briefly identify the importance of critical thinking in achieving your institutional

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

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

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

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

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

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

Critical thinking skills help you to:

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

Table of contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

Scribbr Citation Checker New

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

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

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

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

Academic examples

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

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

Nonacademic examples

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

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

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

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

When encountering information, ask:

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

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

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

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

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

 Plagiarism

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

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

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

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

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

Ask questions such as:

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

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

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

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

Being information literate means that you:

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 26, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

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

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

Why Critical Thinking Is Important (& How to Improve It)

Last updated May 1, 2023. Edited and medically reviewed by Patrick Alban, DC . Written by Deane Alban .

By improving the quality of your thoughts and your decisions, better critical thinking skills can bring about a big positive change in your life. Learn how.

The quality of your life largely depends on the quality of the decisions you make.

Amazingly, the average person makes roughly 35,000 conscious decisions every day! 

Imagine how much better your life would be if there were a way to make better decisions, day in and day out?

Well, there is and you do it by boosting a skill called critical thinking .

Learning to master critical thinking can have a profoundly positive impact on nearly every aspect of your life.

What Exactly Is Critical Thinking?

The first documented account of critical thinking is the teachings of Socrates as recorded by Plato. 

Over time, the definition of critical thinking has evolved.

Most definitions of critical thinking are fairly complex and best understood by philosophy majors or psychologists.

For example, the Foundation for Critical Thinking , a nonprofit think tank, offers this definition:

“Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.”

If that makes your head spin, here are some definitions that you may relate to more easily.

Critical thinking is “reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do.”

WHAT'S THE BEST BRAIN SUPPLEMENT?

I hear this question often. Here's my answer:

#1 Live a brain-healthy lifestyle first (Be Brain Fit tells you how).

#2 Give Mind Lab Pro a try.

This brain supplement meets all 12 of my requirements for a high-quality brain supplement, including effectiveness, safety, purity, and value. So it's easier for you to be mentally sharper, positive, and more productive.

Choosing the right brain supplement is all about quality. See why I recommend Mind Lab Pro.

Or, a catchy way of defining critical thinking is “deciding what’s true and what you should do.”

But my favorite uber-simple definition is that critical thinking is simply “thinking about thinking.”

6 Major Benefits of Good Critical Thinking Skills

Whether or not you think critically can make the difference between success and failure in just about every area of your life.

Our human brains are imperfect and prone to irrationality, distortions, prejudices, and cognitive biases .

Cognitive biases are systematic patterns of irrational thinking.

While the number of cognitive biases varies depending on the source, Wikipedia, for example, lists nearly 200 of them ! 

Some of the most well-known cognitive biases include:

• catastrophic thinking
• confirmation bias
• fear of missing out (FOMO)

Critical thinking will help you move past the limitations of irrational thinking.

Here are some of the most important ways critical thinking can impact your life.

1. Critical Thinking Is a Key to Career Success

There are many professions where critical thinking is an absolute must.

Lawyers, analysts, accountants, doctors, engineers, reporters, and scientists of all kinds must apply critical thinking frequently.

But critical thinking is a skill set that is becoming increasingly valuable in a growing number of professions.

Critical thinking can help you in any profession where you must:

• analyze information
• systematically solve problems
• generate innovative solutions
• plan strategically
• think creatively
• present your work or ideas to others in a way that can be readily understood

And, as we enter the fourth industrial revolution , critical thinking has become one of the most sought-after skills.

According to the World Economic Forum , critical thinking and complex problem-solving are the two top in-demand skills that employers look for. 

Critical thinking is considered a soft or enterprise skill — a core attribute required to succeed in the workplace . 

NUTRITION FOR THE MIND/BODY CONNECTION

It’s almost impossible to live a lifestyle that provides all the nutrients needed for good brain health and performance. The reason? All of us confront multiple nutrient thieves — stress, poor diet, insomnia, pharmaceuticals, pollution, and more — that steal nutrients that the brain needs to thrive.

• Provides the building blocks to create new brain cells and brain chemicals
• Helps increase resilience to stress to avoid mental burnout
• Supplies the brain with the fuel it needs for mental energy

A foundational principle of mental health and cognitive performance is to supply the body with the best nutrition possible. See why I recommend Performance Lab.

According to The University of Arizona, other soft skills include : 

• interpersonal skills
• communication skills
• digital literacy

Critical thinking can help you develop the rest of these soft skills.

Developing your critical thinking can help you land a job since many employers will ask you interview questions or even give you a test to determine how well you can think critically.

It can also help you continually succeed in your career, since being a critical thinker is a powerful predictor of long-term success.

2. Critical Thinkers Make Better Decisions

Every day you make thousands of decisions.

Most of them are made by your subconscious , are not very important, and don’t require much thought, such as what to wear or what to have for lunch. 

But the most important decisions you make can be hard and require a lot of thought, such as when or if you should change jobs, relocate to a new city, buy a house, get married, or have kids.

At work, you may have to make decisions that can alter the course of your career or the lives of others.

Critical thinking helps you cope with everyday problems as they arise.

It promotes independent thinking and strengthens your inner “BS detector.”

It helps you make sense of the glut of data and information available, making you a smarter consumer who is less likely to fall for advertising hype, peer pressure, or scams.

3. Critical Thinking Can Make You Happier

Knowing and understanding yourself is an underappreciated path to happiness. 

We’ve already shown how your quality of life largely depends on the quality of your decisions, but equally as important is the quality of your thoughts.

Critical thinking is an excellent tool to help you better understand yourself and to learn to master your thoughts.

You can use critical thinking to free yourself from cognitive biases, negative thinking , and limiting beliefs that are holding you back in any area of your life.

Critical thinking can help you assess your strengths and weaknesses so that you know what you have to offer others and where you could use improvement.

Critical thinking will enable you to better express your thoughts, ideas, and beliefs.

Better communication helps others to understand you better, resulting in less frustration for both of you.

Critical thinking fosters creativity and out-of-the-box thinking that can be applied to any area of your life.

It gives you a process you can rely on, making decisions less stressful.

4. Critical Thinking Ensures That Your Opinions Are Well-Informed

We have access to more information than ever before .

Astoundingly, more data has been created in the past two years than in the entire previous history of mankind. 

Critical thinking can help you sort through the noise.

American politician, sociologist, and diplomat Daniel Patrick Moynihan once remarked , “You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.” 

Critical thinking ensures your opinions are well-informed and based on the best available facts.

You’ll get a boost in confidence when you see that those around you trust your well-considered opinions.

5. Critical Thinking Improves Relationships

You might be concerned that critical thinking will turn you into a Spock-like character who is not very good at relationships.

But, in fact, the opposite is true.

Employing critical thinking makes you more open-minded and better able to understand others’ points of view.

Critical thinkers are more empathetic and in a better position to get along with different kinds of people.

Critical thinking keeps you from jumping to conclusions.

You can be counted on to be the voice of reason when arguments get heated.

You’ll be better able to detect when others:

• are being disingenuous
• don’t have your best interests at heart
• try to take advantage of or manipulate you

6. Critical Thinking Makes You a Better, More Informed Citizen

“An educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people.”

This quote has been incorrectly attributed to Thomas Jefferson , but regardless of the source, these words of wisdom are more relevant than ever. 

Critical thinkers are able to see both sides of any issue and are more likely to generate bipartisan solutions.

They are less likely to be swayed by propaganda or get swept up in mass hysteria.

They are in a better position to spot fake news when they see it.

5 Steps to Improve Your Critical Thinking Skills

Some people already have well-developed critical thinking skills.

These people are analytical, inquisitive, and open to new ideas.

And, even though they are confident in their own opinions, they seek the truth, even if it proves their existing ideas to be wrong.

They are able to connect the dots between ideas and detect inconsistencies in others’ thinking.

But regardless of the state of your critical thinking skills today, it’s a skill set you can develop.

While there are many techniques for thinking rationally, here’s a classic 5-step critical thinking process . 

How to Improve Your Critical Thinking Skills

Clearly define your question or problem.

This step is so important that Albert Einstein famously quipped:

“If I had an hour to solve a problem, I’d spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and 5 minutes thinking about solutions.”

Gather Information to Help You Weigh the Options

Consider only the most useful and reliable information from the most reputable sources.

Disregard the rest.

Apply the Information and Ask Critical Questions

Scrutinize all information carefully with a skeptic’s eye.

Not sure what questions to ask?

You can’t go wrong starting with the “5 Ws” that any good investigator asks: Who? What? Where? When? Why?

Then finish by asking “How?”

You’ll find more thought-provoking questions on this Critical Thinking Skills Cheatsheet .

Consider the Implications

Look for potential unintended consequences.

Do a thought experiment about how your solution could play out in both the short term and the long run.

Explore the Full Spectrum of Viewpoints

Examine why others are drawn to differing points of view.

This will help you objectively evaluate your own viewpoint.

You may find critical thinkers who take an opposing view and this can help you find gaps in your own logic.

Watch the Video

This TED-Ed video on YouTube elaborates on the five steps to improve your critical thinking.

Recommended: Upgrading brain health is key to making your brain work better.

• Improve your mental clarity and focus.
• Boost your memory and your ability to learn.
• Increase your capacity to think critically, solve problems, and make decisions.

P.S. Like what you've read on this page? Get more like this -- Sign up for our emails .

• Appointments

• Resume Reviews

• Undergraduates
• PhDs & Postdocs
• Faculty & Staff
• Prospective Students
• Online Students
• Career Champions
• I’m Exploring
• Architecture & Design
• Education & Academia
• Engineering
• Fashion, Retail & Consumer Products
• Fellowships & Gap Year
• Fine Arts, Performing Arts, & Music
• Government, Law & Public Policy
• Healthcare & Public Health
• International Relations & NGOs
• Life & Physical Sciences
• Marketing, Advertising & Public Relations
• Media, Journalism & Entertainment
• Non-Profits
• Pre-Health, Pre-Law and Pre-Grad
• Real Estate, Accounting, & Insurance
• Social Work & Human Services
• Sports & Hospitality
• Startups, Entrepreneurship & Freelancing
• Sustainability, Energy & Conservation
• Technology, Data & Analytics
• DACA and Undocumented Students
• First Generation and Low Income Students
• International Students
• LGBTQ+ Students
• Transfer Students
• Students of Color
• Students with Disabilities
• Explore Careers & Industries
• Make Connections & Network
• Search for a Job or Internship
• Write a Resume/CV
• Write a Cover Letter
• Engage with Employers
• Research Salaries & Negotiate Offers
• Find Funding
• Develop Professional and Leadership Skills
• Apply to Graduate School
• Apply to Health Professions School
• Apply to Law School
• Self-Assessment
• Experiences
• Post-Graduate
• Jobs & Internships
• Career Fairs
• For Employers
• Meet the Team
• Peer Career Advisors
• Career Services Policies
• Walk-Ins & Pop-Ins
• Strategic Plan 2022-2025

Critical Thinking: A Simple Guide and Why It’s Important

• Share This: Share Critical Thinking: A Simple Guide and Why It’s Important on Facebook Share Critical Thinking: A Simple Guide and Why It’s Important on LinkedIn Share Critical Thinking: A Simple Guide and Why It’s Important on X

Critical Thinking: A Simple Guide and Why It’s Important was originally published on Ivy Exec .

Strong critical thinking skills are crucial for career success, regardless of educational background. It embodies the ability to engage in astute and effective decision-making, lending invaluable dimensions to professional growth.

At its essence, critical thinking is the ability to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information in a logical and reasoned manner. It’s not merely about accumulating knowledge but harnessing it effectively to make informed decisions and solve complex problems. In the dynamic landscape of modern careers, honing this skill is paramount.

The Impact of Critical Thinking on Your Career

☑ problem-solving mastery.

Visualize critical thinking as the Sherlock Holmes of your career journey. It facilitates swift problem resolution akin to a detective unraveling a mystery. By methodically analyzing situations and deconstructing complexities, critical thinkers emerge as adept problem solvers, rendering them invaluable assets in the workplace.

☑ Refined Decision-Making

Navigating dilemmas in your career path resembles traversing uncertain terrain. Critical thinking acts as a dependable GPS, steering you toward informed decisions. It involves weighing options, evaluating potential outcomes, and confidently choosing the most favorable path forward.

☑ Enhanced Teamwork Dynamics

Within collaborative settings, critical thinkers stand out as proactive contributors. They engage in scrutinizing ideas, proposing enhancements, and fostering meaningful contributions. Consequently, the team evolves into a dynamic hub of ideas, with the critical thinker recognized as the architect behind its success.

