the literacy process involves intuition imagination problem solving and critical thinking skills

Chapter 1. What is Literacy? Multiple Perspectives on Literacy

Constance Beecher

“Once you learn to read, you will be forever free.” – Frederick Douglass

Download Tar Beach – Faith Ringgold Video Transcript [DOC]

Keywords: literacy, digital literacy, critical literacy, community-based literacies

Definitions of literacy from multiple perspectives

Literacy is the cornerstone of education by any definition. Literacy refers to the ability of people to read and write (UNESCO, 2017). Reading and writing in turn are about encoding and decoding information between written symbols and sound (Resnick, 1983; Tyner, 1998). More specifically, literacy is the ability to understand the relationship between sounds and written words such that one may read, say, and understand them (UNESCO, 2004; Vlieghe, 2015). About 67 percent of children nationwide, and more than 80 percent of those from families with low incomes, are not proficient readers by the end of third grade ( The Nation Assessment for Educational Progress; NAEP 2022 ).  Children who are not reading on grade level by third grade are 4 times more likely to drop out of school than their peers who are reading on grade level. A large body of research clearly demonstrates that Americans with fewer years of education have poorer health and shorter lives. In fact, since the 1990s, life expectancy has fallen for people without a high school education. Completing more years of education creates better access to health insurance, medical care, and the resources for living a healthier life (Saha, 2006). Americans with less education face higher rates of illness, higher rates of disability, and shorter life expectancies. In the U.S., 25-year-olds without a high school diploma can expect to die 9 years sooner than college graduates. For example, by 2011, the prevalence of diabetes had reached 15% for adults without a high -school education, compared with 7% for college graduates (Zimmerman et al., 2018).

Thus, literacy is a goal of utmost importance to society. But what does it mean to be literate, or to be able to read? What counts as literacy?

Learning Objectives

• Describe two or more definitions of literacy and the differences between them.
• Define digital and critical literacy.
• Distinguish between digital literacy, critical literacy, and community-based literacies.
• Explain multiple perspectives on literacy.

Here are some definitions to consider:

“Literacy is the ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate, and compute, using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society.” – United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

“The ability to understand, use, and respond appropriately to written texts.” – National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), citing the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC)

“An individual’s ability to read, write, and speak in English, compute, and solve problems, at levels of proficiency necessary to function on the job, in the family of the individual, and in society.” – Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), Section 203

“The ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate, and compute, using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society.” – Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC), as cited by the American Library Association’s Committee on Literacy

“Using printed and written information to function in society, to achieve one’s goals, and to develop one’s knowledge and potential.” – Kutner, Greenberg, Jin, Boyle, Hsu, & Dunleavy (2007). Literacy in Everyday Life: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2007-480)

Which one of these above definitions resonates with you? Why?

New literacy practices as meaning-making practices

In the 21 st century, literacy increasingly includes understanding the roles of digital media and technology in literacy. In 1996, the New London Group coined the term “multiliteracies” or “new literacies” to describe a modern view of literacy that reflected multiple communication forms and contexts of cultural and linguistic diversity within a globalized society. They defined multiliteracies as a combination of multiple ways of communicating and making meaning, including such modes as visual, audio, spatial, behavioral, and gestural (New London Group, 1996). Most of the text’s students come across today are digital (like this textbook!). Instead of books and magazines, students are reading blogs and text messages.

For a short video on the importance of digital literacy, watch The New Media Literacies .

The National Council for Teachers of English (NCTE, 2019) makes it clear that our definitions of literacy must continue to evolve and grow ( NCTE definition of digital literacy ).

“Literacy has always been a collection of communicative and sociocultural practices shared among communities. As society and technology change, so does literacy. The world demands that a literate person possess and intentionally apply a wide range of skills, competencies, and dispositions. These literacies are interconnected, dynamic, and malleable. As in the past, they are inextricably linked with histories, narratives, life possibilities, and social trajectories of all individuals and groups. Active, successful participants in a global society must be able to:

• participate effectively and critically in a networked world.
• explore and engage critically and thoughtfully across a wide variety of inclusive texts and tools/modalities.
• consume, curate, and create actively across contexts.
• advocate for equitable access to and accessibility of texts, tools, and information.
• build and sustain intentional global and cross-cultural connections and relationships with others to pose and solve problems collaboratively and strengthen independent thought.
• promote culturally sustaining communication and recognize the bias and privilege present in the interactions.
• examine the rights, responsibilities, and ethical implications of the use and creation of information.
• determine how and to what extent texts and tools amplify one’s own and others’ narratives as well as counterproductive narratives.
• recognize and honor the multilingual literacy identities and culture experiences individuals bring to learning environments, and provide opportunities to promote, amplify, and encourage these variations of language (e.g., dialect, jargon, and register).”

In other words, literacy is not just the ability to read and write. It is also being able to effectively use digital technology to find and analyze information. Students who are digitally literate know how to do research, find reliable sources, and make judgments about what they read online and in print. Next, we will learn more about digital literacy.

• Malleable : can be changed.
• Culturally sustaining : the pedagogical preservation of the cultural and linguistic competence of young people pertaining to their communities of origin while simultaneously affording dominant-culture competence.
• Bias : a tendency to believe that some people, ideas, etc., are better than others, usually resulting in unfair treatment.
• Privilege : a right or benefit that is given to some people and not to others.
• Unproductive narrative : negative commonly held beliefs such as “all students from low-income backgrounds will struggle in school.” (Narratives are phrases or ideas that are repeated over and over and become “shared narratives.” You can spot them in common expressions and stories that almost everyone knows and holds as ingrained values or beliefs.)

Literacy in the digital age

The Iowa Core recognizes that today, literacy includes technology. The goal for students who graduate from the public education system in Iowa is:

“Each Iowa student will be empowered with the technological knowledge and skills to learn effectively and live productively. This vision, developed by the Iowa Core 21st Century Skills Committee, reflects the fact that Iowans in the 21st century live in a global environment marked by a high use of technology, giving citizens and workers the ability to collaborate and make individual contributions as never before. Iowa’s students live in a media-suffused environment, marked by access to an abundance of information and rapidly changing technological tools useful for critical thinking and problem-solving processes. Therefore, technological literacy supports preparation of students as global citizens capable of self-directed learning in preparation for an ever-changing world” (Iowa Core Standards 21 st Century Skills, n.d.).

NOTE: The essential concepts and skills of technology literacy are taken from the International Society for Technology in Education’s National Educational Technology Standards for Students: Grades K-2 | Technology Literacy Standards

Literacy in any context is defined as the ability “ to access, manage, integrate, evaluate, and create information in order to function in a knowledge society” (ICT Literacy Panel, 2002). “ When we teach only for facts (specifics)… rather than for how to go beyond facts, we teach students how to get out of date ” (Sternberg, 2008). This statement is particularly significant when applied to technology literacy. The Iowa essential concepts for technology literacy reflect broad, universal processes and skills.

Unlike the previous generations, learning in the digital age is marked using rapidly evolving technology, a deluge of information, and a highly networked global community (Dede, 2010). In such a dynamic environment, learners need skills beyond the basic cognitive ability to consume and process language. To understand the characteristics of the digital age, and what this means for how people learn in this new and changing landscape, one may turn to the evolving discussion of literacy or, as one might say now, of digital literacy. The history of literacy contextualizes digital literacy and illustrates changes in literacy over time. By looking at literacy as an evolving historical phenomenon, we can glean the fundamental characteristics of the digital age. These characteristics in turn illuminate the skills needed to take advantage of digital environments. The following discussion is an overview of digital literacy, its essential components, and why it is important for learning in the digital age.

Literacy is often considered a skill or competency. Children and adults alike can spend years developing the appropriate skills for encoding and decoding information. Over the course of thousands of years, literacy has become much more common and widespread, with a global literacy rate ranging from 81% to 90% depending on age and gender (UNESCO, 2016). From a time when literacy was the domain of an elite few, it has grown to include huge swaths of the global population. There are several reasons for this, not the least of which are some of the advantages the written word can provide. Kaestle (1985) tells us that “literacy makes it possible to preserve information as a snapshot in time, allows for recording, tracking and remembering information, and sharing information more easily across distances among others” (p. 16). In short, literacy led “to the replacement of myth by history and the replacement of magic by skepticism and science.”

If literacy involves the skills of reading and writing, digital literacy requires the ability to extend those skills to effectively take advantage of the digital world (American Library Association [ALA], 2013). More general definitions express digital literacy as the ability to read and understand information from digital sources as well as to create information in various digital formats (Bawden, 2008; Gilster, 1997; Tyner, 1998; UNESCO, 2004). Developing digital skills allows digital learners to manage a vast array of rapidly changing information and is key to both learning and working in the evolving digital landscape (Dede, 2010; Koltay, 2011; Mohammadyari & Singh, 2015). As such, it is important for people to develop certain competencies specifically for handling digital content.

ALA Digital Literacy Framework

To fully understand the many digital literacies, we will look at the American Library Association (ALA) framework. The ALA framework is laid out in terms of basic functions with enough specificity to make it easy to understand and remember but broad enough to cover a wide range of skills. The ALA framework includes the following areas:

• understanding,
• evaluating,
• creating, and
• communicating (American Library Association, 2013).

Finding information in a digital environment represents a significant departure from the way human beings have searched for information for centuries. The learner must abandon older linear or sequential approaches to finding information such as reading a book, using a card catalog, index, or table of contents, and instead use more horizontal approaches like natural language searches, hypermedia text, keywords, search engines, online databases and so on (Dede, 2010; Eshet, 2002). The shift involves developing the ability to create meaningful search limits (SCONUL, 2016). Previously, finding the information would have meant simply looking up page numbers based on an index or sorting through a card catalog. Although finding information may depend to some degree on the search tool being used (library, internet search engine, online database, etc.) the search results also depend on how well a person is able to generate appropriate keywords and construct useful Boolean searches. Failure in these two areas could easily return too many results to be helpful, vague, or generic results, or potentially no useful results at all (Hangen, 2015).

Part of the challenge of finding information is the ability to manage the results. Because there is so much data, changing so quickly, in so many different formats, it can be challenging to organize and store them in such a way as to be useful. SCONUL (2016) talks about this as the ability to organize, store, manage, and cite digital resources, while the Educational Testing Service also specifically mentions the skills of accessing and managing information. Some ways to accomplish these tasks is using social bookmarking tools such as Diigo, clipping and organizing software such as Evernote and OneNote, and bibliographic software. Many sites, such as YouTube, allow individuals with an account to bookmark videos, as well as create channels or collections of videos for specific topics or uses. Other websites have similar features.

Understanding

Understanding in the context of digital literacy perhaps most closely resembles traditional literacy because it is the ability to read and interpret text (Jones-Kavalier & Flannigan, 2006). In the digital age, however, the ability to read and understand extends much further than text alone. For example, searches may return results with any combination of text, video, sound, and audio, as well as still and moving pictures. As the internet has evolved, a whole host of visual languages have also evolved, such as moving images, emoticons, icons, data visualizations, videos, and combinations of all the above. Lankshear & Knoble (2008) refer to these modes of communication as “post typographic textual practice.” Understanding the variety of modes of digital material may also be referred to as multimedia literacy (Jones-Kavalier & Flannigan, 2006), visual literacy (Tyner, 1998), or digital literacy (Buckingham, 2006).

Evaluating digital media requires competencies ranging from assessing the importance of a piece of information to determining its accuracy and source. Evaluating information is not new to the digital age, but the nature of digital information can make it more difficult to understand who the source of information is and whether it can be trusted (Jenkins, 2018). When there are abundant and rapidly changing data across heavily populated networks, anyone with access can generate information online. This results in the learner needing to make decisions about its authenticity, trustworthiness, relevance, and significance. Learning evaluative digital skills means learning to ask questions about who is writing the information, why they are writing it, and who the intended audience is (Buckingham, 2006). Developing critical thinking skills is part of the literacy of evaluating and assessing the suitability for use of a specific piece of information (SCONUL, 2016).

Creating in the digital world makes the production of knowledge and ideas in digital formats explicit. While writing is a critical component of traditional literacy, it is not the only creative tool in the digital toolbox. Other tools are available and include creative activities such as podcasting, making audio-visual presentations, building data visualizations, 3D printing, and writing blogs. Tools that haven’t been thought of before are constantly appearing. In short, a digitally literate individual will want to be able to use all formats in which digital information may be conveyed in the creation of a product. A key component of creating with digital tools is understanding what constitutes fair use and what is considered plagiarism. While this is not new to the digital age, it may be more challenging these days to find the line between copying and extending someone else’s work.

In part, the reason for the increased difficulty in discerning between plagiarism and new work is the “cut and paste culture” of the Internet, referred to as “reproduction literacy” (Eshet 2002, p.4), or appropriation in Jenkins’ New Media Literacies (Jenkins, 2018). The question is, what kind and how much change is required to avoid the accusation of plagiarism? This skill requires the ability to think critically, evaluate a work, and make appropriate decisions. There are tools and information to help understand and find those answers, such as the Creative Commons. Learning about such resources and how to use them is part of digital literacy.

Communicating

Communicating is the final category of digital skills in the ALA digital framework. The capacity to connect with individuals all over the world creates unique opportunities for learning and sharing information, for which developing digital communication skills is vital. Some of the skills required for communicating in the digital environment include digital citizenship, collaboration, and cultural awareness. This is not to say that one does not need to develop communication skills outside of the digital environment, but that the skills required for digital communication go beyond what is required in a non-digital environment. Most of us are adept at personal, face- to-face communication, but digital communication needs the ability to engage in asynchronous environments such as email, online forums, blogs, social media, and learning platforms where what is written may not be deleted and may be misinterpreted. Add that to an environment where people number in the millions and the opportunities for misunderstanding and cultural miscues are likely.

The communication category of digital literacies covers an extensive array of skills above and beyond what one might need for face-to-face interactions. It is comprised of competencies around ethical and moral behavior, responsible communication for engagement in social and civic activities (Adam Becker et al., 2017), an awareness of audience, and an ability to evaluate the potential impact of one’s online actions. It also includes skills for handling privacy and security in online environments. These activities fall into two main categories: digital citizenship and collaboration.

Digital citizenship refers to one’s ability to interact effectively in the digital world. Part of this skill is good manners, often referred to as “netiquette.” There is a level of context which is often missing in digital communication due to physical distance, lack of personal familiarity with the people online, and the sheer volume of the people who may encounter our words. People who know us well may understand exactly what we mean when we say something sarcastic or ironic, but people online do not know us, and vocal and facial cues are missing in most digital communication, making it more likely we will be misunderstood. Furthermore, we are more likely to misunderstand or be misunderstood if we are unaware of cultural differences. So, digital citizenship includes an awareness of who we are, what we intend to say, and how it might be perceived by other people we do not know (Buckingham, 2006). It is also a process of learning to communicate clearly in ways that help others understand what we mean.

Another key digital skill is collaboration, and it is essential for effective participation in digital projects via the Internet. The Internet allows people to engage with others they may never see in person and work towards common goals, be they social, civic, or business oriented. Creating a community and working together requires a degree of trust and familiarity that can be difficult to build when there is physical distance between the participants. Greater effort must be made to be inclusive , and to overcome perceived or actual distance and disconnectedness. So, while the potential of digital technology for connecting people is impressive, it is not automatic or effortless, and it requires new skills.

Literacy narratives are stories about reading or composing a message in any form or context. They often include poignant memories that involve a personal experience with literacy. Digital literacy narratives can sometimes be categorized as ones that focus on how the writer came to understand the importance of technology in their life or pedagogy. More often, they are simply narratives that use a medium beyond the print-based essay to tell the story:

Create your own literacy narrative that tells of a significant experience you had with digital literacy. Use a multi-modal tool that includes audio and images or video. Share it with your classmates and discuss the most important ideas you notice in each other’s narratives.

Critical literacy

Literacy scholars recognize that although literacy is a cognitive skill, it is also a set of practices that communities and people participate in. Next, we turn to another perspective on literacy – critical literacy. “Critical” here is not meant as having a negative point of view, but rather using an analytic lens that detects power, privilege, and representation to understand different ways of looking at texts. For example, when groups or individuals stage a protest, do the media refer to them as “protesters” or “rioters?” What is the reason for choosing the label they do, and what are the consequences? 

Critical literacy does not have a set definition or typical history of use, but the following key tenets have been described in the literature, which will vary in their application based on the individual social context (Vasquez, 2019). Table 1 presents some key aspects of critical literacy, but this area of literacy research is growing and evolving rapidly, so this is not an exhaustive list.

An important component of critical literacy is the adoption of culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogy. One definition comes from Dr. Django Paris (2012), who stated that Culturally Responsive-Sustaining (CR-S) education recognizes that cultural differences (including racial, ethnic, linguistic, gender, sexuality, and ability ones) should be treated as assets for teaching and learning. Culturally sustaining pedagogy requires teachers to support multilingualism and multiculturalism in their practice. That is, culturally sustaining pedagogy seeks to perpetuate and foster—to sustain—linguistic, literary, and cultural pluralism as part of the democratic project of schooling.

For more, see the Culturally Responsive and Sustaining F ramework . The framework helps educators to think about how to create student-centered learning environments that uphold racial, linguistic, and cultural identities. It prepares students for rigorous independent learning, develops their abilities to connect across lines of difference, elevates historically marginalized voices, and empowers them as agents of social change. CR-S education explores the relationships between historical and contemporary conditions of inequality and the ideas that shape access, participation, and outcomes for learners.

• What can you do to learn more about your students’ cultures?
• How can you build and sustain relationships with your students?
• How do the instructional materials you use affirm your students’ identities?

Community-based literacies

You may have noticed that communities are a big part of critical literacy – we understand that our environment and culture impact what we read and how we understand the world. Now think about the possible differences among three Iowa communities: a neighborhood in the middle of Des Moines, the rural community of New Hartford, and Coralville, a suburb of Iowa City:

You may not have thought about how living in a certain community might contribute to or take away from a child’s ability to learn to read. Dr. Susan Neuman (2001) did. She and her team investigated the differences between two neighborhoods regarding how much access to books and other reading materials children in those neighborhoods had. One middle-to-upper class neighborhood in Philadelphia had large bookstores, toy stores with educational materials, and well-resourced libraries. The other, a low-income neighborhood, had no bookstores or toy stores. There was a library, but it had fewer resources and served a larger number of patrons. In fact, the team found that even the signs on the businesses were harder to read, and there was less environmental printed word. Their findings showed that each child in the middle-class neighborhood had 13 books on average, while in the lower-class neighborhood there was one book per 300 children .

Dr. Neuman and her team (2019) recently revisited this question. This time, they looked at low-income neighborhoods – those where 60% or more of the people are living in poverty . They compared these to borderline neighborhoods – those with 20-40% in poverty – in three cities, Washington, D.C., Detroit, and Los Angeles. Again, they found significantly fewer books in the very low-income areas. The chart represents the preschool books available for sale in each neighborhood. Note that in the lower-income neighborhood of Washington D.C., there were no books for young children to be found at all!

Now watch this video from Campaign for Grade Level Reading. Access to books is one way that children can have new experiences, but it is not the only way!

