) (β = 0.337, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.251, 0.420]. Cognitive ability (X) can significantly predict Self-discipline (W) (a1 = 0.423, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.340, 0.497]. The interaction term (UX) of Cognitive ability (X) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict Self-discipline (W) (a3 = 0.083, p = 0.218), 95% CI = [–0.052, 0.210], containing 0. Self-discipline(W) can significantly predict Comprehensive Academic achievement(Y) (b1 = 0.622, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.550, 0.689]; the interaction term (UX) of Cognitive ability (X) and Planning (U) can significantly predict Comprehensive Academic achievement (Y) (c3′ = 0.090, p < 0.05), 95% CI = [0.007, 0.170]; the interaction term (UW) between Self-discipline (W) and Planning (U) can significantly predict Comprehensive Academic achievement (Y) (b2 = 0.104, p < 0.05), 95% CI = [0.034, 0.191]. In addition, 95% CI for a1b2, a3b1, and a3b2 were calculated using the Bootstrap method and were [0.016, 0.078], [–0.014, 0.050], and [0.000, 0.001], respectively, with only 95% CI for a1b2 not containing 0. Thus, it is evident that the Self-discipline in the mediating effect between cognitive ability and comprehensive academic achievement was significant (mediating effect = 2.884, SE = 0.398, p < 0.001, 95% CI = [2.148, 3.706]), while the discipline was moderated by Planning in the second half of the mediating effect, the effect of Self-discipline on comprehensive academic achievement varied with the level of planning; the first half of the mediating effect of Self-discipline was not moderated by planning. Hypotheses 2 and 4 are valid, but hypothesis 3 is not.

To further explore the moderating effect of Planning, students were divided into “high/low Planning groups” using a positive/negative one standard deviation boundary for Planning. The simple slope test (see Figure 3 ) showed that Self-discipline was a significant positive predictor of Comprehensive Academic achievement in the “high Planning group” (β = 1.874, p < 0.001); in the “Low Planning group,” although the predictive effect was still significant (β = 1.846, p < 0.001), it was weaker than in the “High Planning group.” In addition, when the process of mediation is moderated, it is required to test whether the mediating effect varies with changes in the moderating variable U, as suggested by Edwards and Lambert (2007) , which is to take the value of one standard deviation above and below the mean of U (standard UH = 1, UL =–1) to determine whether there was a difference in the mediating effect between the two groups. In the high planning group, the mediating effect of self-discipline was 2.906, 95% CI = [2.162, 3.732]; in the low planning group, the mediating effect of self-discipline was 2.862, 95% CI = [2.128, 3.681]; the comparison mediating effect was significant ( p < 0.01), 95% CI = [0.016, 0.078]. This indicates that the mediation effect is stronger in the higher Planning condition and the mediation model with moderation is validated. Hypothesis 5 is valid.

Simple slope test (comprehensive academic achievement).

Model 2: Impact on Chinese academic achievement

Referring to the steps of analysis of mediated model with moderation summarized by Wen and Ye (2014) and combined with the hypotheses of this study, Cognitive ability (X), Self-discipline (W), Chinese Academic Achievement (Y), and Planning (U) were used as variables. In addition, all indicators were standardized to reduce the effect of multicollinearity. First, a direct effect model was developed with Cognitive ability(X) as the independent variable and Chinese Academic Achievement (Y) as the dependent variable, and the direct effect was tested to see if it was moderated by Planning(U). The results show that the model without the interaction term fits well: χ 2 /df = 4.63, CFI = 0.914, TLI = 0.867, RMESA = 0.118, and SRMR = 0.056. For the mediated model with the interaction term, AIC = 73863.031, compared to the AIC value of the baseline model (74568.601), which is reduced by 705.570, indicating that the mediated model with adjustment has improved compared with the baseline model; At the same time, For the mediated model with the interaction term, Log Likelihood = –36888.516, which is 360.785 higher than the Log Likelihood of the baseline model (–37249.031), that is, the value of –2LL is 360.785, the degree of freedom of the model is increased by 8, and the chi-square test of –2LL value is significant ( p < 0.05), so the mediated model with adjustment fits better than the baseline model.

Cognitive ability (X) significantly predicts Chinese Academic Achievement (Y)(β = 0.386, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.291, 0.471]; the interaction term of Cognitive ability and Planning was a significant predictor of Chinese Academic Achievement (β = 0.099, p < 0.05), 95% CI = [0.024, 0.178]. It indicates that the direct relationship between Cognitive ability and Chinese Academic Achievement is moderated by Planning.

Second, the effect of Cognitive ability (X) on Chinese Academic achievement (Y) through Self-discipline (W) was tested to see if it was moderated by Planning (U), and the results are shown in Figure 4 . The data show that the model fit index is well: χ 2 /df = 5.01, CFI = 0.906, TLI = 0.854, RMESA = 0.124, and SRMR = 0.060. For the mediated model with adjustment including the interaction term, AIC = 65901.693, compared to the AIC value of the baseline model (74428.485), which is reduced by 8526.792, indicating an improvement of the mediated model with adjustment compared to the baseline model; meanwhile, the Log Likelihood of the mediated model with adjustment = –32907.847, compared to the Log Likelihood of the baseline model (–37178.242), increased by 4270.395, which means that the –2LL value is 4270.395, The increase in the degrees of freedom of the model is 8, and the chi-square test for the –2LL value is significant ( p < 0.05), so the mediated model with adjustment fits better than the baseline model.

Structural equation modeling results diagram (Chinese Academic Achievement). MA, Memory ability; IPA, Information processing ability; RA, Representation ability; LRA, Logical reasoning ability; TCA, Thinking conversion ability. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

The predictive effect of Cognitive ability (X) on Chinese Academic Achievement (Y) was significant (β = 0.282, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.176, 0.381]. Cognitive ability (X) can significantly predict Self-discipline (W) (a1 = 0.423, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.342, 0.497]. the interaction term (UX) of Cognitive ability (X) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict Self-discipline (W) (a3 = –0.089, p = 0.205), 95% CI = [–0.220, 0.052], containing 0. Self-discipline(W) can significantly predict Chinese Academic Achievement(Y) (b1 = 0.249, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.161, 0.336]; the interaction term (UX) between Cognitive ability (X) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict Chinese Academic Achievement (Y) (c3′ = –0.088, p = 0.052), 95% CI = [–0.178, 0.001], containing 0; the interaction term (UW) between Self-discipline (W) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict Chinese Academic Achievement (Y)(b2 = 0.015, p = 0.637), 95% CI = [–0.049, 0.075], containing 0. In addition, 95% CI for a1b2, a3b1, and a3b2 were calculated using the Bootstrap method and were [–0.003, 0.004], [–85.243, 98.343], and [–1.645, 1.110], respectively, with 95% CI all contained 0. Therefore, the mediating effect of Self-discipline between Cognitive ability and Chinese Academic achievement was significant [mediating effect = 0.343, SE = 0.069, p < 0.001, 95% CI = (0.224.0.504)], but the moderating effect of Planning was not significant.

Model 3: Impact on Mathematics academic achievement

Referring to the steps of analysis of mediated model with moderation summarized by Wen and Ye (2014) and combined with the hypotheses of this study, Cognitive ability (X), Self-discipline (W), Mathematics Academic achievement (Y), and Planning (U) were used as variables. In addition, all indicators were standardized to reduce the effect of multicollinearity. First, a direct effect model was developed with Cognitive ability(X) as the independent variable and Mathematics Academic achievement(Y) as the dependent variable, and the direct effect was tested to see if it was moderated by Planning(U). The results show that the model without the interaction term fits well: χ 2 /df = 4.72, CFI = 0.909, TLI = 0.858, RMESA = 0.120, and SRMR = 0.059. For the mediated model with the interaction term, AIC = 74066.091, compared to the AIC value of the baseline model (74767.932), which is reduced by 700.901, indicating that the mediated model with adjustment has improved compared with the baseline model; At the same time, For the mediated model with the interaction term, Log Likelihood = –36990.486, which is 358.480 higher than the Log Likelihood of the baseline model (–37348.966), that is, the value of –2LL is 358.480, the degree of freedom of the model is increased by 8, and the chi-square test of –2LL value is significant ( p < 0.05), so the mediated model with adjustment fits better than the baseline model.

Cognitive ability was a positive predictor of Mathematics Academic achievement (β = 0.278, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.180, 0.370]; the interaction term of Cognitive ability and Planning was a non-significant predictor of Mathematics Academic achievement was not significantly predicted by the interaction term between Cognitive ability and Planning (β = 0.036, p = 0.377), 95% CI = [–0.044, 0.118], containing 0. This indicates that the direct relationship between Cognitive ability and Mathematics Academic achievement was not affected by Planning of the direct relationship was not moderated by Planning.