☑ Communication Prowess

Effective communication is the cornerstone of professional interactions. Critical thinking enriches communication skills, enabling the clear and logical articulation of ideas. Whether in emails, presentations, or casual conversations, individuals adept in critical thinking exude clarity, earning appreciation for their ability to convey thoughts seamlessly.

☑ Adaptability and Resilience

Perceptive individuals adept in critical thinking display resilience in the face of unforeseen challenges. Instead of succumbing to panic, they assess situations, recalibrate their approaches, and persist in moving forward despite adversity.

☑ Fostering Innovation

Innovation is the lifeblood of progressive organizations, and critical thinking serves as its catalyst. Proficient critical thinkers possess the ability to identify overlooked opportunities, propose inventive solutions, and streamline processes, thereby positioning their organizations at the forefront of innovation.

☑ Confidence Amplification

Critical thinkers exude confidence derived from honing their analytical skills. This self-assurance radiates during job interviews, presentations, and daily interactions, catching the attention of superiors and propelling career advancement.

So, how can one cultivate and harness this invaluable skill?

✅ developing curiosity and inquisitiveness:.

Embrace a curious mindset by questioning the status quo and exploring topics beyond your immediate scope. Cultivate an inquisitive approach to everyday situations. Encourage a habit of asking “why” and “how” to deepen understanding. Curiosity fuels the desire to seek information and alternative perspectives.

✅ Practice Reflection and Self-Awareness:

Engage in reflective thinking by assessing your thoughts, actions, and decisions. Regularly introspect to understand your biases, assumptions, and cognitive processes. Cultivate self-awareness to recognize personal prejudices or cognitive biases that might influence your thinking. This allows for a more objective analysis of situations.

✅ Strengthening Analytical Skills:

Practice breaking down complex problems into manageable components. Analyze each part systematically to understand the whole picture. Develop skills in data analysis, statistics, and logical reasoning. This includes understanding correlation versus causation, interpreting graphs, and evaluating statistical significance.

✅ Engaging in Active Listening and Observation:

Actively listen to diverse viewpoints without immediately forming judgments. Allow others to express their ideas fully before responding. Observe situations attentively, noticing details that others might overlook. This habit enhances your ability to analyze problems more comprehensively.

✅ Encouraging Intellectual Humility and Open-Mindedness:

Foster intellectual humility by acknowledging that you don’t know everything. Be open to learning from others, regardless of their position or expertise. Cultivate open-mindedness by actively seeking out perspectives different from your own. Engage in discussions with people holding diverse opinions to broaden your understanding.

✅ Practicing Problem-Solving and Decision-Making:

Engage in regular problem-solving exercises that challenge you to think creatively and analytically. This can include puzzles, riddles, or real-world scenarios. When making decisions, consciously evaluate available information, consider various alternatives, and anticipate potential outcomes before reaching a conclusion.

✅ Continuous Learning and Exposure to Varied Content:

Read extensively across diverse subjects and formats, exposing yourself to different viewpoints, cultures, and ways of thinking. Engage in courses, workshops, or seminars that stimulate critical thinking skills. Seek out opportunities for learning that challenge your existing beliefs.

✅ Engage in Constructive Disagreement and Debate:

Encourage healthy debates and discussions where differing opinions are respectfully debated.

This practice fosters the ability to defend your viewpoints logically while also being open to changing your perspective based on valid arguments. Embrace disagreement as an opportunity to learn rather than a conflict to win. Engaging in constructive debate sharpens your ability to evaluate and counter-arguments effectively.

✅ Utilize Problem-Based Learning and Real-World Applications:

Engage in problem-based learning activities that simulate real-world challenges. Work on projects or scenarios that require critical thinking skills to develop practical problem-solving approaches. Apply critical thinking in real-life situations whenever possible.

This could involve analyzing news articles, evaluating product reviews, or dissecting marketing strategies to understand their underlying rationale.

In conclusion, critical thinking is the linchpin of a successful career journey. It empowers individuals to navigate complexities, make informed decisions, and innovate in their respective domains. Embracing and honing this skill isn’t just an advantage; it’s a necessity in a world where adaptability and sound judgment reign supreme.

So, as you traverse your career path, remember that the ability to think critically is not just an asset but the differentiator that propels you toward excellence.

• How to apply critical thinking in learning

Sometimes your university classes might feel like a maze of information. Consider critical thinking skills like a map that can lead the way.

Why do we need critical thinking?  

Critical thinking is a type of thinking that requires continuous questioning, exploring answers, and making judgments. Critical thinking can help you: 

• analyze information to comprehend more thoroughly
• approach problems systematically, identify root causes, and explore potential solutions 
• make informed decisions by weighing various perspectives 
• promote intellectual curiosity and self-reflection, leading to continuous learning, innovation, and personal development 

What is the process of critical thinking? 

1. understand  .

Critical thinking starts with understanding the content that you are learning.

This step involves clarifying the logic and interrelations of the content by actively engaging with the materials (e.g., text, articles, and research papers). You can take notes, highlight key points, and make connections with prior knowledge to help you engage.

Ask yourself these questions to help you build your understanding:  

• What is the structure?
• What is the main idea of the content?  
• What is the evidence that supports any arguments?
• What is the conclusion?

2. Analyze  

You need to assess the credibility, validity, and relevance of the information presented in the content. Consider the authors’ biases and potential limitations in the evidence. 

Ask yourself questions in terms of why and how:

• What is the supporting evidence?  
• Why do they use it as evidence?   
• How does the data present support the conclusions?  
• What method was used? Was it appropriate?  

 3.  Evaluate   

After analyzing the data and evidence you collected, make your evaluation of the evidence, results, and conclusions made in the content.

Consider the weaknesses and strengths of the ideas presented in the content to make informed decisions or suggest alternative solutions:

• What is the gap between the evidence and the conclusion?  
• What is my position on the subject?  
• What other approaches can I use?  

When do you apply critical thinking and how can you improve these skills?   

1. reading academic texts, articles, and research papers.

• analyze arguments
• assess the credibility and validity of evidence
• consider potential biases presented
• question the assumptions, methodologies, and the way they generate conclusions

2. Writing essays and theses

• demonstrate your understanding of the information, logic of evidence, and position on the topic
• include evidence or examples to support your ideas
• make your standing points clear by presenting information and providing reasons to support your arguments
• address potential counterarguments or opposing viewpoints
• explain why your perspective is more compelling than the opposing viewpoints

3. Attending lectures

• understand the content by previewing, active listening , and taking notes
• analyze your lecturer’s viewpoints by seeking whether sufficient data and resources are provided
• think about whether the ideas presented by the lecturer align with your values and beliefs
• talk about other perspectives with peers in discussions

Related blog posts

• Survival guide to group work
• Four common group project challenges (and what to do)
• Determine the best way to graph your data
• How to read graphs and diagrams
• A beginner's guide to successful labs

Recent blog posts

Blog topics.

• assignments (1)
• Graduate (2)
• Learning support (27)
• note-taking and reading (8)
• research (2)
• tests and exams (8)
• time management (3)
• Tips from students (9)
• undergraduate (29)
• university learning (12)

Blog posts by audience

• Current undergraduate students (31)
• Current graduate students (5)
• Future undergraduate students (9)
• Future graduate students (1)

Blog posts archive

• December (1)
• November (6)
• October (8)
• August (10)

Contact the Student Success Office

South Campus Hall, second floor University of Waterloo 519-888-4567 ext. 84410

Immigration Consulting

Book a same-day appointment on Portal  or submit an online inquiry  to receive immigration support.

Request an authorized leave from studies for immigration purposes. 

Quick links

Current student resources

Employment and volunteer opportunities

• Contact Waterloo
• Maps & Directions
• Accessibility

The University of Waterloo acknowledges that much of our work takes place on the traditional territory of the Neutral, Anishinaabeg, and Haudenosaunee peoples. Our main campus is situated on the Haldimand Tract, the land granted to the Six Nations that includes six miles on each side of the Grand River. Our active work toward reconciliation takes place across our campuses through research, learning, teaching, and community building, and is co-ordinated within the Office of Indigenous Relations .

REVIEW article

Conceptualizations and instructional strategies on critical thinking in higher education: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

• Instituto de Investigación y Postgrado, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Central de Chile, Santiago, Chile

Aim: This systematic review identified systematic reviews of quantitative and qualitative empirical studies on the promotion and development of critical thinking in higher education students that allowed us to answer the following research questions : (1) What are the main definitions of critical thinking found in systematic reviews of critical thinking in higher education, and what are their similarities and differences? and (2) What are the most commonly used teaching strategies in higher education for teaching or promoting critical thinking, and how effective have they proven to be?

Methods: Systematic reviews were selected according to the guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyzes (PRISMA, 2020) and the eligibility criteria proposed by the PICOS strategy (population, interventions, comparators, outcomes and study design), based on 23 records of scientifically identified registers in the Journal Citation Report databases of the Web of Science.

Results: The bibliometric and systematic search of reviews of empirical studies on the topic allowed the selection of five systematic reviews. The results highlighted that conceptually critical thinking is related to both dispositions and skills, and that although there is no consensus on its definition, it is established that it is a higher-order cognitive process that can be trained. However, the results show that more studies have been conducted considering critical thinking as a skill than as a disposition, that the immersion approach has been widely used, and that some instructional strategies have shown greater effectiveness than others when the disciplines are evaluated independently.

Discussion: Despite the relative consensus on the importance of critical thinking for professional development in higher education, this review highlights some difficulties in conceptualizing critical thinking, in the relationship between dispositions and skills, and in its assessment in academic disciplines.

1. Introduction

How we think has become a fundamental pedagogical discussion, in terms of the kinds of thinking skills needed in particular societies, and the role and possibilities of education in developing or fostering these skills. In this context, critical thinking has become a central notion, understood in educational institutions in the Global North as a key necessity in contemporary societies. In this regard, the UN and UNESCO have gone so far as to define critical and creative thinking, which enables innovation and knowledge sharing, as a requirement for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and therefore a priority for any educational institution ( Fejes, 2006 ; Beneitone and Yarosh, 2015 ; Organización de Naciones Unidas, 2018 ; Sabzalieva et al., 2021 ). As a result, various higher education (HE) institutions around the world have included critical thinking among their objectives ( Zahavi and Friedman, 2019 ; Cruz et al., 2021 ). However, despite broad agreement on its relevance, there is neither a single definition of critical thinking that satisfies the complex and diverse aspects that are part of critical thinking discussions, nor agreement on the best method for teaching or fostering critical thinking in HE, or on how to assess or measure it ( Halpern, 1998 ; Van Damme and Zahner, 2022 ). Moreover, recent studies show that even within HEIs that have established critical thinking as an explicit pedagogical objective and developed specific strategies for teaching it, students do not appear to become significantly more skilled as critical thinkers as a result of their education, with variables such as nationality, languages, gender and socio-economic background having varying degrees of impact in this regard. As suggested by van Damme and Zahner (2022) , given the importance that critical thinking has gained in higher education and the limited success of these critical thinking programmes, universities should make greater efforts in this regard.

In terms of its conceptualization, a specific link between critical thinking and education dates back to the beginning of the twentieth century. El Soufi and See (2019) noted that the Deweyan approach had already pointed to the role of education in strengthening critical thinking among students as a key objective. More recently, in 1980, Peter Facione gave rise to the Delphi Project ( Facione, 1990 ). This was based, on the one hand, on the observation in various cases that students did not reason adequately. And on the other, the identification of a lack of agreement about how critical thinking was defined, taught and assessed, despite its agreed relevance to higher education ( Facione, 1990 ). The Delphi project brought together 46 experts from around the world, including philosophers, scientists, and educators, with the aim of defining critical thinking and developing recommendations on how to teach and assess it ( El Soufi and See, 2019 ).

The resulting definition – and one of the most widely quoted – referred to critical thinking as: “purposeful, self-regulating judgment that results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and conclusion, as well as an explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, critical, or contextual considerations on which that judgment is based. Critical thinking is essential as a tool of inquiry. As such, critical thinking is a liberating force in education and a powerful resource in personal and civic life” ( Facione, 1990 , p. 651). However, despite this agreed definition, some authors have noted that there is still a lack of agreement on how to define and approach critical thinking ( Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, there is a debate about whether it is even possible to teach critical thinking. This discussion relates, on the one hand, to the argument that critical thinking is a socio-culturally specific practice that cannot be easily taught or learned ( Ramanathan and Kaplan, 1996 ; Atkinson, 1997 ). In this regard, variables such as nationality, culture, language and socio-economic background may be key to differentiating students’ critical thinking learning processes ( Giacomazzi et al., 2022 ; Van Damme and Zahner, 2022 ).