What is the “summer slide,” and how does it contribute to the differences in children’s reading abilities?

The importance of being literate and how to get there

“Literacy is a bridge from misery to hope” – Kofi Annan, former United Nations Secretary-General.

Our economy is enhanced when citizens have higher literacy levels. Effective literacy skills open the doors to more educational and employment opportunities so that people can lift themselves out of poverty and chronic underemployment. In our increasingly complex and rapidly changing technological world, it is essential that individuals continuously expand their knowledge and learn new skills to keep up with the pace of change. The goal of our public school system in the United States is to “ensure that all students graduate from high school with the skills and knowledge necessary to succeed in college, career, and life, regardless of where they live.” This is the basis of the Common Core Standards, developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center). These groups felt that education was too inconsistent across the different states, and today’s students are preparing to enter a world in which colleges and businesses are demanding more than ever before. To ensure that all students are ready for success after high school, the Common Core State Standards established clear universal guidelines for what every student should know and be able to do in math and English language arts from kindergarten through 12th grade: “The Common Core State Standards do not tell teachers how to teach, but they do help teachers figure out the knowledge and skills their students should have” (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2012).

Explore the Core!

Go to iowacore.gov and click on Literacy Standards. Spend some time looking at the K-3 standards. Notice how consistent they are across the grade levels. Each has specific requirements within the categories:

• Reading Standards for Literature
• Reading Standards for Informational Text
• Reading Standards for Foundational Skills
• Writing Standards
• Speaking and Listening Standards
• Language Standards

Download the Iowa Core K-12 Literacy Manual . You will use it as a reference when you are creating lessons.

Next, explore the Subject Area pages and resources. What tools does the state provide to teachers to support their use of the Core?

Describe a resource you found on the website. How will you use this when you are a teacher?

Watch this video about the Iowa Literacy Core Standards:

• Literacy is typically defined as the ability to ingest, understand, and communicate information.
• Literacy has multiple definitions, each with a different point of focus.
• “New literacies,” or multiliteracies, are a combination of multiple ways of communicating and making meaning, including visual, audio, spatial, behavioral, and gestural communication.
• As online communication has become more prevalent, digital literacy has become more important for learners to engage with the wealth of information available online.
• Critical literacy develops learners’ critical thinking by asking them to use an analytic lens that detects power, privilege, and representation to understand different ways of looking at information.
• The Common Core State Standards were established to set clear, universal guidelines for what every student should know after completing high school.

Resources for teacher educators

• Culturally Responsive-Sustaining Education Framework [PDF]
• Common Core State Standards
• Iowa Core Instructional Resources in Literacy

Gonzalez, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2006). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms . New York, NY: Routledge.

Lau, S. M. C. (2012). Reconceptualizing critical literacy teaching in ESL classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 65 , 325–329.

Literacy. (2018, March 19). Retrieved March 2, 2020, from  https://en.unesco.org/themes/literacy

Neuman, S. B., & Celano, D. (2001). Access to print in low‐income and middle‐income communities: An ecological study of four neighborhoods. Reading Research Quarterly, 36 (1), 8-26.

Neuman, S. B., & Moland, N. (2019). Book deserts: The consequences of income segregation on children’s access to print.  Urban education, 54 (1), 126-147.

New London Group (1996). A Pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures.  Harvard Educational Review, 66 (1), 60-92.

O’Brien, J. (2001). Children reading critically: A local history. In B. Comber & A. Simpson (Eds.), Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms (pp. 41–60). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ordoñez-Jasis, R., & Ortiz, R. W. (2006). Reading their worlds: Working with diverse families to enhance children’s early literacy development. Y C Young Children, 61 (1), 42.

Saha S. (2006). Improving literacy as a means to reducing health disparities. J Gen Intern Med. 21 (8):893-895. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00546.x

UNESCO. (2017). Literacy rates continue to rise from one generation to the next global literacy trends today. Retrieved from http://on.unesco.org/literacy-map.

Vasquez, V.M., Janks, H. & Comber, B. (2019). Critical Literacy as a Way of Being and Doing. Language Arts, 96 (5), 300-311.

Vlieghe, J. (2015). Traditional and digital literacy. The literacy hypothesis, technologies of reading and writing, and the ‘grammatized’ body. Ethics and Education, 10 (2), 209-226.

Zimmerman, E. B., Woolf, S. H., Blackburn, S. M., Kimmel, A. D., Barnes, A. J., & Bono, R. S. (2018). The case for considering education and health. Urban Education, 53 (6), 744-773.U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences.

U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2022 Reading Assessment.

Methods of Teaching Early Literacy Copyright © 2023 by Constance Beecher is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

5.3: Using Critical Thinking Skills- Decision Making and Problem Solving

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 24260

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Introduction

In previous lessons, you learned about characteristics of critical thinkers and information literacy. In this module, you will learn how to put those skills into action through the important processes of decision making and problem solving.

As with the process of developing information literacy, asking questions is an important part of decision making and problem solving. Thinking is born of questions. Questions wake us up. Questions alert us to hidden assumptions. Questions promote curiosity and create new distinctions. Questions open up options that otherwise go unexplored. Besides, teachers love questions.

We make decisions all the time, whether we realize it or not. Even avoiding decisions is a form of decision making. The student who puts off studying for a test until the last minute, for example, might really be saying, “I’ve decided this course is not important” or “I’ve decided not to give this course much time.”

Decisions are specific and lead to focused action. When we decide, we narrow down. We give up actions that are inconsistent with our decision.

In addition to decision making, critical thinking skills are important to solving problems. We encounter problems every single day, and having a solid process in place is important to solving them.

At the end of the lesson, you will learn how to put your critical thinking skills to use by reviewing an example of how critical thinking skills can help with making those everyday decisions.

Using Critical Thinking Skills: Asking Questions

Questions have practical power. Asking for directions can shave hours off a trip. Asking a librarian for help can save hours of research time. Asking how to address an instructor—by first name or formal title—can change your relationship with that person. Asking your academic advisor a question can alter your entire education. Asking people about their career plans can alter your career plans.

You can use the following strategies to develop questions for problem solving and decision making:

Ask questions that create possibilities. At any moment, you can ask a question that opens up a new possibility for someone.

• Suppose a friend walks up to you and says, “People just never listen to me.” You listen carefully. Then you say, “Let me make sure I understand. Who, specifically, doesn’t listen to you? And how do you know they’re not listening?”
• Another friend tells you, “I just lost my job to someone who has less experience. That should never happen.” You respond, “Wow, that’s hard. I’m sorry you lost your job. Who can help you find another job?”
• A relative seeks your advice. “My mother-in-law makes me mad,” she says. “You’re having a hard time with this person,” you say. “What does she say and do when you feel mad at her? And are there times when you don’t get mad at her?”

These kinds of questions—asked with compassion and a sense of timing—can help people move from complaining about problems to solving them.

Discover new questions. Students sometimes say, “I don’t know what questions to ask.” Consider the following ways to create questions about any subject you want to study or about any

area of your life that you want to change:

• Let your pen start moving. Sometimes you can access a deeper level of knowledge by taking out your pen, putting it on a piece of paper, and writing down questions—even before you know what to write. Don’t think. Just watch the pen move across the paper. Notice what appears. The results might be surprising.
• Ask about what’s missing . Another way to invent useful questions is to notice what’s missing from your life and then ask how to supply it. For example, if you want to take better notes, you can write, “What’s missing is skill in note taking. How can I gain more skill in taking notes?” If you always feel rushed, you can write, “What’s missing is time. How do I create enough time in my day to actually do the things that I say I want to do?”
• Pretend to be someone else. Another way to invent questions is first to think of someone you greatly respect. Then pretend you’re that person. Ask the questions you think she would ask.
• What can I do when ... an instructor calls on me in class and I have no idea what to say? When a teacher doesn’t show up for class on time? When I feel overwhelmed with assignments?
• How can I ... take the kind of courses that I want? Expand my career options? Become much more effective as a student, starting today?
• When do I ... decide on a major? Transfer to another school? Meet with an instructor to discuss an upcoming term paper?
• What else do I want to know about ... my academic plan? My career plan? My options for job hunting? My friends? My relatives? My spouse?
• Who can I ask about ... my career options? My major? My love life? My values and purpose in life?

Many times you can quickly generate questions by simply asking yourself, “What else do I want to know?” Ask this question immediately after you read a paragraph in a book or listen to someone speak.

Start from the assumption that you are brilliant. Then ask questions to unlock your brilliance.

Using Critical Thinking Skills in Decision Making

As you develop your critical thinking skills, you can apply them as you make decisions. The following suggestions can help in your decision-making process:

Recognize decisions. Decisions are more than wishes or desires. There’s a world of difference between “I wish I could be a better student” and “I will take more powerful notes, read with greater retention, and review my class notes daily.” Deciding to eat fruit for dessert instead of ice cream rules out the next trip to the ice cream store.

Establish priorities. Some decisions are trivial. No matter what the outcome, your life is not affected much. Other decisions can shape your circumstances for years. Devote more time and energy to the decisions with big outcomes.

Base decisions on a life plan. The benefit of having long-term goals for our lives is that they provide a basis for many of our daily decisions. Being certain about what we want to accomplish this year and this month makes today’s choices more clear.

Balance learning styles in decision making. To make decisions more effectively, use all four modes of learning explained in a previous lesson. The key is to balance reflection with action, and thinking with experience. First, take the time to think creatively, and generate many options. Then think critically about the possible consequences of each option before choosing one. Remember, however, that thinking is no substitute for experience. Act on your chosen option, and notice what happens. If you’re not getting the results you want, then quickly return to creative thinking to invent new options.

Choose an overall strategy. Every time you make a decision, you choose a strategy—even when you’re not aware of it. Effective decision makers can articulate and choose from among several strategies. For example:

• Find all of the available options, and choose one deliberately. Save this strategy for times when you have a relatively small number of options, each of which leads to noticeably different results.
• Find all of the available options, and choose one randomly. This strategy can be risky. Save it for times when your options are basically similar and fairness is the main issue.
• Limit the options, and then choose. When deciding which search engine to use, visit many search sites and then narrow the list down to two or three from which to choose.

Use time as an ally. Sometimes we face dilemmas—situations in which any course of action leads to undesirable consequences. In such cases, consider putting a decision on hold. Wait it out. Do nothing until the circumstances change, making one alternative clearly preferable to another.

Use intuition. Some decisions seem to make themselves. A solution pops into your mind, and you gain newfound clarity. Using intuition is not the same as forgetting about the decision or refusing to make it. Intuitive decisions usually arrive after we’ve gathered the relevant facts and faced a problem for some time.

Evaluate your decision. Hindsight is a source of insight. After you act on a decision, observe the consequences over time. Reflect on how well your decision worked and what you might have done differently.

Think of choices. This final suggestion involves some creative thinking. Consider that the word decide derives from the same roots as suicide and homicide . In the spirit of those words, a decision forever “kills” all other options. That’s kind of heavy. Instead, use the word choice , and see whether it frees up your thinking. When you choose , you express a preference for one option over others. However, those options remain live possibilities for the future. Choose for today, knowing that as you gain more wisdom and experience, you can choose again.

Using Critical Thinking Skills in Problem Solving

Think of problem solving as a process with four Ps : Define the problem , generate possibilities ,

create a plan , and perform your plan.

Step 1: Define the problem. To define a problem effectively, understand what a problem is—a mismatch between what you want and what you have. Problem solving is all about reducing the gap between these two factors.

Tell the truth about what’s present in your life right now, without shame or blame. For example: “I often get sleepy while reading my physics assignments, and after closing the book I cannot remember what I just read.”

Next, describe in detail what you want. Go for specifics: “I want to remain alert as I read about physics. I also want to accurately summarize each chapter I read.”

Remember that when we define a problem in limiting ways, our solutions merely generate new problems. As Albert Einstein said, “The world we have made is a result of the level of thinking we have done thus far. We cannot solve problems at the same level at which we created them” (Calaprice 2000).

This idea has many applications for success in school. An example is the student who struggles with note taking. The problem, she thinks, is that her notes are too sketchy. The logical solution, she decides, is to take more notes; her new goal is to write down almost everything her instructors say. No matter how fast and furiously she writes, she cannot capture all of the instructors’ comments.

Consider what happens when this student defines the problem in a new way. After more thought, she decides that her dilemma is not the quantity of her notes but their quality . She adopts a new format for taking notes, dividing her notepaper into two columns. In the right-hand column, she writes down only the main points of each lecture. In the left-hand column, she notes two or three supporting details for each point.

Over time, this student makes the joyous discovery that there are usually just three or four core ideas to remember from each lecture. She originally thought the solution was to take more notes. What really worked was taking notes in a new way.

Step 2: Generate possibilities. Now put on your creative thinking hat. Open up. Brainstorm as many possible solutions to the problem as you can. At this stage, quantity counts. As you generate possibilities, gather relevant facts. For example, when you’re faced with a dilemma about what courses to take next semester, get information on class times, locations, and instructors. If you haven’t decided which summer job offer to accept, gather information on salary, benefits, and working conditions.

Step 3: Create a plan. After rereading your problem definition and list of possible solutions, choose the solution that seems most workable. Think about specific actions that will reduce the gap between what you have and what you want. Visualize the steps you will take to make this solution a reality, and arrange them in chronological order. To make your plan even more powerful, put it in writing.

Step 4: Perform your plan. This step gets you off your chair and out into the world. Now you actually do what you have planned.

Ultimately, your skill in solving problems lies in how well you perform your plan. Through the quality of your actions, you become the architect of your own success.

When facing problems, experiment with these four Ps, and remember that the order of steps is not absolute. Also remember that any solution has the potential to create new problems. If that happens, cycle through the four Ps of problem solving again.

Critical Thinking Skills in Action: Thinking About Your Major, Part 1

One decision that troubles many students in higher education is the choice of a major. Weighing the benefits, costs, and outcomes of a possible major is an intellectual challenge. This choice is an opportunity to apply your critical thinking, decision-making, and problem-solving skills. The following suggestions will guide you through this seemingly overwhelming process.

The first step is to discover options. You can use the following suggestions to discover options for choosing your major:

Follow the fun. Perhaps you look forward to attending one of your classes and even like completing the assignments. This is a clue to your choice of major.

See whether you can find lasting patterns in the subjects and extracurricular activities that you’ve enjoyed over the years. Look for a major that allows you to continue and expand on these experiences.

Also, sit down with a stack of 3 × 5 cards and brainstorm answers to the following questions:

• What do you enjoy doing most with your unscheduled time?
• Imagine that you’re at a party and having a fascinating conversation. What is this conversation about?
• What kind of problems do you enjoy solving—those that involve people? Products? Ideas?
• What interests are revealed by your choices of reading material, television shows, and other entertainment?
• What would an ideal day look like for you? Describe where you would live, who would be with you, and what you would do throughout the day. Do any of these visions suggest a possible major?

Questions like these can uncover a “fun factor” that energizes you to finish the work of completing a major.

Consider your abilities. In choosing a major, ability counts as much as interest. In addition to considering what you enjoy, think about times and places when you excelled. List the courses that you aced, the work assignments that you mastered, and the hobbies that led to rewards or recognition. Let your choice of a major reflect a discovery of your passions and potentials.

Use formal techniques for self-discovery. Explore questionnaires and inventories that are designed to correlate your interests with specific majors. Examples include the Strong Interest Inventory and the Self-Directed Search. Your academic advisor or someone in your school’s career planning office can give you more details about these and related assessments. For some fun, take several of them and meet with an advisor to interpret the results. Remember inventories can help you gain self-knowledge, and other people can offer valuable perspectives. However, what you do with all this input is entirely up to you.

Critical Thinking Skills in Action: Thinking About Your Major, Part 2

As you review the following additional suggestions of discovering options, think about what strategies you already use in your own decision-making process. Also think about what new strategies you might try in the future.

Link to long-term goals. Your choice of a major can fall into place once you determine what you want in life. Before you choose a major, back up to a bigger picture. List your core values, such as contributing to society, achieving financial security and professional recognition, enjoying good health, or making time for fun. Also write down specific goals that you want to accomplish 5 years, 10 years, or even 50 years from today.

Many students find that the prospect of getting what they want in life justifies all of the time, money, and day-to-day effort invested in going to school. Having a major gives you a powerful incentive for attending classes, taking part in discussions, reading textbooks, writing papers, and completing other assignments. When you see a clear connection between finishing school and creating the life of your dreams, the daily tasks of higher education become charged with meaning.

Ask other people. Key people in your life might have valuable suggestions about your choice of major. Ask for their ideas, and listen with an open mind. At the same time, distance yourself from any pressure to choose a major or career that fails to interest you. If you make a choice solely on the basis of the expectations of other people, you could end up with a major or even a career you don’t enjoy.

Gather information. Check your school’s catalog or website for a list of available majors. Here is a gold mine of information. Take a quick glance, and highlight all the majors that interest you. Then talk to students who have declared these majors. Also read the descriptions of courses required for these majors. Do you get excited about the chance to enroll in them? Pay attention to your gut feelings.

Also chat with instructors who teach courses in a specific major. Ask for copies of their class syllabi. Go to the bookstore and browse the required texts. Based on all of this information, write a list of prospective majors. Discuss them with an academic advisor and someone at your school’s career-planning center.

Invent a major. When choosing a major, you might not need to limit yourself to those listed in your school catalog. Many schools now have flexible programs that allow for independent study. Through such programs, you might be able to combine two existing majors or invent an entirely new one of your own.

Consider a complementary minor. You can add flexibility to your academic program by choosing a minor to complement or contrast with your major. The student who wants to be a minister could opt for a minor in English; all of those courses in composition can help in writing sermons. Or the student with a major in psychology might choose a minor in business administration, with the idea of managing a counseling service some day. An effective choice of a minor can expand your skills and career options.

Think critically about the link between your major and your career. Your career goals might have a significant impact on your choice of major.

You could pursue a rewarding career by choosing among several different majors. Even students planning to apply for law school or medical school have flexibility in their choice of majors. In addition, after graduation, many people tend to be employed in jobs that have little relationship to their major. And you might choose a career in the future that is unrelated to any currently available major.

Critical Thinking Skills in Action: Thinking About Your Major, Part 3

Once you have discovered all of your options, you can move on to the next step in the process— making a trial choice.

Make a Trial Choice

Pretend that you have to choose a major today. Based on the options for a major that you’ve already discovered, write down the first three ideas that come to mind. Review the list for a few minutes, and then choose one.

Evaluate Your Trial Choice

When you’ve made a trial choice of major, take on the role of a scientist. Treat your choice as a hypothesis, and then design a series of experiments to evaluate and test it. For example:

• Schedule office meetings with instructors who teach courses in the major. Ask about required course work and career options in the field.
• Discuss your trial choice with an academic advisor or career counselor.
• Enroll in a course related to your possible major. Remember that introductory courses might not give you a realistic picture of the workload involved in advanced courses. Also, you might not be able to register for certain courses until you’ve actually declared a related major.
• Find a volunteer experience, internship, part-time job, or service-learning experience related to the major.
• Interview students who have declared the same major. Ask them in detail about their experiences and suggestions for success.
• Interview people who work in a field related to the major and “shadow” them—that is, spend time with those people during their workday.
• Think about whether you can complete your major given the amount of time and money that you plan to invest in higher education.
• Consider whether declaring this major would require a transfer to another program or even another school.