Self-discipline (W) was tested to see if it was moderated by Planning (U), and the results are shown in Figure 5 . The data show that the model fit index is well: χ 2 /df = 5.154, CFI = 0.900, TLI = 0.844, RMESA = 0.126, and SRMR = 0.059. For the mediated model with adjustment including the interaction term, AIC = 66101.190, compared to the AIC value of the baseline model (74628.260), which is reduced by 8527.070, indicating an improvement of the mediated model with adjustment compared to the baseline model; meanwhile, the Log Likelihood of the mediated model with adjustment = –33007.595, compared to the Log Likelihood of the baseline model (–37278.130), increased by 4270.535, which means that the –2LL value is 4270.535, The increase in the degrees of freedom of the model is 8, and the chi-square test for the –2LL value is significant ( p < 0.05), so the mediated model with adjustment fits better than the baseline model.

Structural equation modeling results diagram (Mathematics Academic Achievement). MA, Memory ability; IPA, Information processing ability; RA, Representation ability; LRA, Logical reasoning ability; TCA, Thinking conversion ability. * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.

Cognitive ability (X) significantly predicts mathematics Academic Achievement (Y) (β = 0.110, p < 0.05), 95% CI = [0.002, 0.216]. Cognitive ability (X) can significantly predict Self- discipline (W) (a1 = 0.422, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.339, 0.497]. The interaction term (UX) of Cognitive ability (X) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict Self-discipline (W) (a3 = 0.082, p = 0.221), 95% CI = [–0.053, 0.210], containing 0. Self-discipline(W) can significantly predict Mathematics Academic achievement(Y) (b1 = 0.371, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.292, 0.444]; the interaction term (UX) between Cognitive ability (X) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict Mathematics Academic achievement (Y) (c3′ = –0.015, p = 0.725), 95% CI = [–0.100, 0.065]; the interaction term (UW) of Self-discipline (W) and Planning (U) can significantly predict Mathematics Academic achievement (Y) (b2 = 0.094, p < 0.05), 95% CI = [0.023, 0.178]. In addition, 95% CI for a1b2, a3b1, and a3b2 were calculated using the Bootstrap method and were [0.002, 0.011], [–0.005, 0.022], and [0.000, 0.000], respectively, with only 95% CI for a1b2 not containing 0. Thus, It is clear that the mediating effect of self-discipline between cognitive ability and academic achievement in mathematics was significant [mediating effect = 0.279, SE = 0.130, p < 0.05, 95% CI = (0.001.0.518)], while the discipline’s mediating effect was moderated by planning in the second half, the effect of Self-discipline on Mathematics Academic achievement varied with the level of Planning; the first half of Self-discipline’s mediating effect was not The first half of the mediating effect of Self-discipline was not moderated by Planning.

To further explore the moderating effect of Planning, students were divided into “high/low Planning groups” using a positive/negative one standard deviation boundary for Planning. The simple slope test (see Figure 6 ) showed that the positive predictive effect of Self-discipline on Mathematics Academic achievement was significant in the “high Planning group” (β = 0.793, p < 0.001); in the “Low Planning group,” although the predictive effect was still significant (β = 0.775, p < 0.001), it was weaker than in the “High Planning group.”

Simple slope test (mathematics academic achievement).

In addition, when the process of mediation is moderated, it is required to test whether the mediating effect varies with changes in the moderating variable U, as suggested by Edwards and Lambert (2007) , which is to take the value of one standard deviation above and below the mean of U (standard UH = 1, UL = –1) to determine whether there was a difference in the mediating effect between the two groups. In the high planning group, the mediating effect of self-discipline was 0.282, 95% CI = [0.001, 0.524]; in the low planning group, the mediating effect of self-discipline was 0.276, 95% CI = [0.002, 0.513]; the comparison mediating effect was significant ( p < 0.05), 95% CI = [0.001, 0.017]. This indicates that the mediation effect is stronger in the higher Planning condition and the mediation model with moderation is validated.

Model 4: Impact on English academic achievement

Referring to the steps of analysis of mediated model with moderation summarized by Wen and Ye (2014) and combined with the hypotheses of this study, Cognitive ability (X), Self-discipline (W), English Academic achievement (Y), and Planning (U) were used as variables. In addition, all indicators were standardized to reduce the effect of multicollinearity. First, a direct effect model was developed with Cognitive ability(X) as the independent variable and English Academic achievement(Y) as the dependent variable, and the direct effect was tested to see if it was moderated by Planning(U). The results show that the model without the interaction term fits well: χ 2 /df = 4.64, CFI = 0.911, TLI = 0.861, RMESA = 0.118, and SRMR = 0.058. For the mediated model with the interaction term, AIC = 74024.164, compared to the AIC value of the baseline model (74728.602), which is reduced by 704.438, indicating that the mediated model with adjustment has improved compared with the baseline model; At the same time, For the mediated model with the interaction term, Log Likelihood = –36969.082, which is 360.219 higher than the Log Likelihood of the baseline model (–37329.301), that is, the value of –2LL is 360.219, the degree of freedom of the model is increased by 8, and the chi-square test of –2LL value is significant ( p < 0.05), so the mediated model with adjustment fits better than the baseline model.

Cognitive ability was a positive predictor of English Academic achievement (β = 0.274, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.178, 0.363]; the interaction term of Cognitive ability and Planning was a non-significant predictor of English Academic achievement (β = 0.088, p < 0.01), 95% CI = [–0.022, 0.175], contains 0. This indicates that the direct relationship between Cognitive ability and English Academic achievement is not moderated by Planning of moderation.

Second, the effect of Cognitive ability (X) on English Academic achievement (Y) through Self-discipline (W) was tested to see if it was moderated by Planning (U), and the results are shown in Figure 7 . The data show that the model fit index is well: χ 2 /df = 5.03, CFI = 0.902, TLI = 0.848, RMESA = 0.124, and SRMR = 0.059. For the mediated model with adjustment including the interaction term, AIC = 66061, 794, compared to the AIC value of the baseline model (74588.633), which is reduced by 8526.839, indicating an improvement of the mediated model with adjustment compared to the baseline model; meanwhile, the Log Likelihood of the mediated model with adjustment = –32987.897, compared to the Log Likelihood of the baseline model (–37258.317), increased by 4270.420, which means that the –2LL value is 4270.420, The increase in the degrees of freedom of the model is 8, and the chi-square test for the –2LL value is significant ( p < 0.05), so the mediated model with adjustment fits better than the baseline model.

Structural equation modeling results diagram (English Academic Achievement). MA, Memory ability; IPA, Information processing ability; RA, Representation ability; LRA, Logical reasoning ability; TCA, Thinking conversion ability. * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.

Cognitive ability (X) significantly predicts English Academic Achievement (Y) (β = 0.135, p < 0.05), 95% CI = [0.027, 0.235]. Cognitive ability (X) can significantly predict Self-discipline (W) (a1 = 0.421, p < 0.001), 95% CI = [0.339, 0.496]. The interaction term (UX) of Cognitive ability (X) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict Self-discipline (W) (a3 = 0.082, p = 0.221), 95% CI = [–0.052, 0.209], containing 0. Self-discipline(W) can significantly predict English Academic achievement(Y) (b1 = 0.318, p < 0.001), 95%CI = [0.233, 0.397]; the interaction term (UX) between Cognitive ability (X) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict English Academic achievement (Y) (c3′ = 0.063, p = 0.206), 95% CI = [–0.035, 0.164]; the interaction term (UW) between Self-discipline (W) and Planning (U) cannot significantly predict English Academic achievement (Y) (b2 = 0.047, p = 0.179), 95% CI = [–0.022, 0.117]. In addition, 95% CI for a1b2, a3b1, and a3b2 were calculated using the Bootstrap method and were [–0.001, 0.011], [–0.004, 0.018], and [0.000, 0.000], respectively, 95% CI containing 0. Thus, it can be seen that Self-discipline in Cognitive ability and English Academic achievement was significant [mediating effect = 0.266, SE = 0.096, p < 0.01, 95% CI = (0.068.0.452)], but the moderating effect of Planning was not significant.

The direct impact of cognitive ability

In China, the high school level is the best time for students to develop their cognitive abilities, and the intensive learning difficulty and frequent examinations also help students to further improve their cognitive abilities while demonstrating the important role of cognitive abilities in academic achievement. At the high school level, the impact of different types of cognitive abilities on Academic Achievement varies across subjects ( Zuo and Wang, 2016 ; Liang et al., 2020 ).