And, on the other hand, a discussion related to this academic talent from the creative perspective or the development of divergent thinking ( Crossley-Frolick, 2010 ), distinguishing nativist, deterministic or dispositional approaches from others that are more developmental or related to formal and informal learning ( Andreucci-Annunziata, 2012 , 2016 ; Payan-Carreira et al., 2019 ). In this last sense, from a relational, socio-constructivist, dialogical, and critical conception, both academic talent and critical thinking are referred to from their possibilities and limitations in the field of pedagogical interaction and problem-solving ( Andreucci-Annunziata, 2016 ; Ahern et al., 2019 ). In this sense, Puig et al. (2019) suggest that the transition from ‘what to think’ to ‘how to think’ adequately summarizes the challenge of teaching critical thinking, a challenge that requires major transformations in instructional paradigms and that, in turn, questions the initial conceptions.

Given the polysemy of the concept and the divergences around it, critical thinking is generally understood as doubly constituted: on the one hand, as an ability (skill) and, on the other, as a disposition, both dimensions being closely related ( Dumitru et al., 2018 ). The former understands critical thinking as a cognitive skill, or a set of cognitive skills necessary to think critically. As a disposition, critical thinking refers to a set of basic, predetermining affective dispositions, toward life in general and toward specific thinking situations ( Cruz et al., 2021 ). These dispositions are considered necessary (as prerequisites) for the development of the cognitive skills that constitute critical thinking. Understood as dispositions, critical thinking is close to what Dewey (1910) calls “good mental habits” or what Siegel (1988) has conceptualized as “critical spirit.” Facione (1990) proposes a list of affective dispositions grouped into two categories: approaches to life in general (e.g., confidence in one’s own reasoning abilities, interest in keeping informed, openness to different world views, flexibility in considering other alternatives and opinions, etc.) and approaches to specific issues, questions or problems (e.g., clarity in formulating questions and concerns, diligence in seeking relevant information, etc.). The distinction between these two categories is important because it emphasizes that critical thinking is not developed exclusively in relation to specific aspects of reasoning but is rather a way of approaching different aspects of everyday life and questioning this process of approach ( Facione, 2000 ; Braun et al., 2020 ).

Simultaneously, critical thinking studies point out that it is not enough to teach cognitive skills, but that people should: “understand the value of critical thinking and have an interest and enthusiasm in applying it. While critical thinking skills can be explicitly taught, dispositions need to be modeled and nurtured so that students progressively adopt an identity as critical thinkers” ( Al-Ghadouni, 2021 , p. 241). However, while many educators agree that critical thinking is an important skill to teach, not all agree on the best way to teach it. The disagreement falls mainly on whether it is a generic skill that can be transferred between different dimensions and that can be taught independently of the subject or topic, or whether it is specific to each dimension and, therefore, requires positioning ( McPeck, 1981 ; Bailin et al., 1999 ; Moore, 2013 ). Therefore, a detailed analysis of how critical thinking is translated into teaching-learning processes shows several possible paths. Generally, however, there is agreement among educational researchers on the key principles that should shape teaching and learning processes to promote critical thinking, including: “facing open-ended problems, encountering real-world complexity, using multiple knowledge sources, developing knowledge artifacts to explicate thinking, utilizing collective efforts and group resources instead of favoring individual student work, and integrating rich use of modern technologies into the work processes” ( Hyytinen et al., 2019 , p. 71). Regarding these teaching-learning processes, three relevant concepts are identified in the literature: (1) approaches, (2) instructional strategies, and (3) learning materials.

The concept of approaches is usually used in critical thinking studies referring to Ennis (1989) ’s distinction between four different ways of teaching critical thinking mainly differentiated according to the explicit or implicit teaching of critical thinking ( Ahern et al., 2019 ; El Soufi and See, 2019 ). These pedagogical approaches to critical thinking have been synthesized into four types: general method; infusion; immersion and mixed method, which we briefly explain below ( Al-Ghadouni, 2021 ). The general method consists of the explicit teaching of critical thinking, to acquire or developing critical thinking skills as the sole focus. In the infusion method, critical thinking constitutes an explicit objective but in parallel to a specific topic of study. Critical thinking is taught in relation to the topic at hand, and students are encouraged to think critically about it, while the basic principles of critical thinking are explicitly taught as well. In the immersion approach, critical thinking is not an explicit teaching objective. The focus is on immersion in a specific theme or subject, which is taught in a way that provokes critical thinking. Critical thinking principles are not explicitly addressed, and students are not necessarily aware that they are being trained to think critically. Finally, the mixed method consists of a combination of the general method and the infusion or immersion method.

The second key concept in relation to critical teaching-learning processes is instructional strategies. These refer to more specific kinds of activities through which teachers expect students to develop and engage in critical thinking practices. Some of these strategies are: defining arguments, evaluating the reliability of sources, identifying fallacies and assumptions, using inductive and deductive logic, synthesizing information, making inferences, assessment techniques like peer-review, teacher evaluation, and self-evaluation, debates, brainstorming techniques, journal writing, scaffolding, active learning strategies, FRISCO ( Ennis, 1996 ), the guidelines of Elder and Paul (2003) , the ‘IDEALS’ technique of Facione (2011) , Lecture-Discussion Teaching (LDT), Problem-Based Learning (PBL) ( Ennis, 2016 ), problem-solving (inquiry), lecture discussions (argumentation), group work, role-play, self-study, self and peer-assessment, context-based learning ( Dominguez, 2018a ), constructing maps with structured arguments, concept mapping, dialog (learning through discussion), authentic instruction (presenting real problems, simulation, sequential assignments, and performance-based assessment).

The third concept, learning materials, is suggested by Puig et al. (2019) to identify relevant materials that are part of critical thinking teaching-learning processes, such as literary and narrative texts (articles, essays), E-learning activities, and authentic problems.

In addition to the conceptual and methodological discussion around the critical thinking pedagogical approach, critical thinking studies have also focused on discussing the possibility of evaluating it. Various instruments have been developed for this purpose, such as the California Test, which is based on the work of Facione (2000) and focuses on skills, or the Cornell Test, which is based on the work of Ennis and Weir (1985) and focuses on dispositions.

Given the current relevance of critical thinking in higher education and the breadth of its conceptual approaches and the heterogeneity of pedagogical methods used to address it, this article discusses the results of a systematic review of systematic reviews that have addressed critical thinking in relation to higher education. This review responds to the need to identify the main definitions and didactic approaches that have emerged from the establishment of critical thinking as a pedagogical objective in different HE institutions worldwide, systematizing what has been learned in this process to facilitate the formulation of guidelines. Theoretical and methodological support to those academic institutions that intend to implement critical thinking among their teaching objectives and hallmarks in the present and future. In this way, the article develops by answering the following questions.

• What are the main definitions of critical thinking found in systematic reviews of critical thinking in higher education? What are their similarities and differences?

• What are the most commonly used teaching strategies in higher education to teach or promote critical thinking, and how effective have they been shown to be?

In what follows, the materials and methods of the systematic reviews are presented, and then the findings are presented and discussed.

2. Materials and methods

In this review, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA, 2020) guidelines ( Page et al., 2021a , b ) were used, and the PICOS (participants, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and study design) strategy was used to establish the eligibility criteria for the articles ( Methley et al., 2014 ). In addition, the initial search for articles was performed using bibliometric procedures ( Porter et al., 2002 ). Systematic reviews of systematic reviews and bibliometrics have recently been used separately to address educational topics related to learning in general and critical thinking competencies in HE students ( Djamnezhad et al., 2021 ; Pagán Castaño et al., 2022 ). Both methods blend allows for increased accuracy and replicability of study ( Andreucci-Annunziata et al., 2022 ).

A set of articles was used as a homogeneous citation base, avoiding the impossibility of comparing indexing databases that use different calculation bases to deter-mine journals’ impact factors and quartiles ( Bakkalbasi et al., 2006 ; Falagas et al., 2008 ; Chadegani et al., 2013 ; Harzing and Alakangas, 2016 ; Mongeon and Paul-Hus, 2016 ), relying on the Web of Science (WoS) core collection, selecting articles published in journals indexed by WoS in the Science Citation Index Expanded (WoS-SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (WoS-SSCI), from a search vector on critical thinking TS = ((critical NEAR/0 (thinking OR perspective OR approach)) AND (Higher NEAR/0 Education)), without restricted temporal parameters, performing the extraction on 3 October 2022. The following types of documents were included: articles and review articles.

A complementary bibliometric analysis was carried out on a set article obtained for the topic under study. Using two fundamental bibliometric laws:

1. Exponential science growth or Price’s Law, through the exponential adjustment degree of the annual growth of publications, as a measure of a strong interest among the scientific community to develop studies on critical thinking in HE, conforming a critical researcher mass developing this knowledge topic ( Price, 1976 ; Dobrov et al., 1979 ), and determining the time median and its contemporary and obsolete periods.

2. Then we have excluded proceeding papers, book reviews and editorial materials and other languages, for estimate the publications concentration in journals by Bradford’s Law, distributing the journals in thirds according to the decreasing number of documents published in them, establishing as the nucleus of journals with the highest concentration that cover at least 33% of the total publications ( Bulik, 1978 ; Morse and Leimkuhler, 1979 ; Pontigo and Lancaster, 1986 ; Swokowski, 1988 ; Kumar, 2014 ).

According to the checklist of the PRISMA 2020 guidelines ( Page et al., 2021a , b ), the following quality steps for systematic reviews were verified according to the following sections: 1 (title), 2 (structured abstract), 3 (rationale), 4 (objectives), 5 (eligibility criteria), 6 (sources of information), 7 (search strategy), 8 (selection process), 9 (data extraction process), 10a and 10b (data items), 16a and 16b (study selection), 17 (study characteristics), 19 (results of individual studies), 23 (discussion), 24 (registration and protocol), 25 (support), 26 (competing interests), and 27 (availability of data, code and other materials). The following sections were excluded because, as a review of reviews or umbrella review ( Aromataris et al., 2015 ), the data from each study to satisfy their criteria were not considered pertinent within the narrative synthesis of the present review, or were not available, or were presented only in a general way after having been part of a respective protocol: 11 (study risk of bias assessment), 12 (effect measures), 13 (synthesis methods), 14 (reporting bias assessment), 15 (certainty assessment), 18 (risk of bias in studies), 20 (results of syntheses), 21 (reporting biases), and 22 (certainty of evidence).

Through PRISMA guidelines, the selection of articles was specified based on eligibility criteria: the target population (participants), the interventions (methodological techniques), the elements of comparison of these studies, the outcomes of these studies, and the study designs (the criteria of the PICOS strategy as shown in Table 1 ). Screening of the preselected systematic reviews was first performed independently by the following authors, PA-A, AR, SC, AM, and AV-M. Then, the final review of the included reviews was done in the following pairs: PA-A, AM; AR, SC; and AV-M, AM. In case of doubt, it was decided to include a third reviewer among the six authors.

Table 1 . Eligibility criteria using PICOS (participants, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and study design).

The bibliometric systematization over an unrestricted period in the WoS main collection resulted in 1999 documents between 1965 and 2022, showing a continuous publication record from 1994 onwards. Figure 1 shows an exponential publication growth between 1994 and 2022 with an R 2 adjustment of 78% (trend line and value in red). In addition to highlighting as a semi-period of more recent publications between 2018 and 2022 (green shaded area), with an analysis set reduced to 1,084 documents for this period.

Figure 1 . Publications on critical thinking between 1965 and 2022.

After the exclusions are made, 847 documents are fragmented in search of the Bradford core ( Table 2 ). This estimate narrows the core to 38 journals that concentrate the publication of 276 articles between 2018 and 2022 (See detail in Table A1 in Appendix A, and data in Supplementary Table S1 ).

Table 2 . Bradford zones estimation, articles by journal zones.

The absolute percentage error is estimated at 3%, therefore the adjustment achieved by the nuclear zone is considered adequate (See Equation 1 ).

This 276-document set is entered as input to the PRISMA diagram flow ( Figure 2 ), according to the eligibility criteria (PICOS) set out in Table 1 .

Figure 2 . PRISMA 2020 diagram flow. *SSCI, Social Sciences Citation Index; SCI-E, Science Citation Index Expanded; ESCI, Emerging Sources Citation Index; BKCI-SSH, Book Citation Index Social Sciences & Humanities; A&HCI, Arts & Humanities Citation Index.