If your “experiments” confirm your choice of major, celebrate that fact. If they result in choosing a new major, celebrate that outcome as well.

Also remember that higher education represents a safe place to test your choice of major—and to change your mind. As you sort through your options, help is always available from administrators, instructors, advisors, and peers.

Choose Again

Keep your choice of a major in perspective. There is probably no single “correct” choice. Your unique collection of skills is likely to provide the basis for majoring in several fields.

Odds are that you’ll change your major at least once—and that you’ll change careers several times during your life. One benefit of higher education is mobility. You gain the general skills and knowledge that can help you move into a new major or career field at any time.

Viewing a major as a one-time choice that determines your entire future can raise your stress levels. Instead, look at choosing a major as the start of a continuing path that involves discovery, choice, and passionate action.

As you review this example of how you can use critical thinking to make a decision about choosing your major, think about how you will use your critical thinking to make decisions and solve problems in the future.

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

7 Module 7: Thinking, Reasoning, and Problem-Solving

This module is about how a solid working knowledge of psychological principles can help you to think more effectively, so you can succeed in school and life. You might be inclined to believe that—because you have been thinking for as long as you can remember, because you are able to figure out the solution to many problems, because you feel capable of using logic to argue a point, because you can evaluate whether the things you read and hear make sense—you do not need any special training in thinking. But this, of course, is one of the key barriers to helping people think better. If you do not believe that there is anything wrong, why try to fix it?

The human brain is indeed a remarkable thinking machine, capable of amazing, complex, creative, logical thoughts. Why, then, are we telling you that you need to learn how to think? Mainly because one major lesson from cognitive psychology is that these capabilities of the human brain are relatively infrequently realized. Many psychologists believe that people are essentially “cognitive misers.” It is not that we are lazy, but that we have a tendency to expend the least amount of mental effort necessary. Although you may not realize it, it actually takes a great deal of energy to think. Careful, deliberative reasoning and critical thinking are very difficult. Because we seem to be successful without going to the trouble of using these skills well, it feels unnecessary to develop them. As you shall see, however, there are many pitfalls in the cognitive processes described in this module. When people do not devote extra effort to learning and improving reasoning, problem solving, and critical thinking skills, they make many errors.

As is true for memory, if you develop the cognitive skills presented in this module, you will be more successful in school. It is important that you realize, however, that these skills will help you far beyond school, even more so than a good memory will. Although it is somewhat useful to have a good memory, ten years from now no potential employer will care how many questions you got right on multiple choice exams during college. All of them will, however, recognize whether you are a logical, analytical, critical thinker. With these thinking skills, you will be an effective, persuasive communicator and an excellent problem solver.

The module begins by describing different kinds of thought and knowledge, especially conceptual knowledge and critical thinking. An understanding of these differences will be valuable as you progress through school and encounter different assignments that require you to tap into different kinds of knowledge. The second section covers deductive and inductive reasoning, which are processes we use to construct and evaluate strong arguments. They are essential skills to have whenever you are trying to persuade someone (including yourself) of some point, or to respond to someone’s efforts to persuade you. The module ends with a section about problem solving. A solid understanding of the key processes involved in problem solving will help you to handle many daily challenges.

7.1. Different kinds of thought

7.2. Reasoning and Judgment

7.3. Problem Solving

READING WITH PURPOSE

Remember and understand.

By reading and studying Module 7, you should be able to remember and describe:

• Concepts and inferences (7.1)
• Procedural knowledge (7.1)
• Metacognition (7.1)
• Characteristics of critical thinking:  skepticism; identify biases, distortions, omissions, and assumptions; reasoning and problem solving skills  (7.1)
• Reasoning:  deductive reasoning, deductively valid argument, inductive reasoning, inductively strong argument, availability heuristic, representativeness heuristic  (7.2)
• Fixation:  functional fixedness, mental set  (7.3)
• Algorithms, heuristics, and the role of confirmation bias (7.3)
• Effective problem solving sequence (7.3)

By reading and thinking about how the concepts in Module 6 apply to real life, you should be able to:

• Identify which type of knowledge a piece of information is (7.1)
• Recognize examples of deductive and inductive reasoning (7.2)
• Recognize judgments that have probably been influenced by the availability heuristic (7.2)
• Recognize examples of problem solving heuristics and algorithms (7.3)

Analyze, Evaluate, and Create

By reading and thinking about Module 6, participating in classroom activities, and completing out-of-class assignments, you should be able to:

• Use the principles of critical thinking to evaluate information (7.1)
• Explain whether examples of reasoning arguments are deductively valid or inductively strong (7.2)
• Outline how you could try to solve a problem from your life using the effective problem solving sequence (7.3)

7.1. Different kinds of thought and knowledge

• Take a few minutes to write down everything that you know about dogs.
• Do you believe that:
• Psychic ability exists?
• Hypnosis is an altered state of consciousness?
• Magnet therapy is effective for relieving pain?
• Aerobic exercise is an effective treatment for depression?
• UFO’s from outer space have visited earth?

On what do you base your belief or disbelief for the questions above?

Of course, we all know what is meant by the words  think  and  knowledge . You probably also realize that they are not unitary concepts; there are different kinds of thought and knowledge. In this section, let us look at some of these differences. If you are familiar with these different kinds of thought and pay attention to them in your classes, it will help you to focus on the right goals, learn more effectively, and succeed in school. Different assignments and requirements in school call on you to use different kinds of knowledge or thought, so it will be very helpful for you to learn to recognize them (Anderson, et al. 2001).

Factual and conceptual knowledge

Module 5 introduced the idea of declarative memory, which is composed of facts and episodes. If you have ever played a trivia game or watched Jeopardy on TV, you realize that the human brain is able to hold an extraordinary number of facts. Likewise, you realize that each of us has an enormous store of episodes, essentially facts about events that happened in our own lives. It may be difficult to keep that in mind when we are struggling to retrieve one of those facts while taking an exam, however. Part of the problem is that, in contradiction to the advice from Module 5, many students continue to try to memorize course material as a series of unrelated facts (picture a history student simply trying to memorize history as a set of unrelated dates without any coherent story tying them together). Facts in the real world are not random and unorganized, however. It is the way that they are organized that constitutes a second key kind of knowledge, conceptual.

Concepts are nothing more than our mental representations of categories of things in the world. For example, think about dogs. When you do this, you might remember specific facts about dogs, such as they have fur and they bark. You may also recall dogs that you have encountered and picture them in your mind. All of this information (and more) makes up your concept of dog. You can have concepts of simple categories (e.g., triangle), complex categories (e.g., small dogs that sleep all day, eat out of the garbage, and bark at leaves), kinds of people (e.g., psychology professors), events (e.g., birthday parties), and abstract ideas (e.g., justice). Gregory Murphy (2002) refers to concepts as the “glue that holds our mental life together” (p. 1). Very simply, summarizing the world by using concepts is one of the most important cognitive tasks that we do. Our conceptual knowledge  is  our knowledge about the world. Individual concepts are related to each other to form a rich interconnected network of knowledge. For example, think about how the following concepts might be related to each other: dog, pet, play, Frisbee, chew toy, shoe. Or, of more obvious use to you now, how these concepts are related: working memory, long-term memory, declarative memory, procedural memory, and rehearsal? Because our minds have a natural tendency to organize information conceptually, when students try to remember course material as isolated facts, they are working against their strengths.

One last important point about concepts is that they allow you to instantly know a great deal of information about something. For example, if someone hands you a small red object and says, “here is an apple,” they do not have to tell you, “it is something you can eat.” You already know that you can eat it because it is true by virtue of the fact that the object is an apple; this is called drawing an  inference , assuming that something is true on the basis of your previous knowledge (for example, of category membership or of how the world works) or logical reasoning.

Procedural knowledge

Physical skills, such as tying your shoes, doing a cartwheel, and driving a car (or doing all three at the same time, but don’t try this at home) are certainly a kind of knowledge. They are procedural knowledge, the same idea as procedural memory that you saw in Module 5. Mental skills, such as reading, debating, and planning a psychology experiment, are procedural knowledge, as well. In short, procedural knowledge is the knowledge how to do something (Cohen & Eichenbaum, 1993).

Metacognitive knowledge

Floyd used to think that he had a great memory. Now, he has a better memory. Why? Because he finally realized that his memory was not as great as he once thought it was. Because Floyd eventually learned that he often forgets where he put things, he finally developed the habit of putting things in the same place. (Unfortunately, he did not learn this lesson before losing at least 5 watches and a wedding ring.) Because he finally realized that he often forgets to do things, he finally started using the To Do list app on his phone. And so on. Floyd’s insights about the real limitations of his memory have allowed him to remember things that he used to forget.

All of us have knowledge about the way our own minds work. You may know that you have a good memory for people’s names and a poor memory for math formulas. Someone else might realize that they have difficulty remembering to do things, like stopping at the store on the way home. Others still know that they tend to overlook details. This knowledge about our own thinking is actually quite important; it is called metacognitive knowledge, or  metacognition . Like other kinds of thinking skills, it is subject to error. For example, in unpublished research, one of the authors surveyed about 120 General Psychology students on the first day of the term. Among other questions, the students were asked them to predict their grade in the class and report their current Grade Point Average. Two-thirds of the students predicted that their grade in the course would be higher than their GPA. (The reality is that at our college, students tend to earn lower grades in psychology than their overall GPA.) Another example: Students routinely report that they thought they had done well on an exam, only to discover, to their dismay, that they were wrong (more on that important problem in a moment). Both errors reveal a breakdown in metacognition.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect

In general, most college students probably do not study enough. For example, using data from the National Survey of Student Engagement, Fosnacht, McCormack, and Lerma (2018) reported that first-year students at 4-year colleges in the U.S. averaged less than 14 hours per week preparing for classes. The typical suggestion is that you should spend two hours outside of class for every hour in class, or 24 – 30 hours per week for a full-time student. Clearly, students in general are nowhere near that recommended mark. Many observers, including some faculty, believe that this shortfall is a result of students being too busy or lazy. Now, it may be true that many students are too busy, with work and family obligations, for example. Others, are not particularly motivated in school, and therefore might correctly be labeled lazy. A third possible explanation, however, is that some students might not think they need to spend this much time. And this is a matter of metacognition. Consider the scenario that we mentioned above, students thinking they had done well on an exam only to discover that they did not. Justin Kruger and David Dunning examined scenarios very much like this in 1999. Kruger and Dunning gave research participants tests measuring humor, logic, and grammar. Then, they asked the participants to assess their own abilities and test performance in these areas. They found that participants in general tended to overestimate their abilities, already a problem with metacognition. Importantly, the participants who scored the lowest overestimated their abilities the most. Specifically, students who scored in the bottom quarter (averaging in the 12th percentile) thought they had scored in the 62nd percentile. This has become known as the  Dunning-Kruger effect . Many individual faculty members have replicated these results with their own student on their course exams, including the authors of this book. Think about it. Some students who just took an exam and performed poorly believe that they did well before seeing their score. It seems very likely that these are the very same students who stopped studying the night before because they thought they were “done.” Quite simply, it is not just that they did not know the material. They did not know that they did not know the material. That is poor metacognition.

In order to develop good metacognitive skills, you should continually monitor your thinking and seek frequent feedback on the accuracy of your thinking (Medina, Castleberry, & Persky 2017). For example, in classes get in the habit of predicting your exam grades. As soon as possible after taking an exam, try to find out which questions you missed and try to figure out why. If you do this soon enough, you may be able to recall the way it felt when you originally answered the question. Did you feel confident that you had answered the question correctly? Then you have just discovered an opportunity to improve your metacognition. Be on the lookout for that feeling and respond with caution.

concept :  a mental representation of a category of things in the world

Dunning-Kruger effect : individuals who are less competent tend to overestimate their abilities more than individuals who are more competent do

inference : an assumption about the truth of something that is not stated. Inferences come from our prior knowledge and experience, and from logical reasoning

metacognition :  knowledge about one’s own cognitive processes; thinking about your thinking

Critical thinking

One particular kind of knowledge or thinking skill that is related to metacognition is  critical thinking (Chew, 2020). You may have noticed that critical thinking is an objective in many college courses, and thus it could be a legitimate topic to cover in nearly any college course. It is particularly appropriate in psychology, however. As the science of (behavior and) mental processes, psychology is obviously well suited to be the discipline through which you should be introduced to this important way of thinking.

More importantly, there is a particular need to use critical thinking in psychology. We are all, in a way, experts in human behavior and mental processes, having engaged in them literally since birth. Thus, perhaps more than in any other class, students typically approach psychology with very clear ideas and opinions about its subject matter. That is, students already “know” a lot about psychology. The problem is, “it ain’t so much the things we don’t know that get us into trouble. It’s the things we know that just ain’t so” (Ward, quoted in Gilovich 1991). Indeed, many of students’ preconceptions about psychology are just plain wrong. Randolph Smith (2002) wrote a book about critical thinking in psychology called  Challenging Your Preconceptions,  highlighting this fact. On the other hand, many of students’ preconceptions about psychology are just plain right! But wait, how do you know which of your preconceptions are right and which are wrong? And when you come across a research finding or theory in this class that contradicts your preconceptions, what will you do? Will you stick to your original idea, discounting the information from the class? Will you immediately change your mind? Critical thinking can help us sort through this confusing mess.

But what is critical thinking? The goal of critical thinking is simple to state (but extraordinarily difficult to achieve): it is to be right, to draw the correct conclusions, to believe in things that are true and to disbelieve things that are false. We will provide two definitions of critical thinking (or, if you like, one large definition with two distinct parts). First, a more conceptual one: Critical thinking is thinking like a scientist in your everyday life (Schmaltz, Jansen, & Wenckowski, 2017).  Our second definition is more operational; it is simply a list of skills that are essential to be a critical thinker. Critical thinking entails solid reasoning and problem solving skills; skepticism; and an ability to identify biases, distortions, omissions, and assumptions. Excellent deductive and inductive reasoning, and problem solving skills contribute to critical thinking. So, you can consider the subject matter of sections 7.2 and 7.3 to be part of critical thinking. Because we will be devoting considerable time to these concepts in the rest of the module, let us begin with a discussion about the other aspects of critical thinking.

Let’s address that first part of the definition. Scientists form hypotheses, or predictions about some possible future observations. Then, they collect data, or information (think of this as making those future observations). They do their best to make unbiased observations using reliable techniques that have been verified by others. Then, and only then, they draw a conclusion about what those observations mean. Oh, and do not forget the most important part. “Conclusion” is probably not the most appropriate word because this conclusion is only tentative. A scientist is always prepared that someone else might come along and produce new observations that would require a new conclusion be drawn. Wow! If you like to be right, you could do a lot worse than using a process like this.

A Critical Thinker’s Toolkit 

Now for the second part of the definition. Good critical thinkers (and scientists) rely on a variety of tools to evaluate information. Perhaps the most recognizable tool for critical thinking is  skepticism (and this term provides the clearest link to the thinking like a scientist definition, as you are about to see). Some people intend it as an insult when they call someone a skeptic. But if someone calls you a skeptic, if they are using the term correctly, you should consider it a great compliment. Simply put, skepticism is a way of thinking in which you refrain from drawing a conclusion or changing your mind until good evidence has been provided. People from Missouri should recognize this principle, as Missouri is known as the Show-Me State. As a skeptic, you are not inclined to believe something just because someone said so, because someone else believes it, or because it sounds reasonable. You must be persuaded by high quality evidence.

Of course, if that evidence is produced, you have a responsibility as a skeptic to change your belief. Failure to change a belief in the face of good evidence is not skepticism; skepticism has open mindedness at its core. M. Neil Browne and Stuart Keeley (2018) use the term weak sense critical thinking to describe critical thinking behaviors that are used only to strengthen a prior belief. Strong sense critical thinking, on the other hand, has as its goal reaching the best conclusion. Sometimes that means strengthening your prior belief, but sometimes it means changing your belief to accommodate the better evidence.

Many times, a failure to think critically or weak sense critical thinking is related to a  bias , an inclination, tendency, leaning, or prejudice. Everybody has biases, but many people are unaware of them. Awareness of your own biases gives you the opportunity to control or counteract them. Unfortunately, however, many people are happy to let their biases creep into their attempts to persuade others; indeed, it is a key part of their persuasive strategy. To see how these biases influence messages, just look at the different descriptions and explanations of the same events given by people of different ages or income brackets, or conservative versus liberal commentators, or by commentators from different parts of the world. Of course, to be successful, these people who are consciously using their biases must disguise them. Even undisguised biases can be difficult to identify, so disguised ones can be nearly impossible.

Here are some common sources of biases:

• Personal values and beliefs.  Some people believe that human beings are basically driven to seek power and that they are typically in competition with one another over scarce resources. These beliefs are similar to the world-view that political scientists call “realism.” Other people believe that human beings prefer to cooperate and that, given the chance, they will do so. These beliefs are similar to the world-view known as “idealism.” For many people, these deeply held beliefs can influence, or bias, their interpretations of such wide ranging situations as the behavior of nations and their leaders or the behavior of the driver in the car ahead of you. For example, if your worldview is that people are typically in competition and someone cuts you off on the highway, you may assume that the driver did it purposely to get ahead of you. Other types of beliefs about the way the world is or the way the world should be, for example, political beliefs, can similarly become a significant source of bias.
• Racism, sexism, ageism and other forms of prejudice and bigotry.  These are, sadly, a common source of bias in many people. They are essentially a special kind of “belief about the way the world is.” These beliefs—for example, that women do not make effective leaders—lead people to ignore contradictory evidence (examples of effective women leaders, or research that disputes the belief) and to interpret ambiguous evidence in a way consistent with the belief.
• Self-interest.  When particular people benefit from things turning out a certain way, they can sometimes be very susceptible to letting that interest bias them. For example, a company that will earn a profit if they sell their product may have a bias in the way that they give information about their product. A union that will benefit if its members get a generous contract might have a bias in the way it presents information about salaries at competing organizations. (Note that our inclusion of examples describing both companies and unions is an explicit attempt to control for our own personal biases). Home buyers are often dismayed to discover that they purchased their dream house from someone whose self-interest led them to lie about flooding problems in the basement or back yard. This principle, the biasing power of self-interest, is likely what led to the famous phrase  Caveat Emptor  (let the buyer beware) .  

Knowing that these types of biases exist will help you evaluate evidence more critically. Do not forget, though, that people are not always keen to let you discover the sources of biases in their arguments. For example, companies or political organizations can sometimes disguise their support of a research study by contracting with a university professor, who comes complete with a seemingly unbiased institutional affiliation, to conduct the study.

People’s biases, conscious or unconscious, can lead them to make omissions, distortions, and assumptions that undermine our ability to correctly evaluate evidence. It is essential that you look for these elements. Always ask, what is missing, what is not as it appears, and what is being assumed here? For example, consider this (fictional) chart from an ad reporting customer satisfaction at 4 local health clubs.

Clearly, from the results of the chart, one would be tempted to give Club C a try, as customer satisfaction is much higher than for the other 3 clubs.