IPA (information processing ability) mainly refers to students’ ability to comprehend information after obtaining it through reading and listening, and is closely related to students’ classroom efficiency. Students with higher IPA ability can fully understand and master what teachers teach in class and quickly construct their own knowledge system, thus improving their knowledge mastery and achieving better academic achievement in exams ( Yuan and Wen, 2003 ). The effects of IPA on academic achievement in Chinese and mathematics are comparable because, under the current testing system in China, mathematics exams increase students’ ability to read and extract key information and focus more on their thinking skills, while Chinese exams also increase the amount of reading and require students to have a high IPA to achieve better academic achievement ( Lin, 2021 ). The impact of IPA on academic achievement in English is weaker than that in Chinese and mathematics because the current test focuses on the vocabulary range of students in English, and less on the deeper reading and thinking skills than in Chinese.

TCA (Thinking Conversion Ability) refers to the student’s active thinking in the learning process to understand knowledge, mainly in the speed and accuracy of thinking conversion, therefore, this ability can facilitate learning in various disciplines, especially in mathematics, where students with high TCA ability can more easily summarize existing knowledge and expand new thinking and skills in the problem solving process, and to make analogies in similar problems, thus improving the accuracy of solving novel and difficult problems, and thus improving their academic achievement ( Liu, 1988 ).

MA (memory ability) mainly refers to students’ long term memory ability. the stronger the MA ability value, the more students can remember knowledge quickly and retain it over time ( Liang et al., 2020 ). In addition, MA can interact with IPA to grasp more reading information through memory ability, which leads to faster comprehension of information during reading and significantly improves students’ reading ability, which is especially evident in reading comprehension questions in English and Chinese exams. As a result, academic achievement is also better among students with stronger MA proficiency values ( Yu et al., 2014 ).

LRA (Logical Reasoning Ability) includes both inductive and deductive reasoning types. Recently, higher education entrance examinations in China have begun to focus on students’ reasoning ability, which is also reflected in the addition of a large number of logical reasoning questions in Chinese and English subjects ( Hu, 2017 ); therefore, LRA also has a significant positive impact on academic achievement in Chinese and English examinations.

RA (representational ability) is a key cognitive ability that can effectively help students understand mathematical spatial imagery-like knowledge content ( Shao et al., 2004 ). Also, RA can stimulate associative memory by forming images in students’ minds during the process of reciting knowledge related to Chinese and English, thus making students’ memory of knowledge stronger and longer lasting, and thus improving academic achievement ( Lin et al., 2003 ).

The present study showed that self-discipline partially mediates the relationship between cognitive ability and Academic Achievement. Self-discipline is a behavioral habit, and self-management is the essence of self-discipline. Self-discipline follows certain principles and norms and relies on the student’s own willpower to accomplish the desired goal’s behavioral ability without supervision ( Liu, 2020 ).

A higher level of self-discipline means that students are more able to concentrate and resist external temptations during the learning process, which can help them be more effective in their studies. Especially for high school students, the higher the value of self-discipline, the better they can make the most of their time, the more efficient and independent thinking they can do, thus improving their understanding and mastery of knowledge and leading to improved academic achievement. In addition, according to the teaching schedule in Beijing, school ends at 16:30 every afternoon and students manage the rest of the day by themselves. Students with high self-discipline can fully and rationally use their time, thus consolidating what they have learned, improving their understanding and mastery, and achieving better overall academic results in academic exams.

The stronger the cognitive ability of students, the more efficient students are in their studies, the more focused they are in their studies, and the more likely they are to achieve a sense of academic achievement ( Wang, 2011 ). Therefore, the stronger the cognitive ability of students, the easier it is to immerse themselves in learning, the more willing they are to learn actively and positively, and the more able they are to customer service external temptations, thus continuously improving their self-discipline. When students encounter difficulties and challenges in learning, students with strong cognitive ability have stronger creative thinking ability, such as TCA, RA, and LRA, which can help students solve problems more quickly and efficiently, thus allowing students to stay focused on learning and develop strong self-discipline ( Wo and Lin, 2000 ); when students’ learning is disturbed by the outside world, students with strong cognitive ability This helps students to resist loose learning behaviors and develop stronger self-discipline, so that they can devote more time and energy to their studies, improve their learning efficiency, and enhance their academic achievement ( Zheng and Zhang, 2021 ).

Specifically, self-discipline plays a partially mediating role in overall academic achievement, with a mediating role of 0.263 and a mediating effect of 38.3%; in Chinese academic achievement, self-discipline plays a partially mediating role, with a mediating role of 0.105 and a mediating effect of 27.1%; in mathematics academic achievement, self-discipline plays a partially mediating role, with a mediating role of 0.157 and a mediating effect of The mediating effect of self-discipline in English academic achievement was partially mediated by 0.134, with a mediating effect of 49.8%. As can be seen, the mediating effect of self-discipline is more pronounced in mathematics and English subjects, which is because the examinations of mathematics subjects pay more attention to the assessment of students’ thinking ability, which requires students to think and train for a long time, especially in TCA and LRA, which require students to improve and show these abilities in a long time and highly focused learning process, so for students with strong cognitive ability, the therefore, for students with strong cognitive abilities, the stronger their self-discipline and the longer they focus during the examinations, the more they can show the characteristics of their TCA and LRA abilities, and the more they can achieve better academic results during the examinations. In addition, in the English subject test subjects, the effect of the mediating role of self-discipline in multiple English subjects also appears to be prominent as the test questions become increasingly important in assessing students’ thinking over and above the assessment of mastery of basic knowledge ( Lin, 2021 ) with the advancement of Chinese test reform.

The moderating mediating role of planning

The present study found that planning moderates the second half of academic achievement by influencing academic achievement. Specifically, students with high plannings were more likely to affect academic achievement through cognitive ability compared to students with low plannings, and hypotheses 4 and 5 were tested. Furthermore, in contrast to our expectations, planning did not moderate the direct effect of cognitive ability and the first half of the mediating effect.

The moderating effect of planning was significant in the second half of the mediating effect. planning is an important component of an individual’s self-regulated learning strategy, and as a personality trait, it can stimulate factors such as an individual’s motivation to learn and the ability to self-regulate learning activities, thus facilitating the accomplishment of learning goals ( Cao and Cao, 2004 ), and students who perceive themselves as having a better command of time In addition, the stronger a student’s planning is, the better the student’s ability to manage time, which is a guarantee of high learning effectiveness and high academic achievement ( Wang, 2003 ).

In the first half of the mediating effect, the moderating effect of planning is not significant. The reason for this is that in the stage of influence of cognitive ability on self-discipline, it is mainly through the sense of academic achievement and academic self-confidence built up by cognitive ability that positively influences self-discipline and thus obtains better positive feedback, and this sense of academic achievement does not change with the adjustment of academic plan, so planning is not significant in regulating the influence of cognitive ability on self-discipline.

Also, among the subject-specific subjects, the moderating effect of planning was significant among academic achievement in mathematics, but not in Chinese and English. This is because for mathematics subjects, learning requires more rigorous logical arrangement and reasonable time security in order to fully understand and digest the knowledge learned and to improve one’s thinking ability, so as to improve academic achievement in mathematics. In contrast, Chinese and English subjects are more important to the accumulation of daily knowledge, which requires students to persist for a long time to see the effect, which is not related to the planning of learning arrangements ( Lin, 2021 ), so the moderating effect of planning is not significant.

In addition, the simple slope test revealed that when self-discipline is low, students with low planning ability perform better than students with high planning ability; when self-regulation is high, students with high planning ability perform better than students with low planning ability. This is due to the fact students with weak self-discipline, the stronger their planning ability and the more reasonable their time planning, the more likely they are to put pressure on themselves, which leads to weak execution ability and the inability to complete the planned study tasks, thus leading to lower and lower academic achievement. In contrast, when self-discipline is high, the stronger the planning ability and the more reasonable the time planning arranged, the more it helps students to improve their learning efficiency and give full play to their cognitive ability, thus excelling in academic achievement.

Limitations and future directions

In this study, only the external influences caused by two of the personality traits, self-discipline and planning, were considered in the analysis of the influence of cognitive ability on sustained academic achievement; similarly, the influence of other psychological states of the students on cognitive ability and academic achievement was not considered in the analysis. In addition, one of the most prominent limitations of this study is the small sample size and the single range of students investigated. To further enhance the credibility of the study results, more schools in other Chinese provinces should be selected for study and comparison. Future research could focus on this area to obtain more valuable findings.