Thus, this search identified a total of 276 articles from five different databases in the collection Web of Science (SSCI, Social Sciences Citation Index; SCI-E, Science Citation Index Expanded; ESCI, Emerging Sources Citation Index; BKCI-SSH, Book Citation Index –Social Sciences & Humanities; A&HCI, Arts & Humanities Citation Index). Excluding records by type of document, particularly articles (224), book chapters (9), and early access (20), 23 records were obtained for the screening, corresponding only to systematic reviews of the subject.

Then, 17 systematic reviews were excluded because they presented literature reviews (6); critical reading and writing reviews (6); specific critical thinking teaching techniques, because they focus on how to implement a specific technique and marginally on the development of critical thinking (2) or were outside the focus of this review (3), reducing the corpus to be analyzed to six full-text systematic reviews in English, retrieved and screened using the selection criteria defined with the PICOS strategy. Finally, a last review that included studies on the assessment of critical thinking through standardized instruments was excluded at this stage. Thus, the screening made it possible to identify five systematic reviews that met the inclusion criteria, as shown in Figure 2 . A summary of the general characteristics of the included systematic reviews can be found in Table 3 .

Table 3 . Characteristics of the included reviews.

The selected reviews included studies with different methodological designs, both quantitative (2) and a mixture of quantitative and qualitative design (3). The reviews addressed 29.8 critical thinking studies on average, all chosen following PRISMA 2020 guidelines for their respective selection. It was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis mainly due to the heterogeneity of the studies included in the reviews. One of them considered the Hedge’s g effect size, although not all the studies reviewed by their authors provided the necessary data to perform the calculation ( El Soufi and See, 2019 ). Another review reported three types of statistically significant gains (general, specific, and no gain) assessed from standardized tests in their studies, but without giving values or effect sizes ( Payan-Carreira et al., 2019 ). Finally, the remaining revisions informed methodological limitations of the studies they selected and/or did not report specific statistical tests from the studies ( Ahern et al., 2019 ; Puig et al., 2019 ; Tuononen et al., 2022 ).

The narrative synthesis of the selected systematic reviews made it possible to answer the proposed research questions. For this purpose, we consulted the guidelines for narrative syntheses in systematic reviews ( Popay et al., 2006 ) suggested by the document PRISMA-P 2015 ( Shamseer et al., 2015 ).

A summary of the objectives, definition of critical thinking, associated concepts and variables, and background and/or assumptions of each of the selected reviews can be found in Table 4 , while Table 5 presents a summary of the relevance of critical thinking to HE, key findings and challenges for future research arising from each of the selected reviews.

Table 4 . Summary of the objectives, definition of critical thinking, associated concepts and vari-ables, assumptions, and relevant authors of each of the reviews.

Table 5 . Summary of the relevance of critical thinking to HE, key findings, and challenges for future research of each of the reviews.

Table 6 synthesizes the findings of the approaches and strategies applied for the development of critical thinking in HE in each of the selected reviews.

Table 6 . Approaches and strategies applied for the development of critical thinking in HE from selected reviews.

One of the selected reviews sought to examine the teaching of generic competencies in HE ( Tuononen et al., 2022 ) and another one examined critical thinking in different disciplines, such as biomedical sciences, STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), social sciences, and humanities ( Puig et al., 2019 ). The other three studies have referred to the teaching of critical thinking in specific disciplines: English as a second language ( El Soufi and See, 2019 ), engineering ( Ahern et al., 2019 ), and health sciences ( Payan-Carreira et al., 2019 ).

Regarding the definition of critical thinking, in two of the five systematic reviews addressed, the definition used by the authors is literally the one proposed by Facione (1990) , who led the Delphi project on this topic.

Reviews argue that the critical thinking literature suggests that critical thinking is a disposition and skill ( Ahern et al., 2019 ; Puig et al., 2019 ). However, our results - that analyzed the set of the above five systematic reviews - show that, currently, the concept of skill is more prevalent in the literature than that of disposition. Two of the five reviews do not refer to dispositions at all ( El Soufi and See, 2019 ; Tuononen et al., 2022 ), and the other three do so only narrowly ( Payan-Carreira et al., 2019 ; Puig et al., 2019 ). In contrast, the five systematic reviews highlight the skills aspect, and two of them go deeper into it, highlighting the specific role of cognitive skills ( Payan-Carreira et al., 2019 ; Tuononen et al., 2022 ).

The different existing conceptualizations of critical thinking in the academic field have in common that it is a type of thinking that enables a reflective process and the ability to make evidence-based judgments. In addition to reflexivity and judgment, other terms and verbs highlighted in the conceptualizations are competence, ability, disposition, understanding, analyzing, inferring, and concluding, among others.

Regarding the approaches and methodologies used to teach critical thinking, the first reassuring finding is that the greatest effect is in the explicit teaching of general critical thinking skills ( El Soufi and See, 2019 ). In relation to teaching English, the methodologies identified as effective are the use of literary and narrative texts, assessment techniques such as peer review, teacher assessment and self-assessment, and approaches such as conducting debates, brainstorming, daily writing, scaffolding and active learning strategies ( El Soufi and See, 2019 ). In relation to engineering education, it is concluded that to date there has been no quantifiable evaluation of interventions implemented to enhance critical thinking ( Ahern et al., 2019 ). This review, which looked at critical thinking in different professional fields, concludes that the most commonly used teaching approach across all fields is the so-called immersion approach ( Puig et al., 2019 ). This finding suggests that the teaching of critical thinking is more effective when it is integrated transversely into the teaching of different fields than when it is treated as a separate subject. The reviews that have addressed critical thinking in the health sector are consistent with this review in highlighting the high use of the immersion approach. Within this approach, the most effective strategies appear to be simulation, reflective writing, concept mapping, problem-based learning [PBL] and case-based learning [CBL] ( Payan-Carreira et al., 2019 ). Finally, this review, which focused on the learning of generic skills in higher education, shows that active learning methods, i.e., those that promote students’ activity and role in their learning process, are factors that enhance the learning of critical thinking ( Tuononen et al., 2022 ).

These systematic reviews agree that the development of critical thinking skills is a key objective of different higher education programmes. They also agree that critical thinking contributes to the integration and performance of professionals in different work settings. Two of the reviews offer arguments to support this relevance. Firstly, a pedagogical argument suggests that, given the large amount of information available today, it is relevant that students can distinguish facts from opinions and evaluate and judge the credibility of the evidence presented to them ( El Soufi and See, 2019 ). In the same vein, it is pointed out that health science students should complement scientific and technical knowledge with advanced thinking dispositions and reasoning and decision-making skills ( Payan-Carreira et al., 2019 ). A second argument, of a more technical nature, relates to the requirements of university accreditation processes with assessment agencies ( Ahern et al., 2019 ).

4. Discussion

This systematic review of critical thinking in HE with PRISMA 2020 guidelines identified the main definitions of critical thinking, their commonalities, and differences, instructional strategies, and their effectiveness. The revision was conducted with five reviews from WoS databases which allowed focusing the search according to the PICOS strategy ( Porter et al., 2002 ; Liberati et al., 2009 ; Moher et al., 2009 ; Methley et al., 2014 ; Andreucci-Annunziata et al., 2022 ).

This work has shown that there are several definitions of critical thinking, which has implications for the formulation of theoretical and methodological guidelines in the teaching and learning process in higher education. Through the analysis ( Table 4 ), we found that critical thinking involves complex cognitive activities, which in turn need to be applied to specific contexts in which HE students operate.

Facione’s (1990) definition appears to be the most comprehensive, emphasizing critical thinking as evaluation carried out in a self-regulatory manner through sequential cognitive processes. There are nuances in what constitutes a skill, which implies a situated and evaluative implementation ( Cruz et al., 2017 ; Tuononen et al., 2022 ). El Soufi and See’s (2019) definition is more focused on evidence-based reasoning. Cruz et al. (2017) emphasize dispositions that point to mental and character qualities inherent in a person, which extends the definition to look beyond cognitive abilities.

Comparing these definitions, there is no complete consensus on what needs to be done in order to think critically, except that it involves higher order cognitive processes. The literature emphasizes the fact that students should move from what to learn to how to learn from a socio-constructivist perspective ( Andreucci-Annunziata, 2012 , 2016 ).This means that students must be able to make sense of the task they are doing, because at this level of complex thinking it is not enough to follow instructions or perform tasks: critical thinking necessarily implies students’ ability to evaluate.

Since the information in Table 4 , the question would be how to approach critical thinking, considering two related aspects: one has to do with the training of cognitive tasks in an instructional setting; the other requires aspects more linked to the affective/emotional being, a comprehensive quality that is trained according to the idiosyncrasy and background of each person. The five selected papers do not provide a common answer on how to do this. Critical thinking is associated with formal education in certain fields, such as engineering, language teaching, etc. This means that it is generally approached from specific problem situations and generalized to broader aspects where competences are demonstrated.

The review by El Soufi and See (2019) highlights specific teaching methods that enable critical thinking to be exercised. However, when looking for an answer, they suggest studies with larger populations and add that not all studies agree on a common definition of critical thinking so that different aspects of the process could be measured. Ahern et al. (2019) add that studies should be longer and integrate critical thinking into the curriculum, which would make it possible to evaluate a period of training. They question the assessment of critical thinking in the absence of a more consensual definition of the term. Finally, they suggest that stakeholders interested in demonstrating or assessing critical thinking, such as employers, should be involved.

Payan-Carreira et al. (2019) also discuss the difficulties in studying critical thinking, arguing that no consistent results are obtained from studies using the same teaching strategies. Nor are conclusive results obtained from different strategies. Puig et al. (2019) state that the conceptualization of critical thinking as both a set of skills and a set of dispositions lacks more specific information on how and to what extent learning strategies enhance critical thinking skills and dispositions.

There are several unresolved issues. There is still no consensus on what is meant by critical thinking. On the one hand, reference is made to formal teaching factors provided by universities, which recommend different strategies to acquire the necessary cognitive skills. On the other hand, there is recognition of defined dispositions, which are attributed to action tendencies, personality traits and positive qualities of individuals. Although the authors agree on the existence of both, studies on strategies for training during higher education prevail and the discussion on individual factors of students would appear in disposition or aspects of it. From the selected reviews, it can be seen that the definition of critical thinking obtained by the Delphi project ( Facione, 2011 ) is still valid, although this project was carried out three decades ago. It is worth noting that in the current discussion of critical thinking, the high cognitive skills are most often mentioned, more often than the dispositions, which raises a question. Is this because dispositions are more difficult to study or measure than skills?

It is recognized that critical thinking or reasoning requires dispositions; however, the relationship between dispositions and skills is not yet clear in light of these recent reviews. That is, critical thinking can be developed in students whose dispositions in terms of personal attributions favor this process ( Cruz et al., 2017 ; Wechsler et al., 2018 ). A possible question that arises is whether critical thinking skills are developed from motivational, attitudinal and other dispositions. From the perspective of individual development, there would be environmental conditions and people’s emotional world that favor the acquisition of critical thinking.

Another relevant finding of our analysis is that several of the reviews emphasize the need for methodologically sound studies to advance knowledge about critical thinking in general and how to teach it. For example, Tuononen et al. (2022) found that active learning occurs in learning environments. However, they found conflicting results regarding methodological issues such as study design, methods and sample size.

One question is whether there should be more research on the dispositional aspects of successful critical thinking students, taking into account socio-cultural factors. For example, it is easier to compare individuals with similar educational opportunities (e.g., Finland), as in the study included in this systematic review ( Tuononen et al., 2022 ), which alludes to methodological shortcomings.

If a framework definition of critical thinking training for higher education students were to be proposed, a high level of training in cognitive skills and a complex and comprehensive view of the conditions that make this possible would be paramount. These, as well as aspects of human talent, have been addressed as a condition that favours the development of critical approaches whenever pedagogical scenarios make it possible ( Andreucci-Annunziata, 2012 , 2016 ).

Looking more closely at the strategies that promote the development of critical thinking, and with a view to contributing to the construction of theory in this area, the emphasis on training in cognitive tasks in discipline-based teaching scenarios in four of the five reviews examined stands out. Focusing on the second question guiding this review, Table 6 shows that, with the exception of Tuononen et al. (2022) , who do not mention this aspect, the authors agree on strategic approaches such as the general approach, the infusion approach, the immersion approach or the mixed approach, depending on the specificity of the students.