There are so many distortions and omissions in this chart, however, that it is actually quite meaningless. First, how was satisfaction measured? Do the bars represent responses to a survey? If so, how were the questions asked? Most importantly, where is the missing scale for the chart? Although the differences look quite large, are they really?

Well, here is the same chart, with a different scale, this time labeled:

Club C is not so impressive any more, is it? In fact, all of the health clubs have customer satisfaction ratings (whatever that means) between 85% and 88%. In the first chart, the entire scale of the graph included only the percentages between 83 and 89. This “judicious” choice of scale—some would call it a distortion—and omission of that scale from the chart make the tiny differences among the clubs seem important, however.

Also, in order to be a critical thinker, you need to learn to pay attention to the assumptions that underlie a message. Let us briefly illustrate the role of assumptions by touching on some people’s beliefs about the criminal justice system in the US. Some believe that a major problem with our judicial system is that many criminals go free because of legal technicalities. Others believe that a major problem is that many innocent people are convicted of crimes. The simple fact is, both types of errors occur. A person’s conclusion about which flaw in our judicial system is the greater tragedy is based on an assumption about which of these is the more serious error (letting the guilty go free or convicting the innocent). This type of assumption is called a value assumption (Browne and Keeley, 2018). It reflects the differences in values that people develop, differences that may lead us to disregard valid evidence that does not fit in with our particular values.

Oh, by the way, some students probably noticed this, but the seven tips for evaluating information that we shared in Module 1 are related to this. Actually, they are part of this section. The tips are, to a very large degree, set of ideas you can use to help you identify biases, distortions, omissions, and assumptions. If you do not remember this section, we strongly recommend you take a few minutes to review it.

skepticism :  a way of thinking in which you refrain from drawing a conclusion or changing your mind until good evidence has been provided

bias : an inclination, tendency, leaning, or prejudice

• Which of your beliefs (or disbeliefs) from the Activate exercise for this section were derived from a process of critical thinking? If some of your beliefs were not based on critical thinking, are you willing to reassess these beliefs? If the answer is no, why do you think that is? If the answer is yes, what concrete steps will you take?

7.2 Reasoning and Judgment

• What percentage of kidnappings are committed by strangers?
• Which area of the house is riskiest: kitchen, bathroom, or stairs?
• What is the most common cancer in the US?
• What percentage of workplace homicides are committed by co-workers?

An essential set of procedural thinking skills is  reasoning , the ability to generate and evaluate solid conclusions from a set of statements or evidence. You should note that these conclusions (when they are generated instead of being evaluated) are one key type of inference that we described in Section 7.1. There are two main types of reasoning, deductive and inductive.

Deductive reasoning

Suppose your teacher tells you that if you get an A on the final exam in a course, you will get an A for the whole course. Then, you get an A on the final exam. What will your final course grade be? Most people can see instantly that you can conclude with certainty that you will get an A for the course. This is a type of reasoning called  deductive reasoning , which is defined as reasoning in which a conclusion is guaranteed to be true as long as the statements leading to it are true. The three statements can be listed as an  argument , with two beginning statements and a conclusion:

Statement 1: If you get an A on the final exam, you will get an A for the course

Statement 2: You get an A on the final exam

Conclusion: You will get an A for the course

This particular arrangement, in which true beginning statements lead to a guaranteed true conclusion, is known as a  deductively valid argument . Although deductive reasoning is often the subject of abstract, brain-teasing, puzzle-like word problems, it is actually an extremely important type of everyday reasoning. It is just hard to recognize sometimes. For example, imagine that you are looking for your car keys and you realize that they are either in the kitchen drawer or in your book bag. After looking in the kitchen drawer, you instantly know that they must be in your book bag. That conclusion results from a simple deductive reasoning argument. In addition, solid deductive reasoning skills are necessary for you to succeed in the sciences, philosophy, math, computer programming, and any endeavor involving the use of logic to persuade others to your point of view or to evaluate others’ arguments.

Cognitive psychologists, and before them philosophers, have been quite interested in deductive reasoning, not so much for its practical applications, but for the insights it can offer them about the ways that human beings think. One of the early ideas to emerge from the examination of deductive reasoning is that people learn (or develop) mental versions of rules that allow them to solve these types of reasoning problems (Braine, 1978; Braine, Reiser, & Rumain, 1984). The best way to see this point of view is to realize that there are different possible rules, and some of them are very simple. For example, consider this rule of logic:

therefore q

Logical rules are often presented abstractly, as letters, in order to imply that they can be used in very many specific situations. Here is a concrete version of the of the same rule:

I’ll either have pizza or a hamburger for dinner tonight (p or q)

I won’t have pizza (not p)

Therefore, I’ll have a hamburger (therefore q)

This kind of reasoning seems so natural, so easy, that it is quite plausible that we would use a version of this rule in our daily lives. At least, it seems more plausible than some of the alternative possibilities—for example, that we need to have experience with the specific situation (pizza or hamburger, in this case) in order to solve this type of problem easily. So perhaps there is a form of natural logic (Rips, 1990) that contains very simple versions of logical rules. When we are faced with a reasoning problem that maps onto one of these rules, we use the rule.

But be very careful; things are not always as easy as they seem. Even these simple rules are not so simple. For example, consider the following rule. Many people fail to realize that this rule is just as valid as the pizza or hamburger rule above.

if p, then q

therefore, not p

Concrete version:

If I eat dinner, then I will have dessert

I did not have dessert

Therefore, I did not eat dinner

The simple fact is, it can be very difficult for people to apply rules of deductive logic correctly; as a result, they make many errors when trying to do so. Is this a deductively valid argument or not?

Students who like school study a lot

Students who study a lot get good grades

Jane does not like school

Therefore, Jane does not get good grades

Many people are surprised to discover that this is not a logically valid argument; the conclusion is not guaranteed to be true from the beginning statements. Although the first statement says that students who like school study a lot, it does NOT say that students who do not like school do not study a lot. In other words, it may very well be possible to study a lot without liking school. Even people who sometimes get problems like this right might not be using the rules of deductive reasoning. Instead, they might just be making judgments for examples they know, in this case, remembering instances of people who get good grades despite not liking school.

Making deductive reasoning even more difficult is the fact that there are two important properties that an argument may have. One, it can be valid or invalid (meaning that the conclusion does or does not follow logically from the statements leading up to it). Two, an argument (or more correctly, its conclusion) can be true or false. Here is an example of an argument that is logically valid, but has a false conclusion (at least we think it is false).

Either you are eleven feet tall or the Grand Canyon was created by a spaceship crashing into the earth.

You are not eleven feet tall

Therefore the Grand Canyon was created by a spaceship crashing into the earth

This argument has the exact same form as the pizza or hamburger argument above, making it is deductively valid. The conclusion is so false, however, that it is absurd (of course, the reason the conclusion is false is that the first statement is false). When people are judging arguments, they tend to not observe the difference between deductive validity and the empirical truth of statements or conclusions. If the elements of an argument happen to be true, people are likely to judge the argument logically valid; if the elements are false, they will very likely judge it invalid (Markovits & Bouffard-Bouchard, 1992; Moshman & Franks, 1986). Thus, it seems a stretch to say that people are using these logical rules to judge the validity of arguments. Many psychologists believe that most people actually have very limited deductive reasoning skills (Johnson-Laird, 1999). They argue that when faced with a problem for which deductive logic is required, people resort to some simpler technique, such as matching terms that appear in the statements and the conclusion (Evans, 1982). This might not seem like a problem, but what if reasoners believe that the elements are true and they happen to be wrong; they will would believe that they are using a form of reasoning that guarantees they are correct and yet be wrong.

deductive reasoning :  a type of reasoning in which the conclusion is guaranteed to be true any time the statements leading up to it are true

argument :  a set of statements in which the beginning statements lead to a conclusion

deductively valid argument :  an argument for which true beginning statements guarantee that the conclusion is true

Inductive reasoning and judgment

Every day, you make many judgments about the likelihood of one thing or another. Whether you realize it or not, you are practicing  inductive reasoning   on a daily basis. In inductive reasoning arguments, a conclusion is likely whenever the statements preceding it are true. The first thing to notice about inductive reasoning is that, by definition, you can never be sure about your conclusion; you can only estimate how likely the conclusion is. Inductive reasoning may lead you to focus on Memory Encoding and Recoding when you study for the exam, but it is possible the instructor will ask more questions about Memory Retrieval instead. Unlike deductive reasoning, the conclusions you reach through inductive reasoning are only probable, not certain. That is why scientists consider inductive reasoning weaker than deductive reasoning. But imagine how hard it would be for us to function if we could not act unless we were certain about the outcome.

Inductive reasoning can be represented as logical arguments consisting of statements and a conclusion, just as deductive reasoning can be. In an inductive argument, you are given some statements and a conclusion (or you are given some statements and must draw a conclusion). An argument is  inductively strong   if the conclusion would be very probable whenever the statements are true. So, for example, here is an inductively strong argument:

• Statement #1: The forecaster on Channel 2 said it is going to rain today.
• Statement #2: The forecaster on Channel 5 said it is going to rain today.
• Statement #3: It is very cloudy and humid.
• Statement #4: You just heard thunder.
• Conclusion (or judgment): It is going to rain today.

Think of the statements as evidence, on the basis of which you will draw a conclusion. So, based on the evidence presented in the four statements, it is very likely that it will rain today. Will it definitely rain today? Certainly not. We can all think of times that the weather forecaster was wrong.

A true story: Some years ago psychology student was watching a baseball playoff game between the St. Louis Cardinals and the Los Angeles Dodgers. A graphic on the screen had just informed the audience that the Cardinal at bat, (Hall of Fame shortstop) Ozzie Smith, a switch hitter batting left-handed for this plate appearance, had never, in nearly 3000 career at-bats, hit a home run left-handed. The student, who had just learned about inductive reasoning in his psychology class, turned to his companion (a Cardinals fan) and smugly said, “It is an inductively strong argument that Ozzie Smith will not hit a home run.” He turned back to face the television just in time to watch the ball sail over the right field fence for a home run. Although the student felt foolish at the time, he was not wrong. It was an inductively strong argument; 3000 at-bats is an awful lot of evidence suggesting that the Wizard of Ozz (as he was known) would not be hitting one out of the park (think of each at-bat without a home run as a statement in an inductive argument). Sadly (for the die-hard Cubs fan and Cardinals-hating student), despite the strength of the argument, the conclusion was wrong.

Given the possibility that we might draw an incorrect conclusion even with an inductively strong argument, we really want to be sure that we do, in fact, make inductively strong arguments. If we judge something probable, it had better be probable. If we judge something nearly impossible, it had better not happen. Think of inductive reasoning, then, as making reasonably accurate judgments of the probability of some conclusion given a set of evidence.

We base many decisions in our lives on inductive reasoning. For example:

Statement #1: Psychology is not my best subject

Statement #2: My psychology instructor has a reputation for giving difficult exams

Statement #3: My first psychology exam was much harder than I expected

Judgment: The next exam will probably be very difficult.

Decision: I will study tonight instead of watching Netflix.

Some other examples of judgments that people commonly make in a school context include judgments of the likelihood that:

• A particular class will be interesting/useful/difficult
• You will be able to finish writing a paper by next week if you go out tonight
• Your laptop’s battery will last through the next trip to the library
• You will not miss anything important if you skip class tomorrow
• Your instructor will not notice if you skip class tomorrow
• You will be able to find a book that you will need for a paper
• There will be an essay question about Memory Encoding on the next exam

Tversky and Kahneman (1983) recognized that there are two general ways that we might make these judgments; they termed them extensional (i.e., following the laws of probability) and intuitive (i.e., using shortcuts or heuristics, see below). We will use a similar distinction between Type 1 and Type 2 thinking, as described by Keith Stanovich and his colleagues (Evans and Stanovich, 2013; Stanovich and West, 2000). Type 1 thinking is fast, automatic, effortful, and emotional. In fact, it is hardly fair to call it reasoning at all, as judgments just seem to pop into one’s head. Type 2 thinking , on the other hand, is slow, effortful, and logical. So obviously, it is more likely to lead to a correct judgment, or an optimal decision. The problem is, we tend to over-rely on Type 1. Now, we are not saying that Type 2 is the right way to go for every decision or judgment we make. It seems a bit much, for example, to engage in a step-by-step logical reasoning procedure to decide whether we will have chicken or fish for dinner tonight.

Many bad decisions in some very important contexts, however, can be traced back to poor judgments of the likelihood of certain risks or outcomes that result from the use of Type 1 when a more logical reasoning process would have been more appropriate. For example:

Statement #1: It is late at night.

Statement #2: Albert has been drinking beer for the past five hours at a party.

Statement #3: Albert is not exactly sure where he is or how far away home is.

Judgment: Albert will have no difficulty walking home.

Decision: He walks home alone.

As you can see in this example, the three statements backing up the judgment do not really support it. In other words, this argument is not inductively strong because it is based on judgments that ignore the laws of probability. What are the chances that someone facing these conditions will be able to walk home alone easily? And one need not be drunk to make poor decisions based on judgments that just pop into our heads.

The truth is that many of our probability judgments do not come very close to what the laws of probability say they should be. Think about it. In order for us to reason in accordance with these laws, we would need to know the laws of probability, which would allow us to calculate the relationship between particular pieces of evidence and the probability of some outcome (i.e., how much likelihood should change given a piece of evidence), and we would have to do these heavy math calculations in our heads. After all, that is what Type 2 requires. Needless to say, even if we were motivated, we often do not even know how to apply Type 2 reasoning in many cases.

So what do we do when we don’t have the knowledge, skills, or time required to make the correct mathematical judgment? Do we hold off and wait until we can get better evidence? Do we read up on probability and fire up our calculator app so we can compute the correct probability? Of course not. We rely on Type 1 thinking. We “wing it.” That is, we come up with a likelihood estimate using some means at our disposal. Psychologists use the term heuristic to describe the type of “winging it” we are talking about. A  heuristic   is a shortcut strategy that we use to make some judgment or solve some problem (see Section 7.3). Heuristics are easy and quick, think of them as the basic procedures that are characteristic of Type 1.  They can absolutely lead to reasonably good judgments and decisions in some situations (like choosing between chicken and fish for dinner). They are, however, far from foolproof. There are, in fact, quite a lot of situations in which heuristics can lead us to make incorrect judgments, and in many cases the decisions based on those judgments can have serious consequences.

Let us return to the activity that begins this section. You were asked to judge the likelihood (or frequency) of certain events and risks. You were free to come up with your own evidence (or statements) to make these judgments. This is where a heuristic crops up. As a judgment shortcut, we tend to generate specific examples of those very events to help us decide their likelihood or frequency. For example, if we are asked to judge how common, frequent, or likely a particular type of cancer is, many of our statements would be examples of specific cancer cases:

Statement #1: Andy Kaufman (comedian) had lung cancer.

Statement #2: Colin Powell (US Secretary of State) had prostate cancer.

Statement #3: Bob Marley (musician) had skin and brain cancer

Statement #4: Sandra Day O’Connor (Supreme Court Justice) had breast cancer.

Statement #5: Fred Rogers (children’s entertainer) had stomach cancer.

Statement #6: Robin Roberts (news anchor) had breast cancer.

Statement #7: Bette Davis (actress) had breast cancer.

Judgment: Breast cancer is the most common type.

Your own experience or memory may also tell you that breast cancer is the most common type. But it is not (although it is common). Actually, skin cancer is the most common type in the US. We make the same types of misjudgments all the time because we do not generate the examples or evidence according to their actual frequencies or probabilities. Instead, we have a tendency (or bias) to search for the examples in memory; if they are easy to retrieve, we assume that they are common. To rephrase this in the language of the heuristic, events seem more likely to the extent that they are available to memory. This bias has been termed the  availability heuristic   (Kahneman and Tversky, 1974).

The fact that we use the availability heuristic does not automatically mean that our judgment is wrong. The reason we use heuristics in the first place is that they work fairly well in many cases (and, of course that they are easy to use). So, the easiest examples to think of sometimes are the most common ones. Is it more likely that a member of the U.S. Senate is a man or a woman? Most people have a much easier time generating examples of male senators. And as it turns out, the U.S. Senate has many more men than women (74 to 26 in 2020). In this case, then, the availability heuristic would lead you to make the correct judgment; it is far more likely that a senator would be a man.

In many other cases, however, the availability heuristic will lead us astray. This is because events can be memorable for many reasons other than their frequency. Section 5.2, Encoding Meaning, suggested that one good way to encode the meaning of some information is to form a mental image of it. Thus, information that has been pictured mentally will be more available to memory. Indeed, an event that is vivid and easily pictured will trick many people into supposing that type of event is more common than it actually is. Repetition of information will also make it more memorable. So, if the same event is described to you in a magazine, on the evening news, on a podcast that you listen to, and in your Facebook feed; it will be very available to memory. Again, the availability heuristic will cause you to misperceive the frequency of these types of events.

Most interestingly, information that is unusual is more memorable. Suppose we give you the following list of words to remember: box, flower, letter, platypus, oven, boat, newspaper, purse, drum, car. Very likely, the easiest word to remember would be platypus, the unusual one. The same thing occurs with memories of events. An event may be available to memory because it is unusual, yet the availability heuristic leads us to judge that the event is common. Did you catch that? In these cases, the availability heuristic makes us think the exact opposite of the true frequency. We end up thinking something is common because it is unusual (and therefore memorable). Yikes.

The misapplication of the availability heuristic sometimes has unfortunate results. For example, if you went to K-12 school in the US over the past 10 years, it is extremely likely that you have participated in lockdown and active shooter drills. Of course, everyone is trying to prevent the tragedy of another school shooting. And believe us, we are not trying to minimize how terrible the tragedy is. But the truth of the matter is, school shootings are extremely rare. Because the federal government does not keep a database of school shootings, the Washington Post has maintained their own running tally. Between 1999 and January 2020 (the date of the most recent school shooting with a death in the US at of the time this paragraph was written), the Post reported a total of 254 people died in school shootings in the US. Not 254 per year, 254 total. That is an average of 12 per year. Of course, that is 254 people who should not have died (particularly because many were children), but in a country with approximately 60,000,000 students and teachers, this is a very small risk.

But many students and teachers are terrified that they will be victims of school shootings because of the availability heuristic. It is so easy to think of examples (they are very available to memory) that people believe the event is very common. It is not. And there is a downside to this. We happen to believe that there is an enormous gun violence problem in the United States. According the the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 39,773 firearm deaths in the US in 2017. Fifteen of those deaths were in school shootings, according to the Post. 60% of those deaths were suicides. When people pay attention to the school shooting risk (low), they often fail to notice the much larger risk.

And examples like this are by no means unique. The authors of this book have been teaching psychology since the 1990’s. We have been able to make the exact same arguments about the misapplication of the availability heuristics and keep them current by simply swapping out for the “fear of the day.” In the 1990’s it was children being kidnapped by strangers (it was known as “stranger danger”) despite the facts that kidnappings accounted for only 2% of the violent crimes committed against children, and only 24% of kidnappings are committed by strangers (US Department of Justice, 2007). This fear overlapped with the fear of terrorism that gripped the country after the 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and US Pentagon and still plagues the population of the US somewhat in 2020. After a well-publicized, sensational act of violence, people are extremely likely to increase their estimates of the chances that they, too, will be victims of terror. Think about the reality, however. In October of 2001, a terrorist mailed anthrax spores to members of the US government and a number of media companies. A total of five people died as a result of this attack. The nation was nearly paralyzed by the fear of dying from the attack; in reality the probability of an individual person dying was 0.00000002.