This study used structural equation modeling to analyze the moderating effect of panning on the mediating effect of self-discipline on the relationship between cognitive ability and academic achievement. The results showed that cognitive ability can have a significant positive effect on academic achievement, while self-discipline plays a partially mediating role between cognitive ability and academic achievement, and the moderating effect of Planning is significant in the second half of the mediating effect, i.e., the effect of self-discipline on academic achievement changes as the level of planning increases, and the mediating effect is stronger in the condition of higher planning, and the mediating model with moderating effect holds.

Data availability statement

Ethics statement.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Science and Technology Beijing. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants or their legal guardian/next of kin.

Author contributions

YS contributed to the conception and design of the study and performed the statistical analysis. YS and SQ contributed to the data collection and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. Both authors contributed to the manuscript revision, read, and approved the submitted version.

Acknowledgments

We thank the professional Editage editing language services for ensuring that this manuscript is free of English grammatical errors.

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (L2124028) and the National Social Science Foundation of China (BFA220176).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1014655/full#supplementary-material

• Borghans L., Angela L. D., James J. H., Bas T. W. (2008). The economics and psychology of personality traits. J. Hum. Resour. 45 640–654. 10.1111/j.0042-7092.2007.00700.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cao L. R., Cao X. H. (2004). The effects of time management tendencies, cognitive styles, and meta-concern levels on academic achievement of high school students. Chin. J. Ergon. 10 13–15. 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8309.2004.03.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Claessens B. C., Eerde W. V., Rutte C. G., Roe R. A. (2007). A review of the time management literature. Pers. Rev. 36 255–276. 10.1108/00483480710726136 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Claessens B. C., Eerde W. V., Rutte C. G., Roe R. A. (2010). Planning behavior and perceived control of time at work. J. Organ. Behav. 25 937–950. 10.2307/4093778 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dai Y. (2013). A Correlation Study of Junior High School Students’ Learning Self-Control, Emotional Stability and Academic Achievement. Nanchang: JiangxiNormal University. [ Google Scholar ]
• David F. L. (2005). The role of nonverbal ability tests in identifying academically gifted students: an aptitude perspective. Gift. Child Q. 2 : 409 . 10.1177/001698620504900203 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deary I. J., Steve S., Pauline S., Cres F. (2006). Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence 35 13–21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dickson W. P. (1981). Childrens Oral Communication Skills. New York, NY: Academic Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duckworth A. L., Seligman M. (2010). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic achievement of adolescents. Psychol. Sci. 16 939–944. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01641.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Edwards J. R., Lambert L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: a general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psycholo Methods 12 1–22. 10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.1 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fang A. R., Wang H. P. (2003). A comparative study of study time management between academically gifted students and academically disadvantaged students. Prim. Second. School. Abroad 4 45–49. 10.3969/j.issn.1007-8495.2003.04.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Formazin M., Schroeders U., Kller O., Wilhelm O., Westmeyer H. (2011). Studierendenauswahl im fach psychologie. Psychol. Rundschau 62 221–236. 10.1026/0033-3042/a000093 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grass J., Strobel A., Strobel A. (2017). Cognitive investments in academic success: the role of need for cognition at University. Front. Psychol. 8 : 790 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00790 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heckman J. J., Humphries J. E., Veramendi G. (2018). Returns to education: the causal effects of education on earnings, health, and smoking. J. Polit. Econ. 126 S197–S246. 10.1086/698760 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hu X. D. (2017). The principles and paths of the core competence of chinese in the college entrance examination. J. China Exam. 7 58–65. 10.19360/j.cnki.11-3303/g4.2017.07.012 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huang X. T., Zhang Z. J. (2001). Development of the adolescent time management tendency scale. Acta Psychol. Sin. 4 338–343. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ian J. D., Steve S., Pauline S., Cres F. (2006). Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence 35 13–21. 10.1016/j.intell.2006.02.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• James J. H., Jora S., Sergio U. (2006). The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. NBER Work. Pap. 24 411–482. 10.1086/504455 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuncel N. R., Hezlett S. A., Ones D. S. (2004). Academic Achievement, career potential, creativity, and job performance: can one construct predict them all? J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 86 148–161. 10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.148 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li C., Wang N. X., Li Q. F. (2016). Advances in research related to time management tendencies of undergraduate nursing students. Chin. Gen. Prac. Nurs. 14 1641–1643. 10.3969/j.issn.1674-4748.2016.16.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li T., Zhang W. T. (2015). International trends in the study of personality economics. Econ. Perspect. 8 128–143. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li X. Y. (1999). Cognitive theory of PTSD and cognitive-behavioral therapy. Chin. J. Clin. Psychol. 7 125–128. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liang X. L., He J., Liu P. P. (2020). The influence of cognitive ability on academic achievement of junior middle school students: a mediated moderation model. Psychol. Dev. Educ. 36 449–461. 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2020.04.08 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin C. D., Wo J. Z., Liu H. J. (2003). An EEG study on the intelligence development of primary and middle school students. Stud. Psychol. Behav. 1 5–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin H. P. (2021). Comprehensively promote the reform of the college entranceexamination content to help build a high-quality education system. J. China Exam. 1 1–7. 10.19360/j.cnki.11-3303/g4.2021.01.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu J., Wang H. L. (2000). Application of information processing learning theory in educational technology. Inserv. Educ. Train. Sch. Teach. 12 51–52. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu L. J. (2020). On the cultivation of students’ self-discipline ability. J. Dalian Educ. Univ. 2 52–53. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu S., Wei W., Chen Y., Hugo P., Zhao J. (2021). Visual–spatial ability predicts academic achievement through arithmetic and reading abilities. Front. Psychol. 11 : 591308 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.591308 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu X. J. (2019). Analysis of Factors Affecting High School Students’ College Entrance Examination Results. Hunan: Hunan University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu Y. (1988). On the cultivation of thinking conversion ability in middle school mathematics teaching. J. Yangzhou Univ. 3 110–114. 10.19411/j.1007-824x.1988.03.021 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Macan T. H. (1994). Time management: test of a process model. J. Appl.Psychol. 79 381–391. 10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.381 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Malte S., Ricarda S., Birgit S. (2009). How do motivational regulation strategies affect achievement: mediated by effort management and moderated by intelligence. Learn. Individ. Differ. 19 621–627. 10.1016/j.lindif.2009.08.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miriam V., Franzis P., Heinz H. (2011). Mental abilities and school achievement: a test of a mediation hypothesis. Intelligence 39 357–369. 10.1016/j.intell.2011.06.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mirzaei T., Oskouie F., Rafii F. (2012). Nursing students’ time man-agement, reducing stress and gaining satisfaction: a grounded theory study. Nurs. Health. Sci. 14 46–51. 10.1111/j.1442-2018.2011.00661.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nesayan A., Amani M., Asadi Gandomani R. (2018). A study of the cognitive profile of children and its relationship with academic achievement. Basic Clin. Neurosci. J. 10 165–174. 10.32598/bcn.9.10.230 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Lee J. Y., Podsakoff N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 879–903. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roemer L., Lechner C. M., Rammstedt B. (2022). Beyond competencies: associations between personality and school grades are largely independent of subject-specific and general cognitive competencies. J. Intellig. 10 : 26 . 10.3390/jintelligence10020026 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rohde T. E., Thompson L. A. (2007). Predicting academic achievement with cognitive ability. Intelligence 35 83–92. 10.1016/j.intell.2006.05.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ruffing S., Wach F.-S., Spinath F. M., Brünken R., Karbach J. (2015). Learning strategies and general cognitive ability as predictors of gender- specific academic achievement. Front. Psychol. 6 : 1238 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01238 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schulz E. T. (2021). Addictive use of digital devices in young children: associations with delay discounting, self-control and academic achievement. PLoS One 16 : e0253058 . 10.1371/journal.pone.0253058 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shao R. Z. (1983). Educational Psychology: Principles of Learning and Teaching. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shao Y. C., Huang F. E., Miao D. M., Liu X. F., Qi J. L., Liu L. H. (2004). Thevalidity of the image rotation test in predicting spatial ability. Chin. J. Aerosp. Med. 4 201–203. 10.1088/0031-9155/48/18/305 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stadler M., Miriam A., Nicolas B., Samuel G. (2016). Choosing between what you want now and what you want most: self-control explains academic achievement beyond cognitive ability. Personal. Individ. Differ. 94 168–172. 10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.029 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang H. J. (2003). Middle School Students’ Self-Control Ability and its Correlation With Academic Achievement. Shanghai: Shanghai Normal University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang L. (1999). The attribution, structure and assessmethod of metacognition. Adv. Psychol. Sci. 7 6–11. 10.3969/j.issn.1671-3710.1999.01.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang N. Q. (2011). A survey of middle school students’ mathematical selfmonitoring ability and its cultivation. J. Teach. Manag. 12 59–61. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang X. (2007). A Study on the Relationship Between Time Management Tendencies, Self-Esteem, and Academic Achievement of Secondary School Students. Beijing: Capital Normal University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang Y. L., Qin Y. L., Xiao C., Lin X. Y. (2016). The relationship between parental conflict and adolescent self-harm: a moderated mediation model. Psychol. Dev. Educ. 3 377–384. 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2016.03.15 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wen Z. L., Ye B. J. (2014). Mediated model test with moderation: competition or substitution? Acta Psychol. Sin. 46 714–726. 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2014.00714 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wo J. Z. (2010). Stimulating Information Cognitive Ability Value Test System and Method. Beijing: China National Intellectual Property Administration. CN101779960A. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wo J. Z., Lin C. D. (2000). Research on the development of adolescents’ self-monitoring ability. J. Psychol. Sci. 1 10–15. 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2000.01.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu W., Yao H. B., Zhang R. (2014). The relationship between self-efficacy, self-esteem and anxiety among medical students: mediating effects of time management tendencies. Chin. J. Health Stat. 31 749–751. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xie D. H. (2009). A Study on the Relationship Between Parental Rearing Style, Self-Concept and Self-Control Ability of Middle School Students. Changchun: Northeast Normal University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu F., Li C. H. (2015). The influence of junior middle school students’ cognitive ability on academic achievement. J. Psychol. Sci. 1 11–18. 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2015.01.033 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yu B., Le G. A., Liu H. J. (2014). Working memory and self-discipline. Adv. Psychol. Sci. 5 772–781. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yuan L. X., Wen J. Y. (2003). Research on the relationship between middle school students’ learning strategies and academic achievement. J. Guangdong Univ. Educ. 1 7–12. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang H., Wo J. Z., Liu C. M. (2005). “ The formulation of the norm of personality scale for senior high school students ,” in Proceedings of the 10th National Conference of Psychology , (Shanghai: Chinese Psychological Society; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang J. H., Zhang J. P. (2011). The evolution and thinking of information processing model in the learning process. Educ. Res. 1 40–43. 10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2011.01.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang J. L. (2008). Comparison of logical reasoning ability, metacognition, attention level and academic achievement of primary and middle school students. J. Psychol. Sci. 3 707–710. 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2008.03.035 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang Z. J., Huang X. T., Feng S. H. (2001). A study of factors associated with adolescents’ time management tendencies. J. Psychol. Sci. 6 649–653. 10.3969/j.issn.1671-6981.2001.06.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhao W. Y. (2017). Research on the Relationship Among Self-Control Ability, Academic Self-Efficacy and Academic Achievement of Secondary Vocational Students. Shijiazhuang: Hebei Normal University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zheng F., Zhang H. X. (2021). The influence of self- middle school habits on middle school students and their cultivation. Mod. Commun. 2 4–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zuo C. B., Wang E. G. (2016). The effect of processing speed on teenagers’reasoning ability and academic achievement. Psychol. Res. 4 82–87. [ Google Scholar ]