When considering the specificity of the student, it seems appropriate not to forget the specificity of the teacher. Only the study by Ahern et al. (2019) shows that, from the perspective of the educator, there is a disconnect between the theory of critical thinking and the practice of teaching critical thinking in engineering. The above seems to be relevant to the repair of teacher education beyond techniques. In other words, although some techniques have demonstrated their effectiveness, the interventions carried out in all areas, such as the immersion approach and the infusion approach ( Payan-Carreira et al., 2019 ; Puig et al., 2019 ), followed by general critical thinking skills ( El Soufi and See, 2019 ), operate in a specific interactional framework between teacher and student ( Andreucci-Annunziata, 2016 ; Salas et al., 2021 ).

This interactional framework seems to be relevant for further research. It is within this framework that the teaching-learning process takes place. In turn, this teaching-learning process, of which the development of critical thinking becomes a fundamental part, is inserted into a defined institutional educational and strategic project with guiding guidelines. The guidelines for the process of restructuring and strategic planning of universities in the world, and especially in Latin America, have emphasized the review of the integration of the respective institutional educational projects into the general academic task. This has implications not only for the objectives of academic quality, but also for a rigorous analysis of the curricular models postulated in institutional educational projects. In this sense, the approaches that pay attention to critical thinking because of and in the process of development, focus on the students and enable them to insert themselves in the framework of the challenges imposed by global citizenship, the strengthening of academic skills (cognitive, affective and/or bonding) and life skills, sustainable development, the inclusion of diverse perspectives and openness to internationalization ( Delors et al., 1996 ; Sabzalieva et al., 2021 ). According to Molina et al. (2018) , an educational model in a university setting expresses “synthetic visions of theories or pedagogical approaches that guide specialists and teachers from the development and analysis of study programmes to the systematization of the teaching-learning process in university classrooms” (p. 153). It is this last process that is particularly highlighted in this review.

5. Conclusion

Not surprisingly, since critical thinking is the foundation of integral education in complex times, there has been much research and study on this topic. The recent bibliometric analysis of critical thinking ( Pagán Castaño et al., 2022 ) allowed us to support a review of reviews with current and updated data. Our review shows that dispositions and skills are key concepts in the promotion of critical thinking, and Giancarlo and Facione (2001) point out that the disposition to think critically is conceptually different from having the skills to think critically. Although all the authors reviewed agree in recognizing the importance and influence of dispositions in the area of critical thinking, there has been more research on skills than on dispositions. When turning to the aspect of teaching strategies for critical thinking, there was no consensus on how this should be done. In fact, the common recommendation to conduct further research on how to teach critical thinking raises the question of whether it is possible to teach this disposition or skill at all.

Further concerns arise about the conditions under which critical thinking can be developed in contexts that do not sufficiently validate it, or in higher education institutions that do not explicitly define it in their policies, although they require it in academic outcomes, and vice versa. The strategies derived from the methodologies reviewed do not fully respond to the development of critical thinking because they focus almost exclusively on the evaluation of outcomes rather than on the process of constructing this type of thinking and its applicability. It would be helpful to update paradigms in this area that support both study and teaching practice. A possible alternative is to consider complex paradigms ( Delors et al., 1996 ; Elfert, 2015 ) that support life skills in this 21st century and are concerned with placing students at the center of their learning process, in close contact with their interactional dialog environment (family members, teachers and classmates), which challenges them and proposes joint problem solving.

In the context of educational transformation, which is the purpose of this type of study, the elements to be considered are (1) the institutional educational project (mission, vision, objectives), (2) the institutional strategic plan (strategic quality objectives in the areas of teaching, management, research and links with the environment), (3) the study plan (degree programmes, undergraduate and postgraduate programmes and their respective curricula), and (4) the teaching-learning process. At this last level, which is also the first (the micro-genesis of educational transformations), the development of critical thinking is considered key in two senses: as training in cognitive tasks (instructional scenario) and as “training” in affective-relational attitudinal skills (expressive scenario). It is clear, in the opinion of the authors of this review, that this second approach is the one that requires further study and constitutes a line of research to be deepened and strengthened in future research. The conclusive analysis presented is consistent with the potential of complexity theory to address the challenges, at the micro- and macro-genetic levels, in establishing a new field of research in higher education from the perspective of educational psychology, and to provide possible solutions for the implementation of complex and creative thinking as a developmental goal for students and a strategic goal for higher education institutions. ( Davis and Sumara, 2014 ; Scott et al., 2018 ; Harmat and Herbert, 2020 ).

On the other hand, the main limitation of this review is that there is not enough information to explore the different weight of the methodologies implemented for the development of cognitive, affective-attitudinal, creativity, talent and academic performance skills in higher education in academic programmes. Likewise, given the origin of the systematic reviews found and analyzed in this study, there is no information on the application of critical thinking conceptualizations and teaching practices in Latin America ( Beneitone and Yarosh, 2015 ), which constitutes a challenge and line of research for a working team such as ours.

Author contributions

PA-A: original idea and institutional link. PA-A, AR, SC, and MR: conceptualization and writing—original draft preparation. AM and AV-M: methodology. AM and AR: formal analysis. PA-A, AM, and AV-M: writing—review and editing. PA-A: funding acquisition. PA-A: proofreading and final editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

The article processing charge (APC) was funded by Instituto de Investigación y Postgrado, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Central de Chile (Code: ACD 219201).

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/feduc.2023.1141686/full#supplementary-material

Aglen, B. (2016). Pedagogical strategies to teach bachelor students evidence-based practice: a systematic review. Nurse Educ. Today 36, 255–263. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.08.025

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ahern, A., Dominguez, C., McNally, C., O’Sullivan, J. J., and Pedrosa, D. (2019). A literature review of critical thinking in engineering education. Stud. High. Educ. 44, 816–828. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1586325

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ahern, A., O’Connor, T., Mac Ruairc, G., McNamara, M., and O’Donnell, D. (2012). Critical thinking in the university curriculum: the impact on engineering education. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 37, 125–132. doi: 10.1080/03043797.2012.666516

Al-Ghadouni, A. (2021). Instructional approaches to critical thinking: an overview of reviews. Rev. AR. de Clin. Psicol. 30, 240–246. doi: 10.24205/03276716.2020.2020

Andreucci-Annunziata, P. (2012). El Talento: Una Construcción en y Desde la Pedagogía Dialógica. Psicoperspectivas 11, 185–205. doi: 10.5027/psicoperspectivas-Vol11-Issue2-fulltext-200

Andreucci-Annunziata, P. (2016). Talento y argumentación: Una alianza dialógica en el aula. Profesorado Revista de Currículum y Formación de Profesorado 20, 2–17. doi: 10.30827/profesorado.v20i2.10405

Andreucci-Annunziata, P., Mellado, A., and Vega-Muñoz, A. (2022). Telesupervision in psychotherapy: a bibliometric and systematic review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19:16366. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192316366

Aromataris, E., Fernandez, R., Godfrey, C. M., Holly, C., Khalil, H., and Tungpunkom, P. (2015). Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach. JBI Evid. Implement. 13, 132–140. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000055

Association of American Colleges and Universities (2004). Liberal Education Outcomes: A Preliminary Report on Student Achievement in College . Washington, DC, Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Google Scholar

Association of American Colleges and Universities (2015). Falling Short? College Learning and Career Success . Washington, DC. Available at: http://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2015employerstudentsurvey

Atkinson, D. (1997). A critical approach to critical thinking. TESOL Q. 31, 71–94. doi: 10.2307/3587975

Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J., and Daniels, L. (1999). Common misconceptions of critical thinking. J. Curric. Stud. 31, 269–283. doi: 10.1080/002202799183124

Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., and Wang, L. (2006). Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomed. Digit. Libr. 3:7. doi: 10.1186/1742-5581-3-7

Behar-Horenstein, L. S., and Niu, L. (2011). Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: a review of the literature. J. Coll. Teach. Learn. 8, 25–42. doi: 10.19030/tlc.v8i2.3554

Beneitone, P., and Yarosh, M. (2015). Tuning impact in Latin America: is there implementation beyond design? Tuning. J. High. Educ. 3, 187–216. doi: 10.18543/tjhe-3(1)-2015pp187-216

Braun, H. I., Shavelson, R. J., Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., and Borowiec, K. (2020). Performance assessment of critical thinking: conceptualization, design, and implementation. Front. Educ. 5:156. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2020.00156

Bulik, S. (1978). Book use as a Bradford-Zipf phenomenon. Coll. Res. Libr. 39, 215–219. doi: 10.5860/crl_39_03_215

Chadegani, A. A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., et al. (2013). A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus databases. Asian Soc. Sci. 9:5. doi: 10.5539/ass.v9n5p18

Claris, L., and Riley, D. (2012). Situation critical: critical theory and critical thinking in engineering education. Eng. Stud. 4, 101–120. doi: 10.1080/19378629.2011.649920

Coil, D., Wenderoth, M. P., Cunningham, M., and Dirks, C. (2010). Teaching the process of science: faculty perceptions and an effective methodology. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 9, 524–535. doi: 10.1187/cbe.10-01-0005

Crossley-Frolick, K. A. (2010). Beyond model UNITED NATIONS: simulating multi-level, multi-actor diplomacy using the millennium development goals. Int. Stud. Perspect. 11, 184–201. doi: 10.1111/j.1528-3585.2010.00401.x

Cruz, G., Payan-Carreira, R., and Dominguez, C. (2017). Critical thinking education in the Portuguese higher education institutions: a systematic review of educational practices. Rev. Lusofona Educ. 38, 43–61. doi: 10.24140/issn.1645-7250.rle38.03

Cruz, G., Payan-Carreira, R., Dominguez, C., Silva, H., and Morais, F. (2021). What critical thinking skills and dispositions do new graduates need for professional life? Views from Portuguese employers in different fields. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 40, 721–737. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2020.1785401

Davis, B., and Sumara, D. (2014). Complexity and Education: Inquiries into Learning, Teaching, and Research . Lawrence Erlbaum. Routledge.

Delors, J., Amagi, I., Carneiro, R., Chung, F., Geremek, B., Gorham, W., et al. (1996). La educación encierra un tesoro: informe para la UNESCO de la Comisión Internacional sobre la Educación para el Siglo Veintiuno . París, Santillana Ediciones UNESCO.

Dewey, J. (1910). How We Think . D.C. Heath & Co. Publishers: Boston, United States.

Djamnezhad, D., Koltcheva, N., Dizdarevic, A., Mujezinovic, A., Peixoto, C., Coelho, V., et al. (2021). Social and emotional learning in preschool settings: A systematic map of systematic reviews. Front. Educ. 6:691670. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.691670

Dobrov, G. M., Randolph, R. H., and Rauch, W. D. (1979). New options for team research via international computer networks. Scientometrics 1, 387–404. doi: 10.1007/bf02016658

Dominguez, C. (2018a). A European Review on Critical Thinking Educational Practices in higher Education Institutions. UTAD/EU: Vila Real

Dominguez, C. (2018b). A European Collection of the Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions Needed in Different Professional Fields for the 21st Century . ERASMUS + Programme/EU UTAD: Vila Real

Dumitru, D., Bigu, D., Elen, J., Jiang, L., Railienè, A., Penkauskienè, D., et al. (2018). A European Collection of the Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions Needed in Different Professional Fields for the 21st Century . UTAD: Vila Real, Portugal.

El Soufi, N., and See, B. H. (2019). Does explicit teaching of critical thinking improve critical thinking skills of English language learners in higher education? A critical review of causal evidence. Stud. Educ. Eval. 60, 140–162. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.12.006

Elder, L., and Paul, R. (2003). Critical thinking: teaching students how to study and learn. J. Dev. Educ. 27, 36–38.

Elfert, M. (2015). UNESCO, the Faure report, the Delors report, and the political utopia of lifelong learning. Eur. J. Educ. 50, 88–100. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12104

Ennis, R. (1996). Critical Thinking . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical Thinking and Subject Specificity: Clarification and Needed Research. Educ. Res.. 18, 4–10. doi: 10.3102/0013189X018003004

Ennis, R. H. (2016). Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum: A Vision. Topoi 37, 165–184. doi: 10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4

Ennis, R. H., and Weir, E. (1985). The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test . Pacific Grove, CA: Critical Thinking Press and Software.

European Parliament Council (2008). The establishment of the European qualifications framework for lifelong learning. Official Journal of European Union: EU. Available at: https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/projects/european-qualifications-framework-eqf

Eurydice (2011). Science Education in Europe: National policies, practices and research . EACEA: Brussels, Belgium.

Facione, P.A. (1990). Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction . The California Academic Press: Millibrae, CA, USA.

Facione, P. A. (2000). The disposition toward critical thinking: its character, measurement, and relationship to critical thinking skill. Informal Log. 20, 61–84. doi: 10.22329/il.v20i1.2254

Facione, P. A. (2011). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts . San Jose: California Academic Press.