The availability heuristic can lead you to make incorrect judgments in a school setting as well. For example, suppose you are trying to decide if you should take a class from a particular math professor. You might try to make a judgment of how good a teacher she is by recalling instances of friends and acquaintances making comments about her teaching skill. You may have some examples that suggest that she is a poor teacher very available to memory, so on the basis of the availability heuristic you judge her a poor teacher and decide to take the class from someone else. What if, however, the instances you recalled were all from the same person, and this person happens to be a very colorful storyteller? The subsequent ease of remembering the instances might not indicate that the professor is a poor teacher after all.

Although the availability heuristic is obviously important, it is not the only judgment heuristic we use. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman examined the role of heuristics in inductive reasoning in a long series of studies. Kahneman received a Nobel Prize in Economics for this research in 2002, and Tversky would have certainly received one as well if he had not died of melanoma at age 59 in 1996 (Nobel Prizes are not awarded posthumously). Kahneman and Tversky demonstrated repeatedly that people do not reason in ways that are consistent with the laws of probability. They identified several heuristic strategies that people use instead to make judgments about likelihood. The importance of this work for economics (and the reason that Kahneman was awarded the Nobel Prize) is that earlier economic theories had assumed that people do make judgments rationally, that is, in agreement with the laws of probability.

Another common heuristic that people use for making judgments is the  representativeness heuristic (Kahneman & Tversky 1973). Suppose we describe a person to you. He is quiet and shy, has an unassuming personality, and likes to work with numbers. Is this person more likely to be an accountant or an attorney? If you said accountant, you were probably using the representativeness heuristic. Our imaginary person is judged likely to be an accountant because he resembles, or is representative of the concept of, an accountant. When research participants are asked to make judgments such as these, the only thing that seems to matter is the representativeness of the description. For example, if told that the person described is in a room that contains 70 attorneys and 30 accountants, participants will still assume that he is an accountant.

inductive reasoning :  a type of reasoning in which we make judgments about likelihood from sets of evidence

inductively strong argument :  an inductive argument in which the beginning statements lead to a conclusion that is probably true

heuristic :  a shortcut strategy that we use to make judgments and solve problems. Although they are easy to use, they do not guarantee correct judgments and solutions

availability heuristic :  judging the frequency or likelihood of some event type according to how easily examples of the event can be called to mind (i.e., how available they are to memory)

representativeness heuristic:   judging the likelihood that something is a member of a category on the basis of how much it resembles a typical category member (i.e., how representative it is of the category)

Type 1 thinking : fast, automatic, and emotional thinking.

Type 2 thinking : slow, effortful, and logical thinking.

• What percentage of workplace homicides are co-worker violence?

Many people get these questions wrong. The answers are 10%; stairs; skin; 6%. How close were your answers? Explain how the availability heuristic might have led you to make the incorrect judgments.

• Can you think of some other judgments that you have made (or beliefs that you have) that might have been influenced by the availability heuristic?

7.3 Problem Solving

• Please take a few minutes to list a number of problems that you are facing right now.
• Now write about a problem that you recently solved.
• What is your definition of a problem?

Mary has a problem. Her daughter, ordinarily quite eager to please, appears to delight in being the last person to do anything. Whether getting ready for school, going to piano lessons or karate class, or even going out with her friends, she seems unwilling or unable to get ready on time. Other people have different kinds of problems. For example, many students work at jobs, have numerous family commitments, and are facing a course schedule full of difficult exams, assignments, papers, and speeches. How can they find enough time to devote to their studies and still fulfill their other obligations? Speaking of students and their problems: Show that a ball thrown vertically upward with initial velocity v0 takes twice as much time to return as to reach the highest point (from Spiegel, 1981).

These are three very different situations, but we have called them all problems. What makes them all the same, despite the differences? A psychologist might define a  problem   as a situation with an initial state, a goal state, and a set of possible intermediate states. Somewhat more meaningfully, we might consider a problem a situation in which you are in here one state (e.g., daughter is always late), you want to be there in another state (e.g., daughter is not always late), and with no obvious way to get from here to there. Defined this way, each of the three situations we outlined can now be seen as an example of the same general concept, a problem. At this point, you might begin to wonder what is not a problem, given such a general definition. It seems that nearly every non-routine task we engage in could qualify as a problem. As long as you realize that problems are not necessarily bad (it can be quite fun and satisfying to rise to the challenge and solve a problem), this may be a useful way to think about it.

Can we identify a set of problem-solving skills that would apply to these very different kinds of situations? That task, in a nutshell, is a major goal of this section. Let us try to begin to make sense of the wide variety of ways that problems can be solved with an important observation: the process of solving problems can be divided into two key parts. First, people have to notice, comprehend, and represent the problem properly in their minds (called  problem representation ). Second, they have to apply some kind of solution strategy to the problem. Psychologists have studied both of these key parts of the process in detail.

When you first think about the problem-solving process, you might guess that most of our difficulties would occur because we are failing in the second step, the application of strategies. Although this can be a significant difficulty much of the time, the more important source of difficulty is probably problem representation. In short, we often fail to solve a problem because we are looking at it, or thinking about it, the wrong way.

problem :  a situation in which we are in an initial state, have a desired goal state, and there is a number of possible intermediate states (i.e., there is no obvious way to get from the initial to the goal state)

problem representation :  noticing, comprehending and forming a mental conception of a problem

Defining and Mentally Representing Problems in Order to Solve Them

So, the main obstacle to solving a problem is that we do not clearly understand exactly what the problem is. Recall the problem with Mary’s daughter always being late. One way to represent, or to think about, this problem is that she is being defiant. She refuses to get ready in time. This type of representation or definition suggests a particular type of solution. Another way to think about the problem, however, is to consider the possibility that she is simply being sidetracked by interesting diversions. This different conception of what the problem is (i.e., different representation) suggests a very different solution strategy. For example, if Mary defines the problem as defiance, she may be tempted to solve the problem using some kind of coercive tactics, that is, to assert her authority as her mother and force her to listen. On the other hand, if Mary defines the problem as distraction, she may try to solve it by simply removing the distracting objects.

As you might guess, when a problem is represented one way, the solution may seem very difficult, or even impossible. Seen another way, the solution might be very easy. For example, consider the following problem (from Nasar, 1998):

Two bicyclists start 20 miles apart and head toward each other, each going at a steady rate of 10 miles per hour. At the same time, a fly that travels at a steady 15 miles per hour starts from the front wheel of the southbound bicycle and flies to the front wheel of the northbound one, then turns around and flies to the front wheel of the southbound one again, and continues in this manner until he is crushed between the two front wheels. Question: what total distance did the fly cover?

Please take a few minutes to try to solve this problem.

Most people represent this problem as a question about a fly because, well, that is how the question is asked. The solution, using this representation, is to figure out how far the fly travels on the first leg of its journey, then add this total to how far it travels on the second leg of its journey (when it turns around and returns to the first bicycle), then continue to add the smaller distance from each leg of the journey until you converge on the correct answer. You would have to be quite skilled at math to solve this problem, and you would probably need some time and pencil and paper to do it.

If you consider a different representation, however, you can solve this problem in your head. Instead of thinking about it as a question about a fly, think about it as a question about the bicycles. They are 20 miles apart, and each is traveling 10 miles per hour. How long will it take for the bicycles to reach each other? Right, one hour. The fly is traveling 15 miles per hour; therefore, it will travel a total of 15 miles back and forth in the hour before the bicycles meet. Represented one way (as a problem about a fly), the problem is quite difficult. Represented another way (as a problem about two bicycles), it is easy. Changing your representation of a problem is sometimes the best—sometimes the only—way to solve it.

Unfortunately, however, changing a problem’s representation is not the easiest thing in the world to do. Often, problem solvers get stuck looking at a problem one way. This is called  fixation . Most people who represent the preceding problem as a problem about a fly probably do not pause to reconsider, and consequently change, their representation. A parent who thinks her daughter is being defiant is unlikely to consider the possibility that her behavior is far less purposeful.

Problem-solving fixation was examined by a group of German psychologists called Gestalt psychologists during the 1930’s and 1940’s. Karl Dunker, for example, discovered an important type of failure to take a different perspective called  functional fixedness . Imagine being a participant in one of his experiments. You are asked to figure out how to mount two candles on a door and are given an assortment of odds and ends, including a small empty cardboard box and some thumbtacks. Perhaps you have already figured out a solution: tack the box to the door so it forms a platform, then put the candles on top of the box. Most people are able to arrive at this solution. Imagine a slight variation of the procedure, however. What if, instead of being empty, the box had matches in it? Most people given this version of the problem do not arrive at the solution given above. Why? Because it seems to people that when the box contains matches, it already has a function; it is a matchbox. People are unlikely to consider a new function for an object that already has a function. This is functional fixedness.

Mental set is a type of fixation in which the problem solver gets stuck using the same solution strategy that has been successful in the past, even though the solution may no longer be useful. It is commonly seen when students do math problems for homework. Often, several problems in a row require the reapplication of the same solution strategy. Then, without warning, the next problem in the set requires a new strategy. Many students attempt to apply the formerly successful strategy on the new problem and therefore cannot come up with a correct answer.

The thing to remember is that you cannot solve a problem unless you correctly identify what it is to begin with (initial state) and what you want the end result to be (goal state). That may mean looking at the problem from a different angle and representing it in a new way. The correct representation does not guarantee a successful solution, but it certainly puts you on the right track.

A bit more optimistically, the Gestalt psychologists discovered what may be considered the opposite of fixation, namely  insight . Sometimes the solution to a problem just seems to pop into your head. Wolfgang Kohler examined insight by posing many different problems to chimpanzees, principally problems pertaining to their acquisition of out-of-reach food. In one version, a banana was placed outside of a chimpanzee’s cage and a short stick inside the cage. The stick was too short to retrieve the banana, but was long enough to retrieve a longer stick also located outside of the cage. This second stick was long enough to retrieve the banana. After trying, and failing, to reach the banana with the shorter stick, the chimpanzee would try a couple of random-seeming attempts, react with some apparent frustration or anger, then suddenly rush to the longer stick, the correct solution fully realized at this point. This sudden appearance of the solution, observed many times with many different problems, was termed insight by Kohler.

Lest you think it pertains to chimpanzees only, Karl Dunker demonstrated that children also solve problems through insight in the 1930s. More importantly, you have probably experienced insight yourself. Think back to a time when you were trying to solve a difficult problem. After struggling for a while, you gave up. Hours later, the solution just popped into your head, perhaps when you were taking a walk, eating dinner, or lying in bed.

fixation :  when a problem solver gets stuck looking at a problem a particular way and cannot change his or her representation of it (or his or her intended solution strategy)

functional fixedness :  a specific type of fixation in which a problem solver cannot think of a new use for an object that already has a function

mental set :  a specific type of fixation in which a problem solver gets stuck using the same solution strategy that has been successful in the past

insight :  a sudden realization of a solution to a problem

Solving Problems by Trial and Error

Correctly identifying the problem and your goal for a solution is a good start, but recall the psychologist’s definition of a problem: it includes a set of possible intermediate states. Viewed this way, a problem can be solved satisfactorily only if one can find a path through some of these intermediate states to the goal. Imagine a fairly routine problem, finding a new route to school when your ordinary route is blocked (by road construction, for example). At each intersection, you may turn left, turn right, or go straight. A satisfactory solution to the problem (of getting to school) is a sequence of selections at each intersection that allows you to wind up at school.

If you had all the time in the world to get to school, you might try choosing intermediate states randomly. At one corner you turn left, the next you go straight, then you go left again, then right, then right, then straight. Unfortunately, trial and error will not necessarily get you where you want to go, and even if it does, it is not the fastest way to get there. For example, when a friend of ours was in college, he got lost on the way to a concert and attempted to find the venue by choosing streets to turn onto randomly (this was long before the use of GPS). Amazingly enough, the strategy worked, although he did end up missing two out of the three bands who played that night.

Trial and error is not all bad, however. B.F. Skinner, a prominent behaviorist psychologist, suggested that people often behave randomly in order to see what effect the behavior has on the environment and what subsequent effect this environmental change has on them. This seems particularly true for the very young person. Picture a child filling a household’s fish tank with toilet paper, for example. To a child trying to develop a repertoire of creative problem-solving strategies, an odd and random behavior might be just the ticket. Eventually, the exasperated parent hopes, the child will discover that many of these random behaviors do not successfully solve problems; in fact, in many cases they create problems. Thus, one would expect a decrease in this random behavior as a child matures. You should realize, however, that the opposite extreme is equally counterproductive. If the children become too rigid, never trying something unexpected and new, their problem solving skills can become too limited.

Effective problem solving seems to call for a happy medium that strikes a balance between using well-founded old strategies and trying new ground and territory. The individual who recognizes a situation in which an old problem-solving strategy would work best, and who can also recognize a situation in which a new untested strategy is necessary is halfway to success.

Solving Problems with Algorithms and Heuristics

For many problems there is a possible strategy available that will guarantee a correct solution. For example, think about math problems. Math lessons often consist of step-by-step procedures that can be used to solve the problems. If you apply the strategy without error, you are guaranteed to arrive at the correct solution to the problem. This approach is called using an  algorithm , a term that denotes the step-by-step procedure that guarantees a correct solution. Because algorithms are sometimes available and come with a guarantee, you might think that most people use them frequently. Unfortunately, however, they do not. As the experience of many students who have struggled through math classes can attest, algorithms can be extremely difficult to use, even when the problem solver knows which algorithm is supposed to work in solving the problem. In problems outside of math class, we often do not even know if an algorithm is available. It is probably fair to say, then, that algorithms are rarely used when people try to solve problems.

Because algorithms are so difficult to use, people often pass up the opportunity to guarantee a correct solution in favor of a strategy that is much easier to use and yields a reasonable chance of coming up with a correct solution. These strategies are called  problem solving heuristics . Similar to what you saw in section 6.2 with reasoning heuristics, a problem solving heuristic is a shortcut strategy that people use when trying to solve problems. It usually works pretty well, but does not guarantee a correct solution to the problem. For example, one problem solving heuristic might be “always move toward the goal” (so when trying to get to school when your regular route is blocked, you would always turn in the direction you think the school is). A heuristic that people might use when doing math homework is “use the same solution strategy that you just used for the previous problem.”

By the way, we hope these last two paragraphs feel familiar to you. They seem to parallel a distinction that you recently learned. Indeed, algorithms and problem-solving heuristics are another example of the distinction between Type 1 thinking and Type 2 thinking.

Although it is probably not worth describing a large number of specific heuristics, two observations about heuristics are worth mentioning. First, heuristics can be very general or they can be very specific, pertaining to a particular type of problem only. For example, “always move toward the goal” is a general strategy that you can apply to countless problem situations. On the other hand, “when you are lost without a functioning gps, pick the most expensive car you can see and follow it” is specific to the problem of being lost. Second, all heuristics are not equally useful. One heuristic that many students know is “when in doubt, choose c for a question on a multiple-choice exam.” This is a dreadful strategy because many instructors intentionally randomize the order of answer choices. Another test-taking heuristic, somewhat more useful, is “look for the answer to one question somewhere else on the exam.”

You really should pay attention to the application of heuristics to test taking. Imagine that while reviewing your answers for a multiple-choice exam before turning it in, you come across a question for which you originally thought the answer was c. Upon reflection, you now think that the answer might be b. Should you change the answer to b, or should you stick with your first impression? Most people will apply the heuristic strategy to “stick with your first impression.” What they do not realize, of course, is that this is a very poor strategy (Lilienfeld et al, 2009). Most of the errors on exams come on questions that were answered wrong originally and were not changed (so they remain wrong). There are many fewer errors where we change a correct answer to an incorrect answer. And, of course, sometimes we change an incorrect answer to a correct answer. In fact, research has shown that it is more common to change a wrong answer to a right answer than vice versa (Bruno, 2001).

The belief in this poor test-taking strategy (stick with your first impression) is based on the  confirmation bias   (Nickerson, 1998; Wason, 1960). You first saw the confirmation bias in Module 1, but because it is so important, we will repeat the information here. People have a bias, or tendency, to notice information that confirms what they already believe. Somebody at one time told you to stick with your first impression, so when you look at the results of an exam you have taken, you will tend to notice the cases that are consistent with that belief. That is, you will notice the cases in which you originally had an answer correct and changed it to the wrong answer. You tend not to notice the other two important (and more common) cases, changing an answer from wrong to right, and leaving a wrong answer unchanged.

Because heuristics by definition do not guarantee a correct solution to a problem, mistakes are bound to occur when we employ them. A poor choice of a specific heuristic will lead to an even higher likelihood of making an error.

algorithm :  a step-by-step procedure that guarantees a correct solution to a problem

problem solving heuristic :  a shortcut strategy that we use to solve problems. Although they are easy to use, they do not guarantee correct judgments and solutions

confirmation bias :  people’s tendency to notice information that confirms what they already believe

An Effective Problem-Solving Sequence

You may be left with a big question: If algorithms are hard to use and heuristics often don’t work, how am I supposed to solve problems? Robert Sternberg (1996), as part of his theory of what makes people successfully intelligent (Module 8) described a problem-solving sequence that has been shown to work rather well:

• Identify the existence of a problem.  In school, problem identification is often easy; problems that you encounter in math classes, for example, are conveniently labeled as problems for you. Outside of school, however, realizing that you have a problem is a key difficulty that you must get past in order to begin solving it. You must be very sensitive to the symptoms that indicate a problem.
• Define the problem.  Suppose you realize that you have been having many headaches recently. Very likely, you would identify this as a problem. If you define the problem as “headaches,” the solution would probably be to take aspirin or ibuprofen or some other anti-inflammatory medication. If the headaches keep returning, however, you have not really solved the problem—likely because you have mistaken a symptom for the problem itself. Instead, you must find the root cause of the headaches. Stress might be the real problem. For you to successfully solve many problems it may be necessary for you to overcome your fixations and represent the problems differently. One specific strategy that you might find useful is to try to define the problem from someone else’s perspective. How would your parents, spouse, significant other, doctor, etc. define the problem? Somewhere in these different perspectives may lurk the key definition that will allow you to find an easier and permanent solution.
• Formulate strategy.  Now it is time to begin planning exactly how the problem will be solved. Is there an algorithm or heuristic available for you to use? Remember, heuristics by their very nature guarantee that occasionally you will not be able to solve the problem. One point to keep in mind is that you should look for long-range solutions, which are more likely to address the root cause of a problem than short-range solutions.
• Represent and organize information.  Similar to the way that the problem itself can be defined, or represented in multiple ways, information within the problem is open to different interpretations. Suppose you are studying for a big exam. You have chapters from a textbook and from a supplemental reader, along with lecture notes that all need to be studied. How should you (represent and) organize these materials? Should you separate them by type of material (text versus reader versus lecture notes), or should you separate them by topic? To solve problems effectively, you must learn to find the most useful representation and organization of information.
• Allocate resources.  This is perhaps the simplest principle of the problem solving sequence, but it is extremely difficult for many people. First, you must decide whether time, money, skills, effort, goodwill, or some other resource would help to solve the problem Then, you must make the hard choice of deciding which resources to use, realizing that you cannot devote maximum resources to every problem. Very often, the solution to problem is simply to change how resources are allocated (for example, spending more time studying in order to improve grades).
• Monitor and evaluate solutions.  Pay attention to the solution strategy while you are applying it. If it is not working, you may be able to select another strategy. Another fact you should realize about problem solving is that it never does end. Solving one problem frequently brings up new ones. Good monitoring and evaluation of your problem solutions can help you to anticipate and get a jump on solving the inevitable new problems that will arise.