The Relationship between Critical Thinking and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis Study

• Ali Orhan Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1234-3919

Author Biography

Ali orhan, zonguldak bülent ecevit university.

Turkey [email protected] 0000-0003-1234-3919

Abbasi, A. & Izadpanah, S. (2018). The relationship between critical thinking, its subscales and academic achievement of English language course: The predictability of educational success based on critical thinking. Academy Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(2), 91-105.

Afshar, H. S., Movassagh, H. & Arbabi, H. R. (2017). The interrelationship among critical thinking, writing an argumentative essay in an L2 and their subskills. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 419-433. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2017.1320420

Afshar, H. S. & Movassagh, H. (2017). On the relationship among critical thinking, language learning strategy use and university achievement of Iranian English as a foreign language majors. The Language Learning Journal, 45(3), 382-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.914238

Akbarilakeh, M., Naderi, A. & Arbabisarjou, A. (2018). Critical Thinking and Emotional Intelligence Skills and Relationship with Students’ Academic Achievement. Prensa Medica Argentina, 104(2), 1-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/lpma.1000280

Altuntaş, E. Ç., Yılmaz, M. & Turan, S. L. (2017). An investigation on critical thinking tendencies of pre-service biology teachers. Ege Journal of Education, 19(1), 34-45. doi: 10.12984/egeefd.306019.

Amiri, F. (2018). The relationship between critical thinking, epistemological beliefs, and learning strategies with the students’ academic performance. Journal of Educational and Psychological Research, 15(58), 572-587.

Amuso, J. O. (2020). Verbal ability and critical thinking skills as determinants of students’ academic achievement in secondary school physics. International Journal of Educational Research and Policy Making, 3(1), 395-405.

Aydoğdu, İ. (2020). Investigation of the relationship between critical thinking perceptions and academic successes of primary school 4th grade students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University.

Bagheri, N. (2018). Critical thinking and autonomy in speaking ability: A case study. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 6(5), 73-83.

Bağcı, K. (2019). Relationship between critical thinking skills of secondary school students and their achievement in fine arts (Unpublished master thesis). Atatürk University, Erzurum.

Basmaz, I. (2017). Determination of critical thinking disposition in the context of reading comprehension, student, family and home environment variables [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ankara University.

Bingöl, P. (2019). The effect of project based learning on academic success and critical thinking in social studies teaching [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Atatürk University.

Ceylan, D. (2020). The predictive power of learning strategies and critical thinking tendencies on high school students' academic achievement [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Yeditepe University.

Esmaeel, N. M. & Zahra, Z. (2015). The relationship between critical thinking ability and listening comprehension ability of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 4(3), 47-59.

Fields, J. B. (2017). Assessing the effectiveness of a critical thinking program to academic success of community college students [Unpublished PhD thesis]. Trident University International.

Ghanizadeh, A. (2016). The interplay between reflective thinking, critical thinking, self-monitoring, and academic achievement in higher education. Higher Education, 74, 101–114.

Ghorbandordinejad, F. & Nourizade, F. (2015). Examination of the relationship between critical thinking disposition and English learning achievement as mediated by emotional intelligence. International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences, 22(4), 83-95.

Hesham, H. A. H. (2015). Metacognition, critical thinking, gender as predictors of achievement of 10th graders in science, technology, engineering and mathematic school (STEM). Psycho-Educational Research Reviews, 4(3), 42-48.

Kanbay, Y., Işık, E., Aslan, Ö. Tektaş, P. & Kılıç, N. (2017). Critical thinking skill and academic achievement development in nursing students: Four-year longitudinal study. American Journal of Educational Research and Reviews, 2(12), 1-10.

Karagöl, İ. & Bekmezci, S. (2015). Investigating academic achievements and critical thinking dispositions of teacher candidates. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(4), 86-92.

Karimi, M. N., Hashemi, M. R. & Sarbazfard, M. (2015). Emotional intelligence and critical thinking ability as correlates of EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 75-94.

Khaing, P. P. & Thein, N. N. (2018). A study of the correlation between students’ critical thinking skills and their mathematics achievement at the middle school level. Journal of the Myanmar Academy Academy of Arts and Science, 16(9A), 333-361.

Kıran, M. S. (2019). The relationship between the level of critical thinking skills and the level of reading comprehension success of 4th grade students in elementary school [Unpublished master’s thesis]. İnönü University.

Kutluca, A. Y., Yılmaz, A. & İbiş, E. (2018). Examination of teacher candidates’ critical thinking attitudes in terms of various variables. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26(6), 2045-2055. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.2309

León, J., Núñez, J. L., Ruiz-Alfonso, Z. & Bordón, B. (2015). Music academic performance: Effect of intrinsic motivation and critical thinking. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 20(2), 377-391.

Moslemi, Z., Ghomi, M. & Mohammadi, S. D. (2016). The relationship between critical thinking skills with mental health and academic achievement of Qom University of medical sciences students. Journal of Medical Education Development, 9(23), 90-101.

Mousazadeh, S., Momennasab, M., Bakhtiari, T. & Reisi, M. (2016). Nursing students' disposition toward critical thinking and its relationship with their academic performance. Journal of Nursing Education, 5(4), 20-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.21859/jne-05043

Musa, M. (2020). Investigation of the relationship between critical thinking levels and academic achievement levels of students in faculty of sports science. Educational Research and Reviews, 15(7), 370-376.