Facione, N. C., Facione, P. A., and Sanchez, C. A. (1994). Critical thinking disposition as a measure of competent clinical judgment: the development of the California critical thinking disposition inventory. J. Nurs. Educ. 33, 345–350. doi: 10.3928/0148-4834-19941001-05

Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G., and Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J. 22, 338–342. doi: 10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF

Fejes, A. (2006). The Bologna process-governing higher education in Europe through standardisation. Revista Española de Educación Comparada 12, 203–232.

Giacomazzi, M., Fontana, M., and Camilli Trujillo, C. (2022). Contextualization of critical thinking in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic integrative review. Think. Ski. Creat 43:100978. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100978

Giancarlo, C. A., and Facione, P. A. (2001). A look across four years at the disposition toward critical thinking among undergraduate students. J. Gen. Educ. 50, 29–55. doi: 10.1353/jge.2001.0004

Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains. Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. Am. Psychol. 53, 449–455. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.53.4.449

Halpern, D. F. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J. Gen. Educ. 50, 270–286. doi: 10.1353/jge.2001.0024

Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking , 5th. Psychology Press: New York, United States.

Harmat, L., and Herbert, A. (2020). Complexity thinking as a tool for understanding the didactics of psychology. Front. Psychol. 11:542446. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.542446

Harzing, A. W., and Alakangas, S. (2016). Google scholar, scopus and the web of science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics 106, 787–804. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9

Hildenbrand, K. J., and Schultz, J. A. (2012). Development of a rubric to improve critical thinking. Athl. Train. Educ. J. 7, 86–94. doi: 10.4085/070386

Hoskins, B., and Deacon Crick, R. (2010). Competences for learning to learn and active citizenship: different currencies or two sides of the same coin? Eur. J. Educ. 45, 121–137. doi: 10.1111/j.1465-3435.2009.01419.x

Hyytinen, K., Saari, E., and Elg, M. (2019). “Human-centered co-evaluation method as a means for sustainable service innovations,” in Human-centered digitalization and services . eds. M. Toivonen and E. Saari (Springer), 57–75.

Kumar, S. (2014). Application of Bradford’s law to human-computer interaction research literature. DESIDOC J. Libr. Inf. Technol. 34, 223–231.

Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., et al. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 62, e1–e34. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136

Liu, O. L., Frankel, L., and Roohr, K. C. (2014). Assessing critical thinking in higher education: current state and directions for next-generation assessment. ETS Res. Rep. Ser. 2014, 1–23. doi: 10.1002/ets2.12009

McPeck, J. E. (1981). Critical Thinking and Education . St. Martin's Press: New York, United States.

Methley, A. M., Campbell, S., Chew-Graham, C., McNally, R., and Cheraghi-Sohi, S. (2014). PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews. BMC Health Serv. Res. 14:579. doi: 10.1186/s12913-014-0579-0

Mitchell, R., Myles, F., Johnston, B., and Ford, P. (2003). “Criticality and the ‘key skills’ agenda in undergraduate linguistics” in Notes of Talk given at Subject Centre for Languages, Linguistics, and Area Studies Seminar: ‘Key Skills Linguistics’. University of Southampton, London (Southampton, London, England: CILT)

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., and Altman, D. G. (2009). The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for sstematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6:e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

Molina, J. M., Lavandero, J., and Hernández, L. M. (2018). El modelo educativo como fundamento del accionar universitario: Experiencia de la Universidad Técnica de Manabí, Ecuador [the educational model as the Foundation of University Action.: the experience of the technical University of Manabi, Ecuador]. Revista Cubana de Educación Superior 37, 151–164.

Mongeon, P., and Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of web of science and scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics 106, 213–228. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

Moore, T. (2013). Critical thinking: seven definitions in search of a concept. Stud. High. Educ. 38, 506–522. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.586995

Moore, T. (2014). Wittgenstein, Williams and the terminologies of higher education: a case study of the term ‘critical’. J. Acad. Lang. Learn. 8, A95–A108.

Morse, P. M., and Leimkuhler, F. F. (1979). Technical note—exact solution for the Bradford distribution and its use in modeling infor-mational data. Oper. Res. 27, 187–198. doi: 10.1287/opre.27.1.187

Naimpally, A., Ramachandran, H., and Smith, C. (2012). Lifelong Learning for Engineers and Scientists in the Information Age . Elsevier: Amsterdam, Holland.

Niu, L., Behar-Horenstein, L., and Garvan, C. W. (2013). Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 9, 114–128. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Organización de Naciones Unidas (2018). Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible. Available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/report/2018/TheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsReport2018-es.pdf

Pagán Castaño, J., Arnal-Pastor, M., Pagán-Castaño, E., and Guijarro-García, M. (2022). Bibliometric analysis of the literature on critical thinking: an increasingly important competence for higher education students. Econ. Res-Ekonomska Istraživanja , 1–22. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2022.2125888

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021a). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int. J. Surg. 88:105906. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906

Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021b). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n160. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n160

Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2003). Learning for the 21st Century . Partnership for 21st Century Learning. Washington, DC, USA.

Payan-Carreira, R., Cruz, G., Papathanasiou, I. V., Fradelos, E., and Jiang, L. (2019). The effectiveness of critical thinking instructional strategies in health professions education: a systematic review. Stud. High. Educ. 44, 829–843. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1586330

Pontigo, J., and Lancaster, F. W. (1986). Qualitative aspects of the Bradford distribution. Scientometrics 9, 59–70. doi: 10.1007/BF02016608

Popay, J., Roberts, H., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Rodgers, M., et al. (2006). Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: a product from the ESRC Methods Programme . Institute for Health Research, University of Lancaster.

Porter, A. L., Kongthon, A., and Lu, J. C. (2002). Research profiling: improving the literature review. Scientometrics 53, 351–370. doi: 10.1023/A:1014873029258

Price, D. D. S. (1976). A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 27, 292–306. doi: 10.1002/asi.4630270505

Puig, B., Blanco-Anaya, P., Bargiela, I., and Crujeiras Pérez, B. (2019). A systematic review on critical thinking intervention studies in higher education across professional fields. Stud. High. Educ. 44, 860–869. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1586333

Ramanathan, V., and Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Audience and voice in current L1 composition texts: some implications for ESL student writers. J. Second. Lang. Writ. 5, 21–34. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90013-2

Sabzalieva, E., Chacon, E., Bosen, L. L., Morales, D., Mutize, T., Nguyen, H., et al. (2021). Thinking higher and beyond perspectives on the futures of higher education to 2050. UNESCO IESALC. ISBN: 978-980-7175-57-9. Available at: https://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv:90677

Saiz, C., and Rivas, S. (2008). Assessment in critical thinking: a proposal for differentiating ways of thinking. Ergo Nueva Época 22, 25–66.

Salas, M., Díaz, A., and Medina, L. (2021). Mentorías en Chile: De la política diseñada a la puesta en acto [Mentoring in Chile: from policy design to implementation.]. Rev. Mex. Investig. Educ. 26, 449–474.

Scott, A., Woolcott, G., Keast, R., and Chamberlain, D. (2018). Sustainability of collaborative networks in higher education research projects: why complexity? Why now? Public Manag. Rev. 20, 1068–1087. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2017.1364410

Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., et al. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 349:g7647. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g7647

Siegel, H. (1988). Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking, and Education . Routledge: New York, United States.

Swokowski, E.W. (1988). Calculus with Analytic Geometry , 4th; Grupo Editorial Planeta: Mexico City, Mexico.

Tuononen, T., Hyytinen, H., Kleemola, K., Hailikari, T., Männikkö, I., and Toom, A. (2022). Systematic review of learning generic skills in higher education—enhancing and impeding factors. Front. Educ. 7:885917. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.885917

Van Damme, D., and Zahner, D. (2022). Does Higher Education Teach Students to Think Critically? OECD Publishing: Paris, France

Wechsler, S. M., Saiz, C., Rivas, S. F., Vendramini, C. M. M., Almeida, L. S., Mundim, M. C., et al. (2018). Creative and critical thinking: independent or overlapping components? Think. Skills Creat. 27, 114–122. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.003

Zahavi, H., and Friedman, Y. (2019). The Bologna process: an international higher education regime. Eur. J. High. Educ. 9, 23–39. doi: 10.1080/21568235.2018.1561314

Keywords: critical thinking, higher education, teaching strategies, skills, dispositions

Citation: Andreucci-Annunziata P, Riedemann A, Cortés S, Mellado A, del Río MT and Vega-Muñoz A (2023) Conceptualizations and instructional strategies on critical thinking in higher education: A systematic review of systematic reviews. Front. Educ . 8:1141686. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1141686

Received: 10 January 2023; Accepted: 20 February 2023; Published: 09 March 2023.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2023 Andreucci-Annunziata, Riedemann, Cortés, Mellado, del Río and Vega-Muñoz. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Augusto Mellado, [email protected] ; Alejandro Vega-Muñoz, [email protected]

Disclaimer: 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.

• The Open University
• Accessibility hub
• Guest user / Sign out
• Study with The Open University

My OpenLearn Profile

Personalise your OpenLearn profile, save your favourite content and get recognition for your learning

About this free course

Become an ou student, download this course, share this free course.

Start this free course now. Just create an account and sign in. Enrol and complete the course for a free statement of participation or digital badge if available.

3 Fundamental aspects of critical thinking

Despite the differences emanating from these schools of thought, there is agreement on some fundamental facets of critical thinking, most of which recognise the various behaviours and/or dispositions that a critical thinker must possess.

• analysing arguments, claims or evidence
• judging or evaluating based on evidence
• making inferences using inductive or deductive reasoning
• making decisions and/or solving problems through reasoning.

Dispositions:

• open-mindedness
• searcher of truth
• inquisition
• fair and balanced view of one’s work and that of others.

Activity 3 Qualities and attributes associated with a ‘critical thinker’

Pause briefly here to reflect further on this.

What qualities or attributes come to mind when you consider someone to be a ‘critical thinker’?

Note down your thoughts; you may find it helpful to list these.

Here are a few thoughts. This is not meant to be the ‘definitive’ answer, but we want you to consider and reflect on some of these points. A critical thinker would typically avoid jumping to conclusions. They would seek to deepen their own understanding, analyse experience gained from different angles, look at the reasons for and consequences of their own actions, seek clarity and evidence to support their assumptions and beliefs, make use of theory, research and professional knowledge and the insights gained to make informed judgements, decisions and plans for the future.

Someone who is engaged in ‘critical thinking’ could be considered to be:

• self-aware (and emotionally aware)
• open to others’ ideas (does not automatically assume that own knowledge and experience is typical of others’)
• imaginative and showing curiosity
• enquiring (asks pertinent questions)
• empathetic (able to understand another’s point of view)
• able to accept praise and constructive criticism
• able to think ‘laterally’
• able to troubleshoot and solve problems (seeks new solutions)
• able to challenge their own assumptions, beliefs and opinions
• able to see things from different perspectives
• able to distinguish between facts and opinions
• able to evaluate statements and arguments.

How many of these matched your own thoughts? Were there other qualities that you noted?

Another aspect of critical thinking we haven’t mentioned yet is, of course, one’s knowledge of the subject matter. A well-informed researcher or practitioner is always in a good position to offer better insights on the subject matter from an informed position. Bailin et al. (1999), for example, posit that domain-specific knowledge is indispensable in academic critique because the kinds of analysis, evaluation and the use of evidence often vary from discipline to discipline. However, it is important to emphasise that critical thinking and analysis is not simply related to subject knowledge. At postgraduate level the expectations are much higher. You will be required to engage in greater depth with a range of literature, as well as methodologies and approaches used in a variety of research. Now, whilst expectation may vary across disciplines, the fundamentals remain the same.

Activity 4 Reflecting on your understanding and perceptions of critical thinking

Return to your notes from Activity 1 (in this session) and consider the following questions:

• To what extent do you think the activities you listed involved critical thinking and/or analysis?
• Has your perception of what constitutes critical thinking shifted in any way?
• If it has, can you explain why?
• If not, which ‘school of thought’ does your understanding align with, and why?

• Departments, units, and programs
• College leadership
• Faculty and staff resources
• Inclusive Excellence
• 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
• Day of Giving
• About giving to LAS
• Building projects
• Corporate engagement
• Faculty support
• Lincoln Scholars Initiative
• Impact of giving
• Diversity, equity, and inclusion

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

Thinking critically and why it is important

Posted on: September 2, 2020

What is critical thinking?

Before you began your university career, you may not have encountered the term ‘critical thinking’. You may be asking what it is and if it is something that applies to you. Should you be learning to think critically? And, if so, how do you learn to think in this way?