Please note that this as  an  effective problem-solving sequence, not  the  effective problem solving sequence. Just as you can become fixated and end up representing the problem incorrectly or trying an inefficient solution, you can become stuck applying the problem-solving sequence in an inflexible way. Clearly there are problem situations that can be solved without using these skills in this order.

Additionally, many real-world problems may require that you go back and redefine a problem several times as the situation changes (Sternberg et al. 2000). For example, consider the problem with Mary’s daughter one last time. At first, Mary did represent the problem as one of defiance. When her early strategy of pleading and threatening punishment was unsuccessful, Mary began to observe her daughter more carefully. She noticed that, indeed, her daughter’s attention would be drawn by an irresistible distraction or book. Fresh with a re-representation of the problem, she began a new solution strategy. She began to remind her daughter every few minutes to stay on task and remind her that if she is ready before it is time to leave, she may return to the book or other distracting object at that time. Fortunately, this strategy was successful, so Mary did not have to go back and redefine the problem again.

Pick one or two of the problems that you listed when you first started studying this section and try to work out the steps of Sternberg’s problem solving sequence for each one.

a mental representation of a category of things in the world

an assumption about the truth of something that is not stated. Inferences come from our prior knowledge and experience, and from logical reasoning

knowledge about one’s own cognitive processes; thinking about your thinking

individuals who are less competent tend to overestimate their abilities more than individuals who are more competent do

Thinking like a scientist in your everyday life for the purpose of drawing correct conclusions. It entails skepticism; an ability to identify biases, distortions, omissions, and assumptions; and excellent deductive and inductive reasoning, and problem solving skills.

a way of thinking in which you refrain from drawing a conclusion or changing your mind until good evidence has been provided

an inclination, tendency, leaning, or prejudice

a type of reasoning in which the conclusion is guaranteed to be true any time the statements leading up to it are true

a set of statements in which the beginning statements lead to a conclusion

an argument for which true beginning statements guarantee that the conclusion is true

a type of reasoning in which we make judgments about likelihood from sets of evidence

an inductive argument in which the beginning statements lead to a conclusion that is probably true

fast, automatic, and emotional thinking

slow, effortful, and logical thinking

a shortcut strategy that we use to make judgments and solve problems. Although they are easy to use, they do not guarantee correct judgments and solutions

udging the frequency or likelihood of some event type according to how easily examples of the event can be called to mind (i.e., how available they are to memory)

judging the likelihood that something is a member of a category on the basis of how much it resembles a typical category member (i.e., how representative it is of the category)

a situation in which we are in an initial state, have a desired goal state, and there is a number of possible intermediate states (i.e., there is no obvious way to get from the initial to the goal state)

noticing, comprehending and forming a mental conception of a problem

when a problem solver gets stuck looking at a problem a particular way and cannot change his or her representation of it (or his or her intended solution strategy)

a specific type of fixation in which a problem solver cannot think of a new use for an object that already has a function

a specific type of fixation in which a problem solver gets stuck using the same solution strategy that has been successful in the past

a sudden realization of a solution to a problem

a step-by-step procedure that guarantees a correct solution to a problem

The tendency to notice and pay attention to information that confirms your prior beliefs and to ignore information that disconfirms them.

a shortcut strategy that we use to solve problems. Although they are easy to use, they do not guarantee correct judgments and solutions

Introduction to Psychology Copyright © 2020 by Ken Gray; Elizabeth Arnott-Hill; and Or'Shaundra Benson is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• F-10 curriculum
• General capabilities
• Critical and Creative Thinking

Critical and Creative Thinking (Version 8.4)

In the Australian Curriculum, students develop capability in critical and creative thinking as they learn to generate and evaluate knowledge, clarify concepts and ideas, seek possibilities, consider alternatives and solve problems. Critical and creative thinking involves students thinking broadly and deeply using skills, behaviours and dispositions such as reason, logic, resourcefulness, imagination and innovation in all learning areas at school and in their lives beyond school.

Thinking that is productive, purposeful and intentional is at the centre of effective learning. By applying a sequence of thinking skills, students develop an increasingly sophisticated understanding of the processes they can use whenever they encounter problems, unfamiliar information and new ideas. In addition, the progressive development of knowledge about thinking and the practice of using thinking strategies can increase students’ motivation for, and management of, their own learning. They become more confident and autonomous problem-solvers and thinkers.

Responding to the challenges of the twenty-first century – with its complex environmental, social and economic pressures – requires young people to be creative, innovative, enterprising and adaptable, with the motivation, confidence and skills to use critical and creative thinking purposefully.

This capability combines two types of thinking: critical thinking and creative thinking. Though the two are not interchangeable, they are strongly linked, bringing complementary dimensions to thinking and learning.

Critical thinking is at the core of most intellectual activity that involves students learning to recognise or develop an argument, use evidence in support of that argument, draw reasoned conclusions, and use information to solve problems. Examples of critical thinking skills are interpreting, analysing, evaluating, explaining, sequencing, reasoning, comparing, questioning, inferring, hypothesising, appraising, testing and generalising.

Creative thinking involves students learning to generate and apply new ideas in specific contexts, seeing existing situations in a new way, identifying alternative explanations, and seeing or making new links that generate a positive outcome. This includes combining parts to form something original, sifting and refining ideas to discover possibilities, constructing theories and objects, and acting on intuition. The products of creative endeavour can involve complex representations and images, investigations and performances, digital and computer-generated output, or occur as virtual reality.

Concept formation is the mental activity that helps us compare, contrast and classify ideas, objects, and events. Concept learning can be concrete or abstract and is closely allied with metacognition. What has been learnt can be applied to future examples. It underpins the organising elements.

Dispositions such as inquisitiveness, reasonableness, intellectual flexibility, open- and fair-mindedness, a readiness to try new ways of doing things and consider alternatives, and persistence promote and are enhanced by critical and creative thinking.

The key ideas for Critical and Creative Thinking are organised into four interrelated elements in the learning continuum, as shown in the figure below.

Inquiring – identifying, exploring and organising information and ideas

Organising elements for Critical and Creative Thinking 

The elements are not a taxonomy of thinking. Rather, each makes its own contribution to learning and needs to be explicitly and simultaneously developed.

This element involves students developing inquiry skills.

Students pose questions and identify and clarify information and ideas, and then organise and process information. They use questioning to investigate and analyse ideas and issues, make sense of and assess information and ideas, and collect, compare and evaluate information from a range of sources. In developing and acting with critical and creative thinking, students:

• pose questions
• identify and clarify information and ideas
• organise and process information.

Generating ideas, possibilities and actions

This element involves students creating ideas and actions, and considering and expanding on known actions and ideas.

Students imagine possibilities and connect ideas through considering alternatives, seeking solutions and putting ideas into action. They explore situations and generate alternatives to guide actions and experiment with and assess options and actions when seeking solutions. In developing and acting with critical and creative thinking, students:

• imagine possibilities and connect ideas
• consider alternatives
• seek solutions and put ideas into action.

Reflecting on thinking and processes

This element involves students reflecting on, adjusting and explaining their thinking and identifying the thinking behind choices, strategies and actions taken.

Students think about thinking (metacognition), reflect on actions and processes, and transfer knowledge into new contexts to create alternatives or open up possibilities. They apply knowledge gained in one context to clarify another. In developing and acting with critical and creative thinking, students:

• think about thinking (metacognition)
• reflect on processes
• transfer knowledge into new contexts.

Analysing, synthesising and evaluating reasoning and procedures

This element involves students analysing, synthesising and evaluating the reasoning and procedures used to find solutions, evaluate and justify results or inform courses of action.

Students identify, consider and assess the logic and reasoning behind choices. They differentiate components of decisions made and actions taken and assess ideas, methods and outcomes against criteria. In developing and acting with critical and creative thinking, students:

• apply logic and reasoning
• draw conclusions and design a course of action
• evaluate procedures and outcomes.

Critical and Creative Thinking in the learning areas

The imparting of knowledge (content) and the development of thinking skills are accepted today as primary purposes of education. The explicit teaching and embedding of critical and creative thinking throughout the learning areas encourages students to engage in higher order thinking. By using logic and imagination, and by reflecting on how they best tackle issues, tasks and challenges, students are increasingly able to select from a range of thinking strategies and use them selectively and spontaneously in an increasing range of learning contexts.

Activities that foster critical and creative thinking should include both independent and collaborative tasks, and entail some sort of transition or tension between ways of thinking. They should be challenging and engaging, and contain approaches that are within the ability range of the learners, but also challenge them to think logically, reason, be open-minded, seek alternatives, tolerate ambiguity, inquire into possibilities, be innovative risk-takers and use their imagination.

Critical and creative thinking can be encouraged simultaneously through activities that integrate reason, logic, imagination and innovation; for example, focusing on a topic in a logical, analytical way for some time, sorting out conflicting claims, weighing evidence, thinking through possible solutions, and then, following reflection and perhaps a burst of creative energy, coming up with innovative and considered responses. Critical and creative thinking are communicative processes that develop flexibility and precision. Communication is integral to each of the thinking processes. By sharing thinking, visualisation and innovation, and by giving and receiving effective feedback, students learn to value the diversity of learning and communication styles.

The learning area or subject with the highest proportion of content descriptions tagged with Critical and Creative Thinking is placed first in the list.

F-6/7 Humanities and Social Sciences (HASS)

In the F–6/7 Australian Curriculum: Humanities and Social Sciences, students develop critical and creative thinking capability as they learn how to build discipline-specific knowledge about history, geography, civics and citizenship, and economics and business. Students learn and practise critical and creative thinking as they pose questions, research, analyse, evaluate and communicate information, concepts and ideas.

Students identify, explore and determine questions to clarify social issues and events, and apply reasoning, interpretation and analytical skills to data and information. Critical thinking is essential to the historical inquiry process because it requires the ability to question sources, interpret the past from incomplete documentation, assess reliability when selecting information from resources, and develop an argument using evidence. Students develop critical thinking through geographical investigations that help them think logically when evaluating and using evidence, testing explanations, analysing arguments and making decisions, and when thinking deeply about questions that do not have straightforward answers. Students learn to critically evaluate texts about people, places, events, processes and issues, including consumer and financial, for shades of meaning, feeling and opinion, by identifying subjective language, bias, fact and opinion, and how language and images can be used to manipulate meaning. They develop civic knowledge by considering multiple perspectives and alternatives, and reflecting on actions, values and attitudes, thus informing their decision-making and the strategies they choose to negotiate and resolve differences.

Students develop creative thinking through the examination of social, political, legal, civic, environmental and economic issues, past and present, that that are contested, do not have obvious or straightforward answers, and that require problem-solving and innovative solutions. Creative thinking is important in developing creative questions, speculation and interpretations during inquiry. Students are encouraged to be curious and imaginative in investigations and fieldwork, and to explore relevant imaginative texts.

Critical and creative thinking is essential for imagining probable, possible and preferred futures in relation to social, environmental, economic and civic sustainability and issues. Students think creatively about appropriate courses of action and develop plans for personal and collective action. They develop enterprising behaviours and capabilities to imagine possibilities, consider alternatives, test hypotheses, and seek and create innovative solutions, and think creatively about the impact of issues on their own lives and the lives of others.

7-10 History

In the Australian Curriculum: History, critical thinking is essential to the historical inquiry process because it requires the ability to question sources, interpret the past from incomplete documentation, develop an argument using evidence, and assess reliability when selecting information from resources. Creative thinking is important in developing new interpretations to explain aspects of the past that are contested or not well understood.

7-10 Geography

In the Australian Curriculum: Geography, students develop critical and creative thinking as they investigate geographical information, concepts and ideas through inquiry-based learning. They develop and practise critical and creative thinking by using strategies that help them think logically when evaluating and using evidence, testing explanations, analysing arguments and making decisions, and when thinking deeply about questions that do not have straightforward answers. Students learn the value and process of developing creative questions and the importance of speculation. Students are encouraged to be curious and imaginative in investigations and fieldwork. The geography curriculum also stimulates students to think creatively about the ways that the places and spaces they use might be better designed, and about possible, probable and preferable futures.

7-10 Civics and Citizenship

In the Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship, students develop critical thinking skills in their investigation of Australia’s democratic system of government. They learn to apply decision-making processes and use strategies to negotiate and resolve differences. Students develop critical and creative thinking through the examination of political, legal and social issues that do not have obvious or straightforward answers and that require problem-solving and innovative solutions. Students consider multiple perspectives and alternatives, think creatively about appropriate courses of action and develop plans for action. The Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship stimulates students to think creatively about the impact of civic issues on their own lives and the lives of others, and to consider how these issues might be addressed.

7-10 Economics and Business

In the Australian Curriculum: Economics and Business, students develop their critical and creative thinking as they identify, explore and determine questions to clarify economics and business issues and/or events and apply reasoning, interpretation and analytical skills to data and/or information. They develop enterprising behaviours and capabilities to imagine possibilities, consider alternatives, test hypotheses, and seek and create innovative solutions to economics and business issues and/or events.

In the Australian Curriculum: The Arts, critical and creative thinking is integral to making and responding to artworks. In creating artworks, students draw on their curiosity, imagination and thinking skills to pose questions and explore ideas, spaces, materials and technologies. They consider possibilities and make choices that assist them to take risks and express their ideas, concepts, thoughts and feelings creatively. They consider and analyse the motivations, intentions and possible influencing factors and biases that may be evident in artworks they make to which they respond. They offer and receive effective feedback about past and present artworks and performances, and communicate and share their thinking, visualisation and innovations to a variety of audiences.

Technologies 

In the Australian Curriculum: Technologies, students develop capability in critical and creative thinking as they imagine, generate, develop and critically evaluate ideas. They develop reasoning and the capacity for abstraction through challenging problems that do not have straightforward solutions. Students analyse problems, refine concepts and reflect on the decision-making process by engaging in systems, design and computational thinking. They identify, explore and clarify technologies information and use that knowledge in a range of situations.

Students think critically and creatively about possible, probable and preferred futures. They consider how data, information, systems, materials, tools and equipment (past and present) impact on our lives, and how these elements might be better designed and managed. Experimenting, drawing, modelling, designing and working with digital tools, equipment and software helps students to build their visual and spatial thinking and to create solutions, products, services and environments.

Health and Physical Education 

In the Australian Curriculum: Health and Physical Education (HPE), students develop their ability to think logically, critically and creatively in response to a range of health and physical education issues, ideas and challenges. They learn how to critically evaluate evidence related to the learning area and the broad range of associated media and other messages to creatively generate and explore original alternatives and possibilities. In the HPE curriculum, students’ critical and creative thinking skills are developed through learning experiences that encourage them to pose questions and seek solutions to health issues by exploring and designing appropriate strategies to promote and advocate personal, social and community health and wellbeing. Students also use critical thinking to examine their own beliefs and challenge societal factors that negatively influence their own and others’ identity, health and wellbeing.

The Australian Curriculum: Health and Physical Education also provides learning opportunities that support creative thinking through dance making, games creation and technique refinement. Students develop understanding of the processes associated with creating movement and reflect on their body’s responses and their feelings about these movement experiences. Including a critical inquiry approach is one of the five propositions that have shaped the HPE curriculum.

Critical and creative thinking are essential to developing analytical and evaluative skills and understandings in the Australian Curriculum: English. Students use critical and creative thinking through listening to, reading, viewing, creating and presenting texts, interacting with others, and when they recreate and experiment with literature, and discuss the aesthetic or social value of texts. Through close analysis of text and through reading, viewing and listening, students critically analyse the opinions, points of view and unstated assumptions embedded in texts. In discussion, students develop critical thinking as they share personal responses and express preferences for specific texts, state and justify their points of view and respond to the views of others.

In creating their own written, visual and multimodal texts, students also explore the influence or impact of subjective language, feeling and opinion on the interpretation of text. Students also use and develop their creative thinking capability when they consider the innovations made by authors, imagine possibilities, plan, explore and create ideas for imaginative texts based on real or imagined events. Students explore the creative possibilities of the English language to represent novel ideas.

Learning in the Australian Curriculum: Languages enables students to interact with people and ideas from diverse backgrounds and perspectives, which enhances critical thinking and reflection, and encourages creative, divergent and imaginative thinking. By learning to notice, connect, compare and analyse aspects of the target language, students develop critical, analytical and problem-solving skills.

Mathematics

In the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics, students develop critical and creative thinking as they learn to generate and evaluate knowledge, ideas and possibilities, and use them when seeking solutions. Engaging students in reasoning and thinking about solutions to problems and the strategies needed to find these solutions are core parts of the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics.

Students are encouraged to be critical thinkers when justifying their choice of a calculation strategy or identifying relevant questions during a statistical investigation. They are encouraged to look for alternative ways to approach mathematical problems; for example, identifying when a problem is similar to a previous one, drawing diagrams or simplifying a problem to control some variables.

In the Australian Curriculum: Science, students develop capability in critical and creative thinking as they learn to generate and evaluate knowledge, ideas and possibilities, and use them when seeking new pathways or solutions. In the science learning area, critical and creative thinking are embedded in the skills of posing questions, making predictions, speculating, solving problems through investigation, making evidence-based decisions, and analysing and evaluating evidence. Students develop understandings of concepts through active inquiry that involves planning and selecting appropriate information, evaluating sources of information to formulate conclusions and to critically reflect on their own and the collective process.

Creative thinking enables the development of ideas that are new to the individual, and this is intrinsic to the development of scientific understanding. Scientific inquiry promotes critical and creative thinking by encouraging flexibility and open-mindedness as students speculate about their observations of the world and the ability to use and design new processes to achieve this. Students’ conceptual understanding becomes more sophisticated as they actively acquire an increasingly scientific view of their world and the ability to examine it from new perspectives.

Work Studies

In the Australian Curriculum: Work Studies, Years 9–10, students develop an ability to think logically, critically and creatively in relation to concepts of work and workplaces contexts. These capabilities are developed through an emphasis on critical thinking processes that encourage students to question assumptions and empower them to create their own understanding of work and personal and workplace learning.

Students’ creative thinking skills are developed and practised through learning opportunities that encourage innovative, entrepreneurial and project-based activities, supporting creative responses to workplace, professional and industrial problems. Students also learn to respond to strategic and problem-based challenges using creative thinking. For example, a student could evaluate possible job scenarios based on local labour market data and personal capabilities.