Mutlu, F., Polat, E., İlçin, M. & Kalkan, T. (2016). An investigation of critical thinking dispositions of physical education and sports school students’ in terms of some variables (Example: Niğde province). Journal of Sport Sciences Researches, 1(1), 27-36.

Nordin, N. (2015). Critical thinking as a predictor of students’ academic achievement: A study on Islamic studies students at Pahang Islamic College, Sultan Ahmad Shan, Kuantan. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 1, 46-56.

Öz, M. (2020). Effects of the science writing heuristic approach with using multimodal representations on students’ academic achievement and critical thinking in science education [Unpublished PhD thesis]. Kastamonu University.

Phakakat, S. & Sovajassatakul, T. (2020). Effects of copper model in blended service learning for the enhancement of undergraduate academic achievements and critical thinking. TEM Journal, 9(2), 814‐819.

Pienaar, J. (2019). Academic performance and cognitive critical thinking skills of certificate in theory of accounting students at Nelson Mandela University [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Nelson Mandela University.

Pozhhan, P., Goodarzi, K. & Roozbehani, M. (2019). Investigating the relationship between critical thinking and academic achievement in male students of the Islamic Azad University of Ahvaz Branch. International Journal of Philosophy and Social-Psychological Sciences, 5(3), 9-17.

Putra, H. M. (2019). An investigation link between critical thinking and reading comprehension: A case of A Madrasah in Lubuk Linggau, South Sumatera. Journal of Islamic Education, 24(1), 211-221.

Ren, X., Tong, Y., Peng, P. & Wang, T. (2020). Critical thinking predicts academic performance beyond general cognitive ability: Evidence from adults and children. Intelligence, 82, 1-10.

Schwanz, K. A. & McIlreavy, M. (2015). Academic performance of introductory psychology students: The importance of critical thinking. Research in Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, 3(2), 25-31.

Shahzadi, U., Nimmi & Khan, I. (2020). Exploring the relationship between critical thinking skills and academic achievement. Sir Syed Journal of Education & Social Research, 3(1), 236-242.

Shirazi, F. & Heidari, S. (2019). The relationship between critical thinking skills and learning styles and academic achievement of nursing students. The Journal of Nursing Research, 27(4), 1-7.

Sisay, Y. (2019a). Preparatory school learners’ level of critical thinking proficiency and its correlation with their academic achievement in Ethiopia: The missing ingredient. English Language, Literature & Culture, 4(2), 32-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.11648/j.ellc.20190402.11

Sisay, Y. (2019b). Upper primary learners’ level of critical thinking skill and its effect on students’ English language achievement in relation with sex. Budapest International Research and Critics in Linguistics and Education Journal, 2(4), 54-63.

Şahin Kölemen, C. & Erişen, Y. (2017). An investigation on the relationship between problem solving and critical thinking skill, and academic achievement of vocational and technical high school students. Turkey Education Journal, 2(2), 42-60.

Tafazzoli, M., Rashidi Fakari, F., Ramazanzadeh, M. & Sarli, A. (2015) The relationship between critical thinking dispositions and academic achievement in Iranian Midwifery Students. Nurse Practice Today, 2(3), 88-93.

Usta, M. (2019). Examination of reading-understanding levels and critical thinking skills of primary school teachers and primary school 4th grade students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Necmettin Erbakan University.

Wan, Z. H. & Cheng, M. H. M. (2019). Classroom learning environment, critical thinking and achievement in an interdisciplinary subject: A study of Hong Kong secondary school graduates. Educational Studies, 45(3), 285-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2018.1446331

Yavuz, M. M. (2019). The research of the connection between critical thinking level and social studies academic achievement of secondary school students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University.

Yüksekbilgili, B. (2019). Analyzing 4th grade students’ critical thinking abilities and math success level [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Gaziantep University.

Additional Files

How to cite.

• Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

Most read articles by the same author(s)

• Ali Orhan, Do Epistemological Beliefs Predict Critical Thinking Dispositions?: A Cross-sectional Study with Turkish High School Students , Psycho-Educational Research Reviews: Vol. 11 No. 2 (2022): Psycho-Educational Research Reviews

           PUBLISHER

Make a Submission

Information.

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

ITHENTICATE

flag counter

Current Issue

• How it works

What is Critical Thinking in Academics – Guide With Examples

Published by Grace Graffin at October 17th, 2023 , Revised On October 17, 2023

In an era dominated by vast amounts of information, the ability to discern, evaluate, and form independent conclusions is more crucial than ever. Enter the realm of “critical thinking.” But what does this term truly mean? 

What is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is the disciplined art of analysing and evaluating information or situations by applying a range of intellectual skills. It goes beyond mere memorisation or blind acceptance of information, demanding a deeper understanding and assessment of evidence, context, and implications.

Moreover, paraphrasing in sources is an essential skill in critical thinking, as it allows for representing another’s ideas in one’s own words, ensuring comprehension.

Critical thinking is not just an academic buzzword but an essential tool. In academic settings, it serves as the backbone of genuine understanding and the springboard for innovation. When students embrace critical thinking, they move from being passive recipients of information to active participants in their own learning journey.

They question, evaluate, and synthesise information from various sources, fostering an intellectual curiosity that extends beyond the classroom. Part of this involves understanding how to integrate sources into their work, which means not only including information from various places, but also doing so in a cohesive and logical way.

The importance of critical thinking in academics cannot be overstated. It equips students with the skills to discern credible sources from unreliable ones, develop well-informed arguments, and approach problems with a solution-oriented mindset.

The Origins and Evolution of Critical Thinking

The idea of critical thinking isn’t a new-age concept. Its roots reach back into ancient civilisations, moulding the foundations of philosophy, science, and education. To appreciate its evolution, it’s vital to delve into its historical context and the influential thinkers who have championed it.

Historical Perspective on the Concept of Critical Thinking

The seeds of critical thinking can be traced back to Ancient Greece, particularly in the city-state of Athens. Here, the practice of debate, dialogue, and philosophical inquiry was valued and was seen as a route to knowledge and wisdom. This era prized the art of questioning, investigating, and exploring diverse viewpoints to reach enlightened conclusions.

In medieval Islamic civilisation, scholars in centres of learning, such as the House of Wisdom in Baghdad, played a pivotal role in advancing critical thought. Their works encompassed vast areas, including philosophy, mathematics, and medicine, often intertwining rigorous empirical observations with analytical reasoning.

The Renaissance period further nurtured critical thinking as it was a time of revival in art, culture, and intellect. This era championed humanistic values, focusing on human potential and achievements. It saw the rebirth of scientific inquiry, scepticism about religious dogma, and an emphasis on empirical evidence.

Philosophers and Educators Who Championed Critical Thinking

Several philosophers and educators stand out for their remarkable contributions to the sphere of critical thinking:

Known for the Socratic method, a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue, Socrates would ask probing questions, forcing his pupils to think deeply about their beliefs and assumptions. His methodology still influences modern education, emphasising the answer and the path of reasoning that leads to it.

A student of Socrates, Plato believed in the importance of reason and inquiry. His allegory of the cave highlights the difference between blindly accepting information and seeking true knowledge.

He placed great emphasis on empirical evidence and logic. His works on syllogism and deductive reasoning laid the foundation for systematic critical thought.

Al-Farabi And Ibn Rushd (Averroes)

Islamic philosophers, who harmonised Greek philosophy with Islamic thought, emphasised the importance of rationality and critical inquiry.

Sir Francis Bacon

An advocate for the scientific method, Bacon believed that knowledge should be based on empirical evidence, observation, and experimentation rather than mere reliance on accepted truths.

A modern proponent of critical thinking, Dewey viewed it as an active, persistent, and careful consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowledge. He emphasised that students should be taught to think for themselves rather than just memorise facts.

Paulo Freire

Recognised for his ideas on “problem-posing education,” Freire believed that students should be encouraged to question, reflect upon, and respond to societal issues, fostering critical consciousness.

Characteristics of Critical Thinkers

Critical thinkers are not defined merely by the knowledge they possess, but by the manner in which they process, analyse, and use that knowledge. While the profile of a critical thinker can be multifaceted, certain core traits distinguish them. Let’s delve into these characteristics:

1. Open-mindedness

Open-mindedness refers to the willingness to consider different ideas, opinions, and perspectives, even if they challenge one’s existing beliefs. It allows critical thinkers to avoid being trapped in their own biases or preconceived notions. By being open to diverse viewpoints, they can make more informed and holistic decisions.