At its simplest, critical thinking is the process of thinking clearly and rationally about a subject. It takes a step back and looks logically at the ideas, asking questions about them and challenging accepted thought. By engaging in this kind of reflective thinking, you will find yourself developing new ideas and a new way of approaching the subject you are studying. You will no longer take things as they appear and will instead look deeper, ask new questions and find yourself understanding the topic at a much deeper level.

Critical thinking turns you from a passive class member into an active learner, someone who engages in what is being taught and questions it, rather than simply nodding along and memorising what you’re being told. You will find yourself challenging your own preconceived ideas, asking if the arguments around the subject are valid and if findings can be trusted.

Being able to think critically isn’t just useful at university, you will find it useful in your future career too.

Why is critical thinking important?

You can see that critical thinking is useful but is it important? Is this a skill you need in order to succeed with your studies? Admittedly, some people are more instinctive critical thinkers than others, and there’s no doubt that plenty of people have gotten through their studies without becoming great critical thinkers. But if you want to get the most out of our course, to do the best you can (and to make the cost of your study worth it), you should want to develop all of the skills you can.

Beyond university life, critical thinking will help you with problem solving, allowing you to see links between issues and ideas. It will be helpful in all job roles, but more so in those that involving planning, strategizing, and project management. It will also help you argue your views, giving you the ability to build an argument and identify any errors in your own, or others’ thinking. 

How to develop your critical thinking skills

Where do you begin to develop your critical thinking skills? The first thing to do is to ask questions of the topics you are studying, the opinions being shared, or the ideas being proposed. Ask how this conclusion was reached. Is it valid? Are there any holes in the argument? Do you agree with what is being said and, whether you agree or not, why do you think that way?

Challenge your own preconceived ideas, your instinctual responses – are your own opinions based on fact or are they just assumptions? We all have unconscious biases, prejudices that get in the way of thinking clearly and critically about things. When you start to challenge these prejudices, not only will you find yourself changing your opinions, you will be more open to new ideas and the opinions of others.

Read widely , not just the key texts on the reading list. Instead, dig deeper by reading the rest of the titles on the reading list, by exploring the subject in your university library, or by discussing it with course mates to hear others’ opinions. Remember though that critical thinking is not an argument, you are not seeking to be critical of others, rather to be critical of ideas by thinking more clearly and by challenging your own assumptions.

When you’re studying, surrounded by a world of new ideas and thoughts, it can be pretty easy to get lost in those thoughts and to lose track of your own thinking, allowing it to disappear amongst the mountain of information. By thinking critically, you can keep your head above the water, and learn to think clearly and develop your own opinions.

The country you have selected will result in the following:

• Product pricing will be adjusted to match the corresponding currency.
• The title Perception will be removed from your cart because it is not available in this region.

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

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

Diane f. halpern.

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

Dana S. Dunn

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

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

1. Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Analyzing Arguments to Determine Degree of Support for a Conclusion

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

7. Conclusions

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

Author Contributions

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

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

No IRB Review.

Informed Consent Statement

No Informed Consent.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

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

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

• Business Strategy
• Business Analysis
• Privacy Policy

Importance of critical thinking: 13 compelling reasons

Not in the mood to read the full article? Listen to the audio podcast episode below .

What does critical thinking mean to you? The ability to think critically is an important skill to have, but not everyone is good at it. Some people think critically in certain situations, but their thinking becomes muddy in other situations. What’s important is that we can all learn this skill, which will help us make sound decisions.

Today’s workplace emphasizes data-driven decision-making, which makes critical thinking a skill more important than ever. The skill, however, is also vital to your personal life. We’ll discuss the importance of critical thinking in everyday life in this article. 

 So, what is critical thinking? Critical thinking can be defined as the mental process of analyzing and evaluating ideas and drawing logical conclusions. Before you start to apply critical thinking skills, this article dives deeper into understanding the importance of critical thinking as a soft skill.

Table of Contents

Listen to the audio article.

“Why Is Critical Thinking Important?”; listen to the audio cast of the full article on Anchor podcasts.

The importance of Critical thinking explained

It is crucial to think critically in this day and age because so much information is available. To figure out what is true and isn’t, you need to think critically and process information.

When you think critically, you make healthy, informed decisions based on facts rather than faulty assumptions. Think about how often you’ve made a decision based on emotion or gut instinct alone. These types of decisions can lead to unhealthy lifestyles, dire financial situations, unsound investments, and much more. 

Success in your personal and professional life depends on strong critical thinking abilities. So how do you improve your critical thinking? Here are some ways that can help you become a better critical thinker. Collectively these reasons illustrate why this skill is so valuable in everyday situations. 

1. Overcoming negative thinking

Critical thinking is dependent on self-confidence. You cannot critically analyze anything if you don’t believe in yourself to make the best decisions. You have to be able to assess situations and make decisions based on your end goals. 

 Making progress will be difficult if you are constantly doubting yourself. Low self-confidence makes people make less optimal decisions since they don’t think they can achieve better results. 

Becoming more confident allows you to think more critically in order to make better decisions. In addition, it negates the negative thoughts we usually have when making a decision.

2. Getting over biases

The way people make decisions is influenced by cognitive biases. This is evident when people have to choose between two options. Usually, we believe we come to an evidence-based conclusion on our own since it feels more natural to us. However, it is possible that our personal bias overshadowed the facts and truth.

However, the choice of one decision over another may not have been based on any logical reasoning. Most of the time, we make critical decisions based on biases rather than what is most optimal under the given circumstances.

It is important to be able to gather information about an issue and analyze it critically in order to challenge our own beliefs. This involves looking at your information sources objectively and determining their biases. Also, verifying the reliability of those sources with sufficient proof without depending on the face value. 

Only by doing this can one form an informed opinion on an issue and effectively engage with others in meaningful dialogue about it.

3. Improving your decision-making

Our senses allow us to critically evaluate what we see, hear, feel, smell, and read. Our mental faculties get energized and work at their best when we think critically. Whenever something doesn’t add up or doesn’t seem right, a critical thinker wants to figure out why.

Better decision-making comes from this kind of analytical thinking combined with strategic thinking; it can make people more productive and decisive.

4. Self-reflection

This means looking inward and questioning one’s own motivations, values, and beliefs. It allows people to analyze their thoughts more deeply. Although it can be uncomfortable, it is essential for growth. Without self-reflection, we are at risk of becoming stuck in our ways and resistant to change.

5. Evaluating multiple options

Critical thinking can help you solve problems more efficiently by focusing on one thing at a time. When analyzing options, you need to analyze them individually. 

 For example, Suppose you want to pick up groceries today. In that case, you have to consider everything else you have scheduled for the day, the peak time at the grocery store, the best time to get fresh produce, the availability of parking, etc. So you compare the time slots available to get to the store with these variables.

6. Gathering information from multiple sources

Critical thinking allows you to approach problems rationally. As we discussed earlier, a critical thinker approaches problems differently from those who do not possess this skill, such as gathering all relevant information from several sources before deciding.

It requires creativity, curiosity, and open-mindedness, as we must be open to new ideas and willing to look beyond what we already know. By doing so, we can see what really matters and cut through the noise.

7. Improving your ability to manage emotions

Critical thinking can provide you with effective tools for managing your emotions. You can use the skill to deal with your emotions more effectively. If you know how your emotions influence how you process information, you can learn to control these impulses before they affect your decisions.

 The key to making smart decisions is taming your emotions. Consider getting an email from your favourite brand offering a 70% discount. Your first thought may be to at the store on your way home. When you think critically, you will first check to see if you actually need more clothes this month before buying any.  

 Let’s say you were thinking about buying a new jacket.  Next, you would see whether jackets are included in the promotion. If they are, you should quickly check if there is any budget left this month to spend on clothing. If not, you might consider waiting until the next promotion is available.

8. Boosting your creativity

It’s easy to take a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants approach when you don’t have all the facts. That leads to mistakes, wasted time, and lost opportunities. With critical thinking, you can separate your emotions from your decisions to make more accurate choices that are more likely to lead to successful outcomes. 

Critical thinking helps you to be creative and think in unconventional ways. That could be the reason why some tech companies hire philosophy majors for their product development teams.

9. Building your character

Critical thinking skills can help you build your personality. Therefore, we must train ourselves to think in a structured way in order to develop our critical thinking skills. Although this may seem counter-intuitive, it will improve our judgment and decision-making skills in the long run. 

A critical thinker analyzes information objectively and logically. This means considering all the evidence and forming an unbiased opinion. Consequently, you can become more open-minded and open to new solutions that may push you out of your comfort zone.

Critical thinking also helps sharpen our judgment. The more confident we are in our ability to make better decisions, the less likely we are to be swayed by others. This will make our lives more fulfilling.  

10. Expanding your mental capacity

It makes us smarter. We’re better at remembering information than people who don’t use critical thinking skills. We can learn new things faster when we use critical thinking.

Spending a little extra time on something helps us remember it long-term. Our mental faculties improve when we use more mental energy to evaluate and weigh different options for a problem or opportunity.

11. Breaking bigger problems into smaller ones

Breaking down larger problems into smaller ones requires critical thinking. When faced with a huge problem, it can be overwhelming to know where to begin. Taking a step back and assessing the situation critically can help you break it down into smaller pieces.

It will give you a better idea of what you’re up against and how to deal with it. Once you have a better grasp of the situation, you can start developing smaller solutions that will eventually lead to solving the larger problem.

12. Learning new things quicker

The process of critical thinking makes it easier to learn new things. It’s about looking at things differently and finding out what’s really going on. We can learn faster and better this way.

Let’s say you’re learning a new language. It will be challenging and time-consuming to just memorize the basic syntax. With critical thinking, you can break down the parts of speech into their sub-components and understand how it all fits together. Critical thinking enhances language learning ability.

It is generally considered a necessary skill when learning any scientific subject. The World Federation for Medical Education, for example, has listed critical thinking as one of the medical training standards .

13. Positively improving relationships

Many people view critical thinking as a cold, calculating process. However, it can actually be quite valuable in our personal relationships. By critically examining our beliefs and assumptions about others, we are more likely to become tolerant and understanding. 

As humans, we tend to view things through our own limited lenses. However, we can see things from a different perspective when we think critically.

This type of thinking and communication can help build strong relationships and resolve conflicts. Critical thinking can help us build more fulfilling relationships.

Critical thinking vs strategic thinking

A critical thinker is able to think clearly and rationally while understanding logical connections between ideas. They can evaluate arguments and data and make informed decisions. On the other hand, strategic thinking is the ability to see the big picture and understand how the pieces fit together. 

When you draw inferences from information, break down facts and ideas based on their merits, or analyze trends over time, that’s strategic thinking. In order to be successful, businesses need both critical and strategic thinkers. 

While critical thinkers provide detailed analysis to enable sound decisions, strategic thinkers help identify long-term opportunities and challenges. These two types of thinking can be combined to make better decisions that lead to long-term success.

Final thoughts

You can’t overemphasize the importance of critical thinking. It is vital that we develop critical thinking in the modern world since it is absolutely essential to both our personal and career growth. It helps us stop seeing people in conflict as adversaries and work together.

Making successful decisions requires critical thinking skills. It entails analyzing information objectively and logically, considering all evidence, and coming to an unbiased conclusion. 

It also helps build one’s character and promotes creativity. It increases mental capacity and promotes smart approaches. 

In addition, breaking down a bigger problem into smaller pieces and understanding how the pieces fit together require critical thinking. The knowledge economy is all about finding solutions to problems. That’s why businesses need critical thinkers to find creative solutions.

Related posts

Read about how strategic thinking helps you achieve your long-term goals.

Here are some useful tips to help you make better decisions

Recent Posts

Top 10 benefits of audiobooks: unlocking the power of listening, a roadmap to strategic planning: 4-phase process, 9 tips to improve your attention to detail and avoid mistakes, 31 most inspiring business strategy quotes, top 7 leadership traits of an effective leader.

© Copyright - AnalytixMinds.com

The Importance of Critical Thinking in Everyday Life

Annie Walls

Critical thinking is an essential skill that plays a significant role in our everyday lives. It involves analyzing and evaluating information, making logical connections, and solving problems. By developing critical thinking skills, we can make informed decisions, avoid cognitive biases, and effectively communicate with others. In this article, we will explore the importance of critical thinking in various aspects of life and discuss key takeaways to help enhance our critical thinking abilities.