PDF documents

Critical, Lateral, & Creative Thinking

Critical thinking & problem-solving, introduction.

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrected. In other words, it is a thought process that involves the evaluation, assessment, and reinterpretation of your own or others’ ideas and thought processes. Critical thinking requires effort and dedication, but pays dividends for the time invested.

Critical thinking comes into play in a wide variety of circumstances. As a citizen of a democracy, it is important to think critically and do background research each time an election is coming up or when there is a news story about which you want to be more informed. As a student, you want to think critically about near term options, such as what courses to take, and longer term decisions, such as how to plan your degree and whether the degree you’re planning should be directed toward current employment, future employment, or your own academic interest that may or may not be related to a current or potential career.

Critical thinking involves analysis, or breaking something (a concept, an argument, a piece of information) down into its parts in order to understand and evaluate it, as a prelude to accepting or rejecting it.  You’re expected to think critically when you’re asked to analyze an article for a college assignment, for example, and offer your own opinion on its validity.  You also think critically when you analyze real-life situations such as moving your residence, changing jobs, or buying a car.

View the following videos on critical thinking, which further define the concept and offer some steps to apply in order to think critically and solve problems.

What are the key concepts of this video?

What examples do you have of the following?

• creating your own solution to an unexpected problem
• using pros and cons to make a decision
• making assumptions about a person
• unthinkingly applying a bias

The first two concepts often have positive outcomes, while the last two concepts may result in negative outcomes. Most likely you will have done all four of these things subconsciously in the workplace or other situations.

This video offers one (of many) ways to consider something critically:

• formulate your question
• gather your information
• apply the information (consider biases, assumptions)
• consider the implications
• explore other points of view

Both videos emphasize the need to consider a question, problem, action, or issue consciously and planfully, breaking it into its parts and considering the parts, before putting them back together with a reasoned solution or multiple potential, reasoned solutions.

Just for fun, here’s a short video on assumptions, a concept related to critical thinking.

initial learning activity

First, read and view information on the Lateral & Creative Thinking page of this text.

Then, write a brief essay (4-5 pages) applying critical, lateral, and creative thinking skills to the solution of a real problem. Use the following format:

• Identify a problem at work or with a community group, or any group or situation in which you are involved (family, friends, daily commuters on the same bus, etc.).  In a few paragraphs, explain the problem.
• In another few paragraphs, analyze the problem.  What are the component parts of the problem? Are there inherent assumptions and/or biases involved?
• In another few paragraphs, offer some possible solutions that you can identify immediately and logically.  Identify and discuss the pros and cons of each immediate and logical solution.
• Then, try to think differently about the problem by applying lateral and creative approaches. You may want to identify the positives, negatives, and interesting aspects of the problem.  You may want to consider solutions that could only happen “in your wildest dreams.”  Brainstorm, and/or create a persona and ask yourself “how would X approach this problem?” Apply these and techniques suggested by the article and videos to posit at least one or more different solutions to the problem. Explain these different solutions in another few paragraphs, and posit what would need to be in place in order to enact this more creative solution.
• Conclude by reflecting on this exercise in a final few paragraphs.  What did you learn about your own thought processes by completing this activity?  How might you apply what you learned to your academic studies?

Submit: essay applying thinking skills

in-depth learning activity

Then, read the publication, Robot-Ready: Human + Skills for the Future of Work . (You may have read excerpts from this in other sections of this text.)

The authors of Robot-Ready assert a number of things, including that:

• Human skills will be more valued in the workplace of the future.
• Human skills are often best taught through liberal arts courses in college.
• Educators and employers do not yet have a common language for discussing the same skill sets.
• Education needs to become more problem-based in order to help develop the “both/and” that will be required in the workplace of the future (both technical knowledge and human skills).

Consider these assertions critically.  Do you accept the evidence provided?  What assumptions, if any, are inherent in the information? What biases, if any, are inherent in the information?  Is there enough data to back up the assertion, and is that data valid?

Then choose one assertion that you feel is sound, based on your analysis.  Apply critical (and lateral and creative) thinking processes to problem-solve and project a way of enacting the concept asserted.  For example:

• How might you propose teaching one of the human skills in the workplace?
• How can a liberal arts college course be more obvious in its focus on human skills so that students get a sense of the real-world application of learning gained from that course?
• How might you propose that employers and educators collaborate?
• Consider a college course you already completed, one in which you learned what the authors of Robot-Ready would consider “technical knowledge.”  How might you revise a learning activity in the course to make it more problem-based?
• your analysis
• your problem-solving proposal for enacting one of the concepts asserted

Related college Learning Goals

Active Learning: Assess and build upon previous learning and experiences to pursue new learning, independently and in collaboration with others.

Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: Evaluate, analyze, synthesize and critique key concepts and experiences, and apply diverse perspectives to find creative solutions to problems concerning human behavior, society and the natural world.

For more information, see the College Learning Goals Policy .

• Critical Thinking & Problem-Solving. Authored by : Susan Oaks; adapted from team work by Nan Travers (lead), Cathy Davison, Elaine Handley, Linda Jones, Jessica Kindred, Gohar Marikyan, Lynette Nickleberry, Susan Oaks, Eileen O'Connor. Project : Educational Planning. License : CC BY-NC: Attribution-NonCommercial
• first two paragraphs under the heading Critical Thinking. Authored by : Tom Mackey and Trudi Jacobson. Provided by : Metaliteracy.com. Located at : https://sites.google.com/view/metaliteracy/empowered-learner/critical-thinker/reevaluate . Project : Metaliteracy Badges. License : CC BY-NC: Attribution-NonCommercial
• Critical Thinking video. Located at : https://youtu.be/6OLPL5p0fMg . License : Other . License Terms : YouTube video
• 5 Tips to Improve Your Critical Thinking. Authored by : Samantha Agoos. Located at : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dItUGF8GdTw&t=5s . License : Other . License Terms : Youtube video
• The Danger of Assumptions. Authored by : Elaine Powell. Located at : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjv_5X9FpVE&t=3s . License : Other . License Terms : YouTube video
• image of male face with question marks. Authored by : geralt. Provided by : Pixabay. Located at : https://pixabay.com/en/man-boy-face-view-direction-479670/ . License : CC0: No Rights Reserved

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Back to Entry
• Entry Contents
• Entry Bibliography
• Academic Tools
• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

Supplement to Critical Thinking

This supplement elaborates on the history of the articulation, promotion and adoption of critical thinking as an educational goal.

John Dewey (1910: 74, 82) introduced the term ‘critical thinking’ as the name of an educational goal, which he identified with a scientific attitude of mind. More commonly, he called the goal ‘reflective thought’, ‘reflective thinking’, ‘reflection’, or just ‘thought’ or ‘thinking’. He describes his book as written for two purposes. The first was to help people to appreciate the kinship of children’s native curiosity, fertile imagination and love of experimental inquiry to the scientific attitude. The second was to help people to consider how recognizing this kinship in educational practice “would make for individual happiness and the reduction of social waste” (iii). He notes that the ideas in the book obtained concreteness in the Laboratory School in Chicago.

Dewey’s ideas were put into practice by some of the schools that participated in the Eight-Year Study in the 1930s sponsored by the Progressive Education Association in the United States. For this study, 300 colleges agreed to consider for admission graduates of 30 selected secondary schools or school systems from around the country who experimented with the content and methods of teaching, even if the graduates had not completed the then-prescribed secondary school curriculum. One purpose of the study was to discover through exploration and experimentation how secondary schools in the United States could serve youth more effectively (Aikin 1942). Each experimental school was free to change the curriculum as it saw fit, but the schools agreed that teaching methods and the life of the school should conform to the idea (previously advocated by Dewey) that people develop through doing things that are meaningful to them, and that the main purpose of the secondary school was to lead young people to understand, appreciate and live the democratic way of life characteristic of the United States (Aikin 1942: 17–18). In particular, school officials believed that young people in a democracy should develop the habit of reflective thinking and skill in solving problems (Aikin 1942: 81). Students’ work in the classroom thus consisted more often of a problem to be solved than a lesson to be learned. Especially in mathematics and science, the schools made a point of giving students experience in clear, logical thinking as they solved problems. The report of one experimental school, the University School of Ohio State University, articulated this goal of improving students’ thinking:

Critical or reflective thinking originates with the sensing of a problem. It is a quality of thought operating in an effort to solve the problem and to reach a tentative conclusion which is supported by all available data. It is really a process of problem solving requiring the use of creative insight, intellectual honesty, and sound judgment. It is the basis of the method of scientific inquiry. The success of democracy depends to a large extent on the disposition and ability of citizens to think critically and reflectively about the problems which must of necessity confront them, and to improve the quality of their thinking is one of the major goals of education. (Commission on the Relation of School and College of the Progressive Education Association 1943: 745–746)

The Eight-Year Study had an evaluation staff, which developed, in consultation with the schools, tests to measure aspects of student progress that fell outside the focus of the traditional curriculum. The evaluation staff classified many of the schools’ stated objectives under the generic heading “clear thinking” or “critical thinking” (Smith, Tyler, & Evaluation Staff 1942: 35–36). To develop tests of achievement of this broad goal, they distinguished five overlapping aspects of it: ability to interpret data, abilities associated with an understanding of the nature of proof, and the abilities to apply principles of science, of social studies and of logical reasoning. The Eight-Year Study also had a college staff, directed by a committee of college administrators, whose task was to determine how well the experimental schools had prepared their graduates for college. The college staff compared the performance of 1,475 college students from the experimental schools with an equal number of graduates from conventional schools, matched in pairs by sex, age, race, scholastic aptitude scores, home and community background, interests, and probable future. They concluded that, on 18 measures of student success, the graduates of the experimental schools did a somewhat better job than the comparison group. The graduates from the six most traditional of the experimental schools showed no large or consistent differences. The graduates from the six most experimental schools, on the other hand, had much greater differences in their favour. The graduates of the two most experimental schools, the college staff reported:

… surpassed their comparison groups by wide margins in academic achievement, intellectual curiosity, scientific approach to problems, and interest in contemporary affairs. The differences in their favor were even greater in general resourcefulness, in enjoyment of reading, [in] participation in the arts, in winning non-academic honors, and in all aspects of college life except possibly participation in sports and social activities. (Aikin 1942: 114)

One of these schools was a private school with students from privileged families and the other the experimental section of a public school with students from non-privileged families. The college staff reported that the graduates of the two schools were indistinguishable from each other in terms of college success.

In 1933 Dewey issued an extensively rewritten edition of his How We Think (Dewey 1910), with the sub-title “A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process”. Although the restatement retains the basic structure and content of the original book, Dewey made a number of changes. He rewrote and simplified his logical analysis of the process of reflection, made his ideas clearer and more definite, replaced the terms ‘induction’ and ‘deduction’ by the phrases ‘control of data and evidence’ and ‘control of reasoning and concepts’, added more illustrations, rearranged chapters, and revised the parts on teaching to reflect changes in schools since 1910. In particular, he objected to one-sided practices of some “experimental” and “progressive” schools that allowed children freedom but gave them no guidance, citing as objectionable practices novelty and variety for their own sake, experiences and activities with real materials but of no educational significance, treating random and disconnected activity as if it were an experiment, failure to summarize net accomplishment at the end of an inquiry, non-educative projects, and treatment of the teacher as a negligible factor rather than as “the intellectual leader of a social group” (Dewey 1933: 273). Without explaining his reasons, Dewey eliminated the previous edition’s uses of the words ‘critical’ and ‘uncritical’, thus settling firmly on ‘reflection’ or ‘reflective thinking’ as the preferred term for his subject-matter. In the revised edition, the word ‘critical’ occurs only once, where Dewey writes that “a person may not be sufficiently critical about the ideas that occur to him” (1933: 16, italics in original); being critical is thus a component of reflection, not the whole of it. In contrast, the Eight-Year Study by the Progressive Education Association treated ‘critical thinking’ and ‘reflective thinking’ as synonyms.

In the same period, Dewey collaborated on a history of the Laboratory School in Chicago with two former teachers from the school (Mayhew & Edwards 1936). The history describes the school’s curriculum and organization, activities aimed at developing skills, parents’ involvement, and the habits of mind that the children acquired. A concluding chapter evaluates the school’s achievements, counting as a success its staging of the curriculum to correspond to the natural development of the growing child. In two appendices, the authors describe the evolution of Dewey’s principles of education and Dewey himself describes the theory of the Chicago experiment (Dewey 1936).

Glaser (1941) reports in his doctoral dissertation the method and results of an experiment in the development of critical thinking conducted in the fall of 1938. He defines critical thinking as Dewey defined reflective thinking:

Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports it and the further conclusions to which it tends. (Glaser 1941: 6; cf. Dewey 1910: 6; Dewey 1933: 9)

In the experiment, eight lesson units directed at improving critical thinking abilities were taught to four grade 12 high school classes, with pre-test and post-test of the students using the Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Test and the Watson-Glaser Tests of Critical Thinking (developed in collaboration with Glaser’s dissertation sponsor, Goodwin Watson). The average gain in scores on these tests was greater to a statistically significant degree among the students who received the lessons in critical thinking than among the students in a control group of four grade 12 high school classes taking the usual curriculum in English. Glaser concludes:

The aspect of critical thinking which appears most susceptible to general improvement is the attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one’s experience. An attitude of wanting evidence for beliefs is more subject to general transfer. Development of skill in applying the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning, however, appears to be specifically related to, and in fact limited by, the acquisition of pertinent knowledge and facts concerning the problem or subject matter toward which the thinking is to be directed. (Glaser 1941: 175)

Retest scores and observable behaviour indicated that students in the intervention group retained their growth in ability to think critically for at least six months after the special instruction.

In 1948 a group of U.S. college examiners decided to develop taxonomies of educational objectives with a common vocabulary that they could use for communicating with each other about test items. The first of these taxonomies, for the cognitive domain, appeared in 1956 (Bloom et al. 1956), and included critical thinking objectives. It has become known as Bloom’s taxonomy. A second taxonomy, for the affective domain (Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia 1964), and a third taxonomy, for the psychomotor domain (Simpson 1966–67), appeared later. Each of the taxonomies is hierarchical, with achievement of a higher educational objective alleged to require achievement of corresponding lower educational objectives.

Bloom’s taxonomy has six major categories. From lowest to highest, they are knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Within each category, there are sub-categories, also arranged hierarchically from the educationally prior to the educationally posterior. The lowest category, though called ‘knowledge’, is confined to objectives of remembering information and being able to recall or recognize it, without much transformation beyond organizing it (Bloom et al. 1956: 28–29). The five higher categories are collectively termed “intellectual abilities and skills” (Bloom et al. 1956: 204). The term is simply another name for critical thinking abilities and skills:

Although information or knowledge is recognized as an important outcome of education, very few teachers would be satisfied to regard this as the primary or the sole outcome of instruction. What is needed is some evidence that the students can do something with their knowledge, that is, that they can apply the information to new situations and problems. It is also expected that students will acquire generalized techniques for dealing with new problems and new materials. Thus, it is expected that when the student encounters a new problem or situation, he will select an appropriate technique for attacking it and will bring to bear the necessary information, both facts and principles. This has been labeled “critical thinking” by some, “reflective thinking” by Dewey and others, and “problem solving” by still others. In the taxonomy, we have used the term “intellectual abilities and skills”. (Bloom et al. 1956: 38)

Comprehension and application objectives, as their names imply, involve understanding and applying information. Critical thinking abilities and skills show up in the three highest categories of analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The condensed version of Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom et al. 1956: 201–207) gives the following examples of objectives at these levels:

• analysis objectives : ability to recognize unstated assumptions, ability to check the consistency of hypotheses with given information and assumptions, ability to recognize the general techniques used in advertising, propaganda and other persuasive materials
• synthesis objectives : organizing ideas and statements in writing, ability to propose ways of testing a hypothesis, ability to formulate and modify hypotheses
• evaluation objectives : ability to indicate logical fallacies, comparison of major theories about particular cultures

The analysis, synthesis and evaluation objectives in Bloom’s taxonomy collectively came to be called the “higher-order thinking skills” (Tankersley 2005: chap. 5). Although the analysis-synthesis-evaluation sequence mimics phases in Dewey’s (1933) logical analysis of the reflective thinking process, it has not generally been adopted as a model of a critical thinking process. While commending the inspirational value of its ratio of five categories of thinking objectives to one category of recall objectives, Ennis (1981b) points out that the categories lack criteria applicable across topics and domains. For example, analysis in chemistry is so different from analysis in literature that there is not much point in teaching analysis as a general type of thinking. Further, the postulated hierarchy seems questionable at the higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. For example, ability to indicate logical fallacies hardly seems more complex than the ability to organize statements and ideas in writing.

A revised version of Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson et al. 2001) distinguishes the intended cognitive process in an educational objective (such as being able to recall, to compare or to check) from the objective’s informational content (“knowledge”), which may be factual, conceptual, procedural, or metacognitive. The result is a so-called “Taxonomy Table” with four rows for the kinds of informational content and six columns for the six main types of cognitive process. The authors name the types of cognitive process by verbs, to indicate their status as mental activities. They change the name of the ‘comprehension’ category to ‘understand’ and of the ‘synthesis’ category to ’create’, and switch the order of synthesis and evaluation. The result is a list of six main types of cognitive process aimed at by teachers: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create. The authors retain the idea of a hierarchy of increasing complexity, but acknowledge some overlap, for example between understanding and applying. And they retain the idea that critical thinking and problem solving cut across the more complex cognitive processes. The terms ‘critical thinking’ and ‘problem solving’, they write:

are widely used and tend to become touchstones of curriculum emphasis. Both generally include a variety of activities that might be classified in disparate cells of the Taxonomy Table. That is, in any given instance, objectives that involve problem solving and critical thinking most likely call for cognitive processes in several categories on the process dimension. For example, to think critically about an issue probably involves some Conceptual knowledge to Analyze the issue. Then, one can Evaluate different perspectives in terms of the criteria and, perhaps, Create a novel, yet defensible perspective on this issue. (Anderson et al. 2001: 269–270; italics in original)

In the revised taxonomy, only a few sub-categories, such as inferring, have enough commonality to be treated as a distinct critical thinking ability that could be taught and assessed as a general ability.

A landmark contribution to philosophical scholarship on the concept of critical thinking was a 1962 article in the Harvard Educational Review by Robert H. Ennis, with the title “A concept of critical thinking: A proposed basis for research in the teaching and evaluation of critical thinking ability” (Ennis 1962). Ennis took as his starting-point a conception of critical thinking put forward by B. Othanel Smith:

We shall consider thinking in terms of the operations involved in the examination of statements which we, or others, may believe. A speaker declares, for example, that “Freedom means that the decisions in America’s productive effort are made not in the minds of a bureaucracy but in the free market”. Now if we set about to find out what this statement means and to determine whether to accept or reject it, we would be engaged in thinking which, for lack of a better term, we shall call critical thinking. If one wishes to say that this is only a form of problem-solving in which the purpose is to decide whether or not what is said is dependable, we shall not object. But for our purposes we choose to call it critical thinking. (Smith 1953: 130)

Adding a normative component to this conception, Ennis defined critical thinking as “the correct assessing of statements” (Ennis 1962: 83). On the basis of this definition, he distinguished 12 “aspects” of critical thinking corresponding to types or aspects of statements, such as judging whether an observation statement is reliable and grasping the meaning of a statement. He noted that he did not include judging value statements. Cutting across the 12 aspects, he distinguished three dimensions of critical thinking: logical (judging relationships between meanings of words and statements), criterial (knowledge of the criteria for judging statements), and pragmatic (the impression of the background purpose). For each aspect, Ennis described the applicable dimensions, including criteria. He proposed the resulting construct as a basis for developing specifications for critical thinking tests and for research on instructional methods and levels.