• Listening to a debate without immediately taking sides.
• Reading literature from different cultures to understand various world views.

2. Analytical Nature

An analytical nature entails the ability to break down complex problems or information into smaller, manageable parts to understand the whole better. Being analytical enables individuals to see patterns, relationships, and inconsistencies, allowing for deeper comprehension and better problem-solving.

• Evaluating a research paper by examining its methodology, results, and conclusions separately.
• Breaking down the components of a business strategy to assess its viability.

3. Scepticism

Scepticism is the tendency to question and doubt claims or assertions until sufficient evidence is presented. Skepticism ensures that critical thinkers do not accept information at face value. They seek evidence and are cautious about jumping to conclusions without verification.

• Questioning the results of a study that lacks a control group.
• Doubting a sensational news headline and researching further before believing or sharing it.

4. Intellectual Humility

Intellectual humility involves recognising and accepting the limitations of one’s knowledge and understanding. It is about being aware that one does not have all the answers. This trait prevents arrogance and overconfidence. Critical thinkers with intellectual humility are open to learning and receptive to constructive criticism.

• Admitting when one is wrong in a discussion.
• Actively seeking feedback on a project or idea to enhance it.

5. Logical Reasoning

Logical reasoning is the ability to think sequentially and make connections between concepts in a coherent manner. It involves drawing conclusions that logically follow from the available information. Logical reasoning ensures that decisions and conclusions are sound and based on valid premises. It helps avoid fallacies and cognitive biases.

• Using deductive reasoning to derive a specific conclusion from a general statement.
• Evaluating an argument for potential logical fallacies like “slippery slope” or “ad hominem.”

The Difference Between Critical Thinking and Memorisation

In today’s rapidly changing educational landscape, there is an ongoing debate about the importance of rote memorisation versus the significance of cultivating critical thinking skills. Both have their place in learning, but they serve very different purposes.

Nature Of Learning

• Rote Learning: Involves memorising information exactly as it is, without necessarily understanding its context or underlying meaning. It’s akin to storing data as-is, without processing.
• Analytical Processing (Critical Thinking): Involves understanding, questioning, and connecting new information with existing knowledge. It’s less about storage and more about comprehension and application.

Depth of Engagement

• Rote Learning: Often remains at the surface level. Students might remember facts for a test, but might forget them shortly after.
• Analytical Processing: Engages deeper cognitive skills. When students think critically, they’re more likely to retain information because they’ve processed it deeper.

Application in New Situations

• Rote Learning: Information memorised through rote often does not easily apply to new or unfamiliar situations, since it is detached from understanding.
• Analytical Processing: Promotes adaptability. Critical thinkers can transfer knowledge and skills to different contexts because they understand underlying concepts and principles.

Why Critical Thinking Produces Long-Term Academic Benefits

Here are the benefits of critical thinking in academics. 

Enhanced Retention

Critical thinking often involves active learning—discussions, problem-solving, and debates—which promotes better retention than passive memorisation.

Skill Development

Beyond content knowledge, critical thinking develops skills like analysis, synthesis, source evaluation , and problem-solving. These are invaluable in higher education and professional settings.

Adaptability

In an ever-evolving world, the ability to adapt is crucial. Critical thinkers are better equipped to learn and adapt because they don’t just know facts; they understand concepts.

Lifelong Learning

Critical thinkers are naturally curious. They seek to understand, question, and explore, turning them into lifelong learners who continually seek knowledge and personal growth.

Improved Decision-Making

Analytical processing allows students to evaluate various perspectives, weigh evidence, and make well-informed decisions, a skill far beyond academics.

Preparation for Real-World Challenges

The real world does not come with a textbook. Critical thinkers can navigate unexpected challenges, connect disparate pieces of information, and innovate solutions.

Steps in the Critical Thinking Process

Critical thinking is more than just a skill—it is a structured process. By following a systematic approach, critical thinkers can navigate complex issues and ensure their conclusions are well-informed and reasoned. Here’s a breakdown of the steps involved:

Step 1. Identification and Clarification of the Problem or Question

Recognizing that a problem or question exists and understanding its nature. It’s about defining the issue clearly, without ambiguity. A well-defined problem serves as the foundation for the subsequent steps. The entire process may become misguided without a clear understanding of what’s being addressed.

Example: Instead of a vague problem like “improving the environment,” a more specific question could be “How can urban areas reduce air pollution?”

Step 2. Gathering Information and Evidence

Actively seeking relevant data, facts, and evidence. This might involve research, observations, experiments, or discussions. Reliable decisions are based on solid evidence. The quality and relevance of the information gathered can heavily influence the final conclusion.

Example: To address urban air pollution, one might gather data on current pollution levels, sources of pollutants, existing policies, and strategies employed by other cities.

Step 3. Analysing the Information

Breaking down the gathered information, scrutinising its validity, and identifying patterns, contradictions, and relationships. This step ensures that the information is not just accepted at face value. Critical thinkers can differentiate between relevant and irrelevant information and detect biases or inaccuracies by analysing data.

Example: When examining data on pollution, one might notice that certain industries are major contributors or that pollution levels rise significantly at specific times of the year.

Step 4. Drawing Conclusions and Making Decisions

After thorough analysis, formulating an informed perspective, solution, or decision-based on the evidence. This is the culmination of the previous steps. Here, the critical thinker synthesises the information and applies logic to arrive at a reasoned conclusion.

Example: Based on the analysis, one might conclude that regulating specific industries and promoting public transportation during peak pollution periods can help reduce urban air pollution.

Step 5. Reflecting on the Process And The Conclusions Reached

Take a step back to assess the entire process, considering any potential biases, errors, or alternative perspectives. It is also about evaluating the feasibility and implications of the conclusions. Reflection ensures continuous learning and improvement. Individuals can refine their approach to future problems by evaluating their thinking process.

Example: Reflecting on the proposed solution to reduce pollution, one might consider its economic implications, potential industry resistance, and the need for public awareness campaigns.

The research done by our experts have:

• Precision and Clarity
• Zero Plagiarism
• Authentic Sources

The Role of Critical Thinking in Different Academic Subjects

Critical thinking is a universal skill applicable across disciplines. Its methodologies might differ based on the subject, but its core principles remain consistent. Let us explore how critical thinking manifests in various academic domains:

1. Sciences

• Hypothesis Testing: Science often begins with a hypothesis—a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. Critical thinking is essential in formulating a testable hypothesis and determining its validity based on experimental results.
• Experimental Design: Designing experiments requires careful planning to ensure valid and reliable results. Critical thinking aids in identifying variables, ensuring controls, and determining the best methodologies to obtain accurate data.
• Example: In a biology experiment to test the effect of light on plant growth, critical thinking helps ensure variables like water and soil quality are consistent, allowing for a fair assessment of the light’s impact.

2. Humanities

• Analysing Texts: Humanities often involve studying texts—literature, historical documents, or philosophical treatises. Critical thinking lets students decode themes, discern authorial intent, and recognise underlying assumptions or biases.
• Understanding Contexts: Recognizing a text or artwork’s cultural, historical, or social contexts is pivotal. Critical thinking allows for a deeper appreciation of these contexts, providing a holistic understanding of the subject.
• Example: When studying Shakespeare’s “Othello,” critical thinking aids in understanding the play’s exploration of jealousy, race, and betrayal, while also appreciating its historical context in Elizabethan England.

3. Social Sciences

• Evaluating Arguments: Social sciences, such as sociology or political science, often present various theories or arguments about societal structures and behaviours. Critical thinking aids in assessing the merits of these arguments and recognising their implications.
• Understanding Biases: Since social sciences study human societies, they’re susceptible to biases. Critical thinking helps identify potential biases in research or theories, ensuring a more objective understanding.
• Example: In studying economic policies, critical thinking helps weigh the benefits and drawbacks of different economic models, considering both empirical data and theoretical arguments.

4. Mathematics

• Problem-Solving: Mathematics is more than just numbers; it is about solving problems. Critical thinking enables students to identify the best strategies to tackle problems, ensuring efficient and accurate solutions.
• Logical Deduction: Mathematical proofs and theorems rely on logical steps. Critical thinking ensures that each step is valid and the conclusions sound.
• Example: In geometry, when proving that two triangles are congruent, critical thinking helps ensure that each criterion (like side lengths or angles) is met and the logic of the proof is coherent.

Examples of Critical Thinking in Academics

Some of the critical thinking examples in academics are discussed below. 

Case Study 1: Evaluating A Scientific Research Paper

Scenario: A research paper claims that a new herbal supplement significantly improves memory in elderly individuals.