Key Takeaways

• Critical thinking involves analyzing and evaluating information to make informed decisions.
• Developing critical thinking skills can help us avoid cognitive biases and make logical connections.
• Problem-solving and creativity are essential components of critical thinking.
• Applying critical thinking in everyday life can lead to better decision-making and effective communication.
• Critical thinking is crucial in the workplace for problem-solving, decision-making, innovation, and conflict resolution.

Understanding Critical Thinking

Defining critical thinking.

Critical thinking is a crucial skill that allows individuals to analyze and evaluate information objectively. It involves carefully considering evidence, arguments, and reasoning before making conclusions or decisions. By engaging in critical thinking, individuals can uncover biases, assumptions, and fallacies that may be present in the information they encounter. This helps them to make more informed and rational choices in their everyday lives.

The Components of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is composed of several key components that work together to enhance our ability to analyze and evaluate information. These components include analysis , interpretation , inference , evaluation , explanation , and self-regulation .

The Benefits of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking has numerous benefits that can positively impact various aspects of life. By engaging in critical thinking, individuals can enhance their problem-solving skills , improve their decision-making abilities, and gain a deeper understanding of complex issues. Analytical thinking is a key component of critical thinking, allowing individuals to break down problems into smaller parts and analyze them systematically. This process enables individuals to identify patterns, make connections, and draw logical conclusions. Moreover, critical thinking promotes creativity and innovation by encouraging individuals to think outside the box and explore alternative solutions. By challenging assumptions and questioning established norms, individuals can generate new ideas and approaches to various situations. Additionally, critical thinking helps individuals evaluate information more effectively, enabling them to make informed decisions based on evidence and logical reasoning. By avoiding cognitive biases and critically assessing the credibility and reliability of information, individuals can navigate through the vast amount of information available in today's digital age. Effective communication is another crucial skill that is enhanced through critical thinking. By critically analyzing and organizing thoughts, individuals can articulate their ideas more clearly and persuasively, leading to more effective communication and collaboration with others.

Developing Critical Thinking Skills

Analytical thinking.

Analytical thinking is a crucial component of critical thinking. It involves breaking down complex problems or situations into smaller parts and examining them systematically. By analyzing the different elements and their relationships, individuals can gain a deeper understanding of the issue at hand. This process allows for the identification of patterns, trends, and potential solutions. Analytical thinking helps individuals make informed decisions based on evidence and logical reasoning. It also enables them to evaluate information objectively and identify any biases or fallacies that may be present.

Logical Reasoning

Logical reasoning is a fundamental aspect of critical thinking. It involves the ability to analyze information, identify patterns, and draw logical conclusions. By using logical reasoning, individuals can evaluate arguments, assess the validity of claims, and make informed decisions. Analyzing evidence and evaluating the logical consistency of statements are key skills in logical reasoning. It allows individuals to think critically and make sound judgments based on evidence and reasoning.

Problem-solving

Problem-solving is a crucial skill in everyday life. It involves identifying and analyzing problems, generating possible solutions, and selecting the best course of action. Creativity plays a significant role in problem-solving as it allows individuals to think outside the box and come up with innovative solutions. Additionally, logical reasoning is essential in evaluating the feasibility and effectiveness of different solutions. To enhance problem-solving skills, it is important to practice analytical thinking and engage in critical evaluation of potential solutions. By developing these skills, individuals can approach problems with a systematic and strategic mindset, leading to more effective problem-solving outcomes.

Creativity and Innovation

Creativity and innovation are essential skills in today's rapidly changing world. Creativity allows individuals to think outside the box, generate new ideas, and find unique solutions to problems. It involves breaking free from conventional thinking and exploring different perspectives. On the other hand, innovation is the process of implementing creative ideas to create value. It involves taking those new ideas and turning them into practical solutions or products that benefit individuals and society.

To foster creativity and innovation, it is important to create an environment that encourages experimentation and risk-taking. This can be achieved by providing opportunities for brainstorming sessions, promoting collaboration among team members, and embracing diverse perspectives. By fostering a culture of creativity and innovation, individuals and organizations can stay ahead of the curve and adapt to the ever-changing demands of the world.

In addition to fostering creativity and innovation, it is also important to nurture these skills through continuous learning and development. This can be done by seeking out new experiences, exploring different fields of knowledge, and challenging oneself to think outside the box. By continuously expanding one's knowledge and skills, individuals can enhance their creative thinking abilities and become more innovative in their approach to problem-solving.

Overall, creativity and innovation are not only important in the workplace but also in everyday life. They enable individuals to adapt to change, find unique solutions to problems, and create value for themselves and others. By embracing creativity and innovation, individuals can unlock their full potential and make a positive impact in the world.

Applying Critical Thinking in Everyday Life

Making informed decisions.

Making informed decisions is a crucial aspect of critical thinking. It involves gathering relevant information, analyzing it objectively, and considering different perspectives before making a choice. By making informed decisions, individuals can minimize the risk of making hasty or uninformed choices that may have negative consequences. It is important to gather information from reliable sources and critically evaluate the credibility and validity of the information. Additionally, considering the potential outcomes and weighing the pros and cons can help individuals make more rational and well-thought-out decisions.

Evaluating Information

Evaluating information is a crucial skill in today's information age. With the abundance of information available online, it is important to be able to discern reliable and accurate sources from misleading or false ones. One effective way to evaluate information is to critically analyze the source and consider its credibility, expertise, and bias. Additionally, fact-checking and cross-referencing information with multiple sources can help ensure its accuracy. It is also important to be aware of cognitive biases that can influence our perception of information and to approach it with a skeptical mindset. By developing the skill of evaluating information, we can make more informed decisions and avoid being misled by misinformation or propaganda.

Avoiding Cognitive Biases

In order to make sound decisions and think critically, it is important to be aware of and avoid cognitive biases . Cognitive biases are inherent tendencies to think in certain ways that can lead to errors in judgment and decision-making. By recognizing and understanding these biases, individuals can improve their ability to think critically and make more rational choices.

Effective Communication

Effective communication is a crucial skill in everyday life. It allows individuals to express their thoughts, ideas, and emotions clearly and concisely. Clear and concise communication helps in avoiding misunderstandings and ensures that messages are accurately conveyed. It involves not only speaking but also listening actively and attentively to others.

In addition to verbal communication, non-verbal cues such as body language, facial expressions, and tone of voice play a significant role in effective communication. Being aware of these cues and using them appropriately can enhance the overall effectiveness of communication.

To improve your communication skills, consider the following tips:

• Practice active listening by giving your full attention to the speaker and avoiding distractions.
• Use open-ended questions to encourage meaningful conversations.
• Be mindful of your body language and maintain eye contact.
• Use appropriate and respectful language.

Remember, effective communication is a two-way process that requires both speaking and listening skills.

Critical Thinking in the Workplace

Problem-solving in the workplace.

Problem-solving is a crucial skill in the workplace as it allows individuals and teams to identify and address challenges effectively. It involves analyzing the situation , identifying possible solutions, and implementing the best course of action. Creativity plays a significant role in problem-solving, as it enables individuals to think outside the box and come up with innovative solutions. Additionally, analytical thinking and logical reasoning are essential in evaluating the pros and cons of different options. To enhance problem-solving skills, organizations can provide training workshops that focus on developing creative thinking skills and techniques for generating and evaluating new ideas. By fostering a culture that values and encourages problem-solving, businesses can create a more innovative and adaptable work environment.

Decision-making in a Team

Effective decision-making is crucial in a team setting. When a group of individuals come together to make decisions, it is important to consider different perspectives and gather relevant information. Collaboration is key in this process, as it allows team members to share their insights and expertise. By leveraging the collective knowledge of the team, better decisions can be made. It is also important to establish clear communication channels to ensure that everyone is on the same page and understands the rationale behind the decisions. Additionally, conflict resolution skills play a vital role in decision-making within a team. When conflicts arise, it is important to address them in a constructive manner and find a resolution that benefits the team as a whole.

Innovation and Adaptability

Innovation and adaptability are crucial skills in today's rapidly changing world. Innovation involves thinking creatively and coming up with new ideas, products, or solutions to problems. It requires the ability to think outside the box and challenge conventional thinking. Adaptability , on the other hand, is the capacity to adjust and thrive in changing circumstances. It involves being open to new ideas, being flexible, and being able to learn and grow from new experiences.

To foster innovation and adaptability in the workplace, organizations can:

• Encourage a culture of experimentation and risk-taking
• Provide opportunities for employees to learn and develop new skills
• Foster collaboration and cross-functional teams
• Embrace diversity and inclusion

Innovation and adaptability go hand in hand, as being innovative often requires the ability to adapt to new situations and challenges. By cultivating these skills, individuals and organizations can stay ahead in a rapidly evolving world.

Conflict Resolution

Conflict resolution is an essential skill in the workplace. It involves finding a solution to disagreements or conflicts that arise between individuals or teams. Effective conflict resolution can lead to improved relationships, increased productivity, and a positive work environment. Here are some strategies for resolving conflicts:

• Active listening : Listening attentively to all parties involved and seeking to understand their perspectives.
• Collaboration : Working together to find a mutually beneficial solution.
• Compromise : Finding a middle ground that satisfies both parties to some extent.
• Mediation : Involving a neutral third party to facilitate communication and guide the resolution process.

Remember, conflict resolution is not about winning or losing, but about finding a resolution that is fair and satisfactory for everyone involved.

Critical thinking is a crucial skill in the workplace. It allows individuals to analyze information, evaluate arguments, and make informed decisions. In today's fast-paced and complex business environment, employers value employees who can think critically and solve problems effectively. By honing your critical thinking skills, you can become a valuable asset to any organization. If you want to learn more about the importance of critical thinking and how it can benefit your career, visit Keynote Speaker James Taylor's website. James Taylor is an inspiring keynote speaker and internationally recognized leader in business creativity and innovation. His website offers valuable insights and resources to help you enhance your critical thinking abilities. Don't miss out on this opportunity to take your career to the next level. Visit Keynote Speaker James Taylor's website today!

In conclusion, critical thinking is an essential skill that plays a crucial role in our everyday lives. It allows us to analyze information, evaluate arguments, and make informed decisions. By cultivating critical thinking skills, we can navigate through the complexities of the modern world and avoid falling victim to misinformation and manipulation. Whether it's in our personal relationships, professional endeavors, or societal interactions, critical thinking empowers us to question assumptions, challenge biases, and seek truth. Therefore, it is imperative that we prioritize the development and application of critical thinking in our daily lives.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is critical thinking.

Critical thinking is the ability to analyze and evaluate information objectively, using logical reasoning and evidence to form well-reasoned judgments and make informed decisions.

Why is critical thinking important in everyday life?

Critical thinking helps us navigate through the complexities of everyday life by enabling us to make more informed decisions, solve problems effectively, and avoid cognitive biases.

How can I develop my critical thinking skills?

You can develop your critical thinking skills by practicing analytical thinking, logical reasoning, problem-solving, and fostering creativity and innovation.

How does critical thinking apply to making informed decisions?

Critical thinking allows us to evaluate information objectively, consider multiple perspectives, and weigh the pros and cons before making informed decisions.

What are some common cognitive biases to avoid?

Some common cognitive biases to avoid include confirmation bias, availability bias, and anchoring bias, which can cloud our judgment and lead to irrational decisions.

How does critical thinking contribute to effective communication?

Critical thinking helps us analyze and evaluate information before communicating, ensuring that our messages are clear, logical, and based on evidence.

Popular Posts

Robert hannigan – the power of neurodiversity in innovation, cybersecurity, gchq and counter-intelligence #342.

Explore key insights on intelligence and decision-making from Professor Sir David Omand’s book, focusing on critical thinking and creativity.

Sam Dixon of Womble Bond Dickinson, The Evolving Role of Lawyers in the AI Era #341

John craske of cms, collaboration between humans and machines in the legal industry #340, jd meier of microsoft, productivity strategies for success #339, sir david omand, author of how spies think – 10 lessons in critical thinking #338, meilleur conférencier principal en teambuilding.

Les conférences virtuelles et les sommets peuvent être des moyens très efficaces pour inspirer, informer

James is a top motivational keynote speaker who is booked as a creativity and innovation keynote speaker, AI speaker , sustainability speaker and leadership speaker . Recent destinations include: Dubai , Abu Dhabi , Orlando , Las Vegas , keynote speaker London , Barcelona , Bangkok , Miami , Berlin , Riyadh , New York , Zurich , motivational speaker Paris , Singapore and San Francisco

Latest News

• 415.800.3059
• [email protected]
• Media Interviews
• Meeting Planners
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy

FIND ME ON SOCIAL

© 2024 James Taylor DBA P3 Music Ltd.