Critical Thinking Application:

Scrutinising Methodology:

• Was the study double-blind and placebo-controlled?
• How large was the sample size?
• Were the groups randomised?
• Were there any potential confounding variables?

Assessing Conclusions:

• Do the results conclusively support the claim, or are there other potential explanations?
• Are the statistical analyses robust, and do they show a significant difference?
• Is the effect size clinically relevant or just statistically significant?

Considering Broader Context:

• How does this study compare with existing literature on the subject?
• Were there any conflicts of interest, such as funding from the supplement company?

Critical analysis determined that while the study showed statistical significance, the effect size was minimal. Additionally, the sample size was small, and there was potential bias as the supplement manufacturer funded the study.

Case Study 2: Analysing a Literary Text

Scenario: A reading of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby.”

Understanding Symbolism:

• What does the green light represent for Gatsby and in the broader context of the American Dream?
• How does the Valley of Ashes symbolise societal decay?

Recognising Authorial Intent:

• Why might Fitzgerald depict the characters’ lavish lifestyles amid underlying dissatisfaction?
• What critiques of American society is Fitzgerald potentially making?

Contextual Analysis:

• How does the era in which the novel was written (Roaring Twenties) influence its themes and characters?

Through critical analysis, the reader recognises that while “The Great Gatsby” is a tale of love and ambition, it’s also a poignant critique of the hollowness of the American Dream and the societal excesses of the 1920s.

Case Study 3: Decoding Historical Events

Scenario: The events leading up to the American Revolution.

Considering Multiple Perspectives:

• How did the British government view the colonies and their demands?
• What were the diverse perspectives within the American colonies, considering loyalists and patriots?

Assessing Validity of Sources:

• Which accounts are primary sources, and which are secondary?
• Are there potential biases in these accounts, based on their origins?

Analysing Causation and Correlation:

• Were taxes and representation the sole reasons for the revolution, or were there deeper economic and philosophical reasons?

Through critical analysis, the student understands that while taxation without representation was a significant catalyst, the American Revolution was also influenced by Enlightenment ideas, economic interests, and long-standing grievances against colonial policies.

Challenges to Developing Critical Thinking Skills

In our complex and rapidly changing world, the importance of critical thinking cannot be overstated. However, various challenges can impede the cultivation of these vital skills. 

1. Common Misconceptions and Cognitive Biases

Human brains often take shortcuts in processing information, leading to cognitive biases. Additionally, certain misconceptions about what constitutes critical thinking can hinder its development.

• Confirmation Bias: The tendency to search for, interpret, and recall information that confirms one’s pre-existing beliefs.
• Anchoring Bias: Relying too heavily on the first piece of information encountered when making decisions.
• Misconception: Believing that critical thinking merely means being critical or negative about ideas, rather than evaluating them objectively.

These biases can skew perception and decision-making, making it challenging to objectively approach issues.

2. The Influence of Technology and Social Media

While providing unprecedented access to information, the digital age also presents unique challenges. The barrage of information, the immediacy of social media reactions, and algorithms that cater to user preferences can hinder critical thought.

• Information Overload: The sheer volume of online data can make it difficult to discern credible sources from unreliable ones.
• Clickbait and Misinformation: Articles with sensational titles designed to generate clicks might lack depth or accuracy.
• Algorithmic Bias: Platforms showing users content based on past preferences can limit exposure to diverse viewpoints.

Relying too heavily on technology and social media can lead to superficial understanding, reduced attention spans, and a narrow worldview.

3. The Danger of Echo Chambers and Confirmation Bias

An echo chamber is a situation in which beliefs are amplified or reinforced by communication and repetition inside a closed system, cutting off differing viewpoints.

• Social Media Groups: Joining groups or following pages that only align with one’s beliefs can create a feedback loop, reinforcing existing opinions without challenge.
• Selective Media Consumption: Only watching news channels or reading websites that align with one’s political or social views.

Echo chambers reinforce confirmation bias, limit exposure to diverse perspectives, and can polarise opinions, making objective, critical evaluation of issues challenging.

Benefits of Promoting Critical Thinking in Education

When cultivated and promoted in educational settings, critical thinking can have transformative effects on students, equipping them with vital skills to navigate their academic journey and beyond. Here’s an exploration of the manifold benefits of emphasising critical thinking in education:

Improved Problem-Solving Skills

Critical thinking enables students to approach problems methodically, breaking them down into manageable parts, analysing each aspect, and synthesising solutions.

• Academic: Enhances students’ ability to tackle complex assignments, research projects, and unfamiliar topics.
• Beyond School: Prepares students for real-world challenges where they might encounter problems without predefined solutions.

Enhanced Creativity and Innovation

Critical thinking is not just analytical but also involves lateral thinking, helping students see connections between disparate ideas and encouraging imaginative solutions.

• Academic: Promotes richer discussions, more creative projects, and the ability to view topics from multiple angles.
• Beyond School: Equips students for careers and situations where innovative solutions can lead to advancements in fields like technology, arts, or social entrepreneurship.

Better Decision-Making Abilities

Critical thinkers evaluate information thoroughly, weigh potential outcomes, and make decisions based on evidence and reason rather than impulse or peer pressure.

• Academic: Helps students make informed choices about their studies, research directions, or group projects.
• Beyond School: Prepares students to make sound decisions in personal and professional spheres, from financial choices to ethical dilemmas.

Greater Resilience in the Face of Complex Challenges

Critical thinking nurtures a growth mindset. When students think critically, they are more likely to view challenges as opportunities for learning rather than insurmountable obstacles.

• Academic: Increases perseverance in difficult subjects, promoting a deeper understanding rather than superficial learning. Students become more resilient in handling academic pressures and setbacks.
• Beyond School: Cultivates individuals who can navigate the complexities of modern life, from career challenges to societal changes, with resilience and adaptability.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is critical thinking.

Critical thinking is the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue to form a judgment. It involves gathering relevant information, discerning potential biases, logically connecting ideas, and questioning assumptions. Essential for informed decision-making, it promotes scepticism and requires the ability to think independently and rationally.

What makes critical thinking?

Critical thinking arises from questioning assumptions, evaluating evidence, discerning fact from opinion, recognising biases, and logically connecting ideas. It demands curiosity, scepticism, and an open mind. By continuously challenging one’s beliefs and considering alternative viewpoints, one cultivates the ability to think clearly, rationally, and independently.

What is the purpose of critical thinking?

The purpose of critical thinking is to enable informed decisions by analysing and evaluating information objectively. It fosters understanding, problem-solving, and clarity, reducing the influence of biases and misconceptions. Through critical thinking, individuals discern truth, make reasoned judgments, and engage more effectively in discussions and debates.

How to improve critical thinking?

• Cultivate curiosity by asking questions.
• Practice active listening.
• Read widely and diversely.
• Engage in discussions and debates.
• Reflect on your thought processes.
• Identify biases and challenge assumptions.
• Solve problems systematically.

What are some critical thinking skills?

• Analysis: breaking concepts into parts.
• Evaluation: judging information’s validity.
• Inference: drawing logical conclusions.
• Explanation: articulating reasons.
• Interpretation: understanding meaning.
• Problem-solving: devising effective solutions.
• Decision-making: choosing the best options.

What is information literacy?

Information literacy is the ability to find, evaluate, and use information effectively. It encompasses understanding where to locate information, determining its credibility, distinguishing between facts and opinions, and using it responsibly. Essential in the digital age, it equips individuals to navigate the vast sea of data and make informed decisions.

What makes a credible source?

• Authorship by experts or professionals.
• Reliable publisher or institution backing.
• Transparent sourcing and references.
• Absence of bias or clear disclosure of it.
• Recent publications or timely updates.
• Peer review or editorial oversight.
• Clear, logical arguments.
• Reputability in its field or domain.

How do I analyse information critically?

• Determine the source’s credibility.
• Identify the main arguments or points.
• Examine the evidence provided.
• Spot inconsistencies or fallacies.
• Detect biases or unspoken assumptions.
• Cross-check facts with other sources.
• Evaluate the relevance to your context.
• Reflect on your own biases or beliefs.

You May Also Like

The vast sea of information is merely a click away in today’s fast-paced, digitally dominated world. With the proliferation of blogs, forums, news outlets, and social media platforms, anyone can become an ‘expert’ and share ‘facts’.

In the digital age, where information is abundant and readily accessible, quickly finding precise and relevant information is paramount. This is where Boolean operators come into play. 

In our vast world of information, conveying ideas in our own words is crucial. This brings us to the practice of “paraphrasing.” 

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works