In the 1970s and 1980s there was an upsurge of attention to the development of thinking skills. The annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Educational Reform has attracted since its start in 1980 tens of thousands of educators from all levels. In 1983 the College Entrance Examination Board proclaimed reasoning as one of six basic academic competencies needed by college students (College Board 1983). Departments of education in the United States and around the world began to include thinking objectives in their curriculum guidelines for school subjects. For example, Ontario’s social sciences and humanities curriculum guideline for secondary schools requires “the use of critical and creative thinking skills and/or processes” as a goal of instruction and assessment in each subject and course (Ontario Ministry of Education 2013: 30). The document describes critical thinking as follows:

Critical thinking is the process of thinking about ideas or situations in order to understand them fully, identify their implications, make a judgement, and/or guide decision making. Critical thinking includes skills such as questioning, predicting, analysing, synthesizing, examining opinions, identifying values and issues, detecting bias, and distinguishing between alternatives. Students who are taught these skills become critical thinkers who can move beyond superficial conclusions to a deeper understanding of the issues they are examining. They are able to engage in an inquiry process in which they explore complex and multifaceted issues, and questions for which there may be no clear-cut answers (Ontario Ministry of Education 2013: 46).

Sweden makes schools responsible for ensuring that each pupil who completes compulsory school “can make use of critical thinking and independently formulate standpoints based on knowledge and ethical considerations” (Skolverket 2018: 12). Subject syllabi incorporate this requirement, and items testing critical thinking skills appear on national tests that are a required step toward university admission. For example, the core content of biology, physics and chemistry in years 7-9 includes critical examination of sources of information and arguments encountered by pupils in different sources and social discussions related to these sciences, in both digital and other media. (Skolverket 2018: 170, 181, 192). Correspondingly, in year 9 the national tests require using knowledge of biology, physics or chemistry “to investigate information, communicate and come to a decision on issues concerning health, energy, technology, the environment, use of natural resources and ecological sustainability” (see the message from the School Board ). Other jurisdictions similarly embed critical thinking objectives in curriculum guidelines.

At the college level, a new wave of introductory logic textbooks, pioneered by Kahane (1971), applied the tools of logic to contemporary social and political issues. Popular contemporary textbooks of this sort include those by Bailin and Battersby (2016b), Boardman, Cavender and Kahane (2018), Browne and Keeley (2018), Groarke and Tindale (2012), and Moore and Parker (2020). In their wake, colleges and universities in North America transformed their introductory logic course into a general education service course with a title like ‘critical thinking’ or ‘reasoning’. In 1980, the trustees of California’s state university and colleges approved as a general education requirement a course in critical thinking, described as follows:

Instruction in critical thinking is to be designed to achieve an understanding of the relationship of language to logic, which should lead to the ability to analyze, criticize, and advocate ideas, to reason inductively and deductively, and to reach factual or judgmental conclusions based on sound inferences drawn from unambiguous statements of knowledge or belief. The minimal competence to be expected at the successful conclusion of instruction in critical thinking should be the ability to distinguish fact from judgment, belief from knowledge, and skills in elementary inductive and deductive processes, including an understanding of the formal and informal fallacies of language and thought. (Dumke 1980)

Since December 1983, the Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking has sponsored sessions at the three annual divisional meetings of the American Philosophical Association. In December 1987, the Committee on Pre-College Philosophy of the American Philosophical Association invited Peter Facione to make a systematic inquiry into the current state of critical thinking and critical thinking assessment. Facione assembled a group of 46 other academic philosophers and psychologists to participate in a multi-round Delphi process, whose product was entitled Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction (Facione 1990a). The statement listed abilities and dispositions that should be the goals of a lower-level undergraduate course in critical thinking. Researchers in nine European countries determined which of these skills and dispositions employers expect of university graduates (Dominguez 2018 a), compared those expectations to critical thinking educational practices in post-secondary educational institutions (Dominguez 2018b), developed a course on critical thinking education for university teachers (Dominguez 2018c) and proposed in response to identified gaps between expectations and practices an “educational protocol” that post-secondary educational institutions in Europe could use to develop critical thinking (Elen et al. 2019).

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

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

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

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Teacher Education - New Perspectives

Development of Creative Thinking Skills in the Teaching-Learning Process

Submitted: 08 October 2020 Reviewed: 19 April 2021 Published: 12 May 2021

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.97780

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Teacher Education - New Perspectives

Edited by Ulas Kayapinar

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

1,481 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

Creativity is one of the most appreciated learning skills current the XXI century. The development of creativity has been considered essential in order to achieve an effective and a high-level learning. As different approaches to its study, creativity has been defined as a result, as a process, as a construct derived from the influence of the context and of the experience and as a personality feature of human nature. The aim of this contribution is to explain the study of creativity from the mentioned approaches to achieve a comprehension of such construct. In addition, the focus has been centred on highlight the development of creativity from an educational approach, starting from the description, implication of the use and application of creative strategies in the teaching and learning processes. Finally, a brief description is made of the most important or relevant strategies found in the literature, with emphasis on the incorporation of these strategies in the problem-solving process.

• divergent thinking
• thinking skills
• teaching-learning process
• creative strategies

Author Information

Natalia larraz-rábanos *.

• Education Faculty, Zaragoza University, Zaragoza, Spain

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

Creativity is one of the most appreciated learning skills current the XXI century [ 1 ]. Creativity is conceived as a higher-order thinking skill based on complex and postformal thought concerned with the creation of new and valuable ideas [ 2 , 3 ]. Higher-order thinking skills are those involved in proficient and strategic thought, and these skills comprise critical, creative and metacognitive thinking, also known as deep learning [ 4 ]. In addition, the development of creativity is today considered essential in order to achieve an effective and a high-level learning.

Despite the observed need for the development of creativity in the curriculum, there is a general tendency to reproduce teaching and learning models and a constraint on teacher’s search for procedures to teach creativity, which involves little creativity development in students, with a predominance of reproductive learning [ 5 ].

Creativity is inherent in human development and his personality. It begins to be developed from the first years of school and continues into higher education and increases through the number of experiences that the individual has, and to the extent that the activity of teachers could promote it [ 5 , 6 ].

Therefore, creativity has been an essential competence for the curriculum design and development. In order to answer this deal, the concept and the psychological construct of creativity has been defined and later, its psychological process involved has been treated to implement teaching and learning strategies oriented to such ends.

2. Concept and relevant aspects of the construct of creativity

There is a consensus among scholars that creativity is not just another skill, but rather a complex process of human subjectivity that is based on a set of psychological resources that are specifically configured and regulate human behavior [ 7 ]. Contemporary researchers have expanded the concept of creativity by recognizing that creative action is a dynamic and inconclusive process and is even co-constitute with the broader social context [ 8 ].

Considering the different approaches to their study assumed by Rodhes [ 9 ], creativity has been defined as a result, as a process, as a construct derived from the influence of the context and as a personality feature of human nature.

There is not a consensus about the definition of creativity, but it has been generally accepted as the ability to do creative products. A creative product is defined as something new, original and appropriate or valued in a particular context [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ].

Most authors advocate understanding creativity not only from the results or the products generated, but also from the process from which it is reached. In this sense, Gardner's definition can be assumed for this purpose. For Gardner, a creative person is a person who solves problems regularly, develops new products and defines issues in a field that initially is novel but ultimately becomes accepted in a particular cultural context [ 12 ]. This definition includes the four approaches to the study of creativity: personality (creative person), the process (problem solving), the context (cultural context) and finally, the product (new products).

3. Approaches to the study of creativity

3.1 creativity as a product.

Regarding the definition of creativity as a result of human activity, many authors consider creativity as the ability to do creative products, hence a creative person is one that produces creative products regularly.

A creative product is defined as something new, original and appropriate or valued in a particular context [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. These characteristics have also been summarized in two fundamental aspects of creative products, which are novelty and quality, which also must involve originality and adequacy respectively [ 14 ].

What is something new?

Is something different to the previously existing things. There is nothing totally new because something new comes from something that previously exists. Therefore, novelty will depend on the frame of reference to which it is compared. For this reason, there are degrees of novelty. It has been considered these two types of creativity besides that [ 15 , 16 , 17 ]:

P-Creativity: is new with respect to oneself (personal creativity). It is also called Little- c creativity.

H-Creativity: is new with respect to History (social creativity). It is also called Big- C creativity

Mini-c: individual/personal and everyday creativity is used to define a type of creativity involved in performances, actions or new events of daily life with personal meaning [ 19 ]. This type of category also refers to a mental or emotional internal state of creativity [ 20 ] and helps to differentiate the subjective to the objective creativity and the Mini-c from the Little-c. Hence, it is also used to distinguish between subjective and objective forms of personal creativity.

Little-c: individual creativity that is grown as a hobby. It is associated with the innovative contributions clearly useful but not exceptional.

Pro-C: not eminent social creativity is given in a creative profession. This kind of creativity comes from people who are creative at their work and helps to distinguish between the area of the Big-C creativity and the area of the Little-c creativity, or between the social and personal creativity.

Big-C: eminent creativity or exceptional creativity. Is used to indicate a type of eminent and exceptional creativity that stands out in a field or domain of knowledge and is socially recognized.

Grades of creativity.

This model proposes that a person could be gradually creative, in a personal level (Little –c and Mini-c) fostering creativity in everyday life. Thus, increase the possibilities to be creative on a social level (Pro-C and Big-C) to become exceptionally creative.

What is something original?

Originality implies that a product is different from other, highly unusual or statistically rare. Furthermore, for most authors, a product may be original to varying degrees (personal, social and universal).

What is appropriate or valued in a particular context?

The suitability of a product means that it is valued and/or appropriate in a particular context. To this end, a proper creative product must meet certain criteria or quality standards, providing true value or usefulness to society, culture or context in which it occurs.

As it was indicated in this section, a creative product can be creative to varying degrees (personal-social) and must meet certain levels of innovation and quality. Creative thinking skills development implies that novelty has to involve a certain level of originality, and quality must involve a certain level of adequacy in a particular social context [ 14 ].

3.2 Creativity as a process

Many authors have explained creativity as a process clearly differentiated from others cognitive process. Guilford [ 21 ] was one of the first authors to propose creative thinking as a cognitive process involved in the structure of intelligence. Today, his theoretical model remains a referent for explaining and predicting a person's creative potential and creative performance. His model of the Structure of Intellect (SOI) defined creativity as a result of a cognitive operation called divergent production, which is related to creative solutions of problems characterised by moving in many directions, in contrast to convergent thinking, characterised by moving in one direction to search for a correct answer (see Figure 2 ).

Guilford’s Model Structure of Intellect (SOI).

Fluency: the production of a large number of ideas. There are three types of fluency: (1) Ideational fluency: quantitative production of ideas in a given class, (2) Associational fluency: building relationships, (3) Fluency of expression: easy to build sentences.

Flexibility: the ability to produce changes in thinking- a change of some kind, of meaning,-a change of meaning, interpretation or use of something, a change in the way of understanding a task or strategy intended to do it, or a change in the direction of thought, which may involve a new interpretation of the problem.

Originality: the production of unusual and intelligent responses collected from premises distant or remote. In order to evaluate this component, the principle of statistical infrequency of an idea within the set of members of a given population has been proposed.

Elaboration: the ability to produce the highest number of steps or details to execute a plan. It is related to the ability to make implications when planning skills are being applied.

Other authors are relevant in addressing and highlighting creativity as a specific thinking process, such as Torrance, Maslow and De Bono, among others. Torrance [ 24 ] describes creativity as the hypothesis development and validation process. Defines creativity as sensitivity to problems, deficiencies and gaps in information, the absence of certain elements, etc., which leads to formulate conjectures and hypothesis about their solution, evaluate, test and modify these assumptions to communicate the findings. Maslow [ 25 ] distinguished between two types of creative thinking and describes two types of creativity, primary and secondary. The creative process is largely composed of the primary creativity, which is related to creative inspiration, and secondary creativity prepares and develops primary creativity and expresses the "finished product". Finally, De Bono [ 26 ] defined creativity as lateral thinking. Lateral thinking involves the generation of ideas, is not sequential, unpredictable and not limited by convention. Lateral thinking is the opposite of vertical thinking defined as sequential, linear, predictable and conventional. Both processes are necessary and complementary.

Hence, there are empirical evidences about two kinds of thinking, creative and critical thinking, that shows a cerebral correlate with both sides of our brain. It has been observed that both styles of thinking imply two different mental operations and processes such as: visual-verbal, parallel- vertical, unconscious-conscious, divergent-convergent, etc. Creativity is located in the right brain hemisphere and in the frontal lobe, as well as having a neurological basis of a stronger hemispheric connection, as a result of an optimal interaction between the two hemispheres. In addition, a high creative thinking ability consisting of frontal and parietal regions within default, salience, and executive brain system [ 27 , 28 ].

A constant throughout the history of creativity has been to recognise the creative process as the semblance of problem solving [ 29 ]. This will be discussed in the last section of this chapter.

3.3 Creativity as an attribute of personality

High intrinsic motivation to solve problems, rather intrinsic than extrinsic.

Security and confidence, not worry about the opinion others have of them.

Qualities for social success; they are balanced, spontaneous and confident in their social relations, while they are not particularly sociable temperament and cooperative.

Not deliberately conformist though. They are truly independent.

Prefer the aesthetic and theoretical values. They are searching for truth and beauty.

Preference for intuitive perception resulting from flexibility, spontaneity and openness of mind to experience.

Inclination towards the complex and asymmetrical.

Two thirds of the study participants were introverts but there is no evidence that introverts are more creative than extroverts.

According to mental health, creative individuals scored above average in the general population in certain psychological traits, but they had enough strength and mental control that allowed them to express themselves in a productive and in a creative way.

The flow of ideas and flexibility of thought.

Not conventional thinking. Thoughts and associated ideas in unusual ways and use of unconventional strategies to solve problems.

Independence and autonomy. High degree of autonomy, independence and confidence. They do not need to be seen or relied on.

Self-discipline, self-control and perseverance. They are responsible for their own actions and have a high degree of strength and persistence to successfully finish a started project.

High achievement motivation. They usually do not feel satisfied with their ideas or projects because they think they can improve them.

Tolerance for ambiguity. They are more capable than most people to carry out the work in the absence of specific requirements.

Preference for complex tasks and information.

Strong sense of humor.

A recent meta-study highlights these same personal characteristics, emphasising awareness, flexibility of thought, abundance of ideas and their ease and the originality of ideas as the fundamental pillars of creative personality and the core of the main studies analysed [ 34 ]. In addition, creative persons must also find four essential factors for creativity potential: affect, cognition, willingness and empathy [ 29 ].

3.4 The context in creativity

The importance of the cultural value or the context in creativity has been highlighted by different authors. The influence of the social environment for creativity development, is essential; this is what makes it possible to provide innovative solutions to the problems i.e., what surrounds the student and contributes to the development of his personality [ 5 ].

In this sense, Glăveanu [ 35 ] has presented an overview of how expanded conceptions of creativity including the context dimension can help move the field from a He paradigm (limited to a few select creators) to an I paradigm (focuses on individuals, but acknowledges that all people are capable of being creative) and toward a We paradigm (sociocultural an expansive focus). The We-paradigm starts from the idea that creativity takes place within, is constituted and influenced by the social context [ 8 ]. These more expansive views about creativity are illustrated in a recent publication of a group of active creativity scholars that outlines the key assumptions of a socio-cultural conception of creativity [ 36 ].

Csikszentmihalyi [ 17 ] defined creativity as any act, idea or product that changes an existing domain or a transformation of an existing domain into a new one, and argues that creativity is to bring something truly new that is valued enough to be added to the culture. Gardiner emphasises interdisciplinarity and collaboration for greater creativity and epistemic control of knowledge [ 37 ].

Domain-relevant skills. It depends on the cognitive, perceptual and motor innate skills and formal and informal education of the person in a particular domain. It includes the knowledge in a domain, the technical skills and the special skills in that domain.

Creativity-related processes. It depends on the experience in the generation of new ideas and personality. It includes the cognitive style, the use of heuristics to generate new ideas, and the style of work.

Intrinsic task motivation. It depends on the initial level of intrinsic motivation toward the task, on the presence or absence of social inhibitors and on the individual abilities to minimize cognitively external inhibitors. It includes attitudes toward the task and the perception of one's motivation to undertake it.

Componential Model of creativity of Amabile (1983).

A key issue in developing creativity context-related is motivation. To develop creativity, it should be a higher intrinsic motivation than an extrinsic one. Amabile [ 10 ] attaches great importance to the influence of social factors on creativity, so that intrinsic motivation, internal evaluation in accordance with technical criteria and the absence of external rewards are crucial factors for its development. Intrinsic motivation is particularly relevant in the early stages of the idea generation or in the early stages of creativity and extrinsic motivation is particularly relevant in the developmental phase of these initial ideas, when the product needs to be developed in detail. In turn, it has been shown that extrinsic motivation can encourage the creativity as long as it does not exceed the intrinsic motivation one, and both kinds of motivation should be combined in a synergistic, additive and complementary way. In other words, “extrinsic incentives and task motivation must combine in a synergistic, additive, or complementary fashion” (p. 352) [ 38 ].

According to investment theory [ 39 ] and creative self-efficacy [ 40 ], success expectations are on the basis of which students are inclined to engage in creative behavior. That is, as teachers we need to encourage positive expectations of the use of creativity, in which behavior is proven a more effective performance in a creative way compared to a non-creative.

4. Teaching methodology for creative thinking skills development

According to De la Torre [ 41 ], creative teaching is characterized by being active, motivating, dynamic and involving. For this author creative learning refers to knowledge built with the active involvement of the subject, from its planning to its internalisation, characterised by intrinsic motivation, being learner-centred, openness of the process and self-evaluation.

The development of creative thinking skills is essential for turning creative potential into creative performance. That is, if creative skills are deliberately, consciously and voluntarily fostered, each individual will be able to convert his or her creative potential into creative behavior [ 2 , 6 , 42 ].

In this respect, the development of creative skills must be personal and voluntary, but it must also be stimulated by the educational context. From a didactic point of view, creativity is a concept that should be addressed curricularly in the objectives, as formative content, as a strategy, in learning activities and in assessment. If not, it is reduced to a mere aspiration for a good social reception [ 43 ].

In general, it can be stated that the recommendations from research, derived from the implemented programmes and strategies for the development of creativity are based on applying divergent thinking processes (fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration, transformation, sensitivity and symbolic play) and convergent thinking processes (analysis, synthesis and evaluation of ideas) involved in the creation of products in the problem-solving process to achieve the optimal development of creativity [ 2 ]. An important finding of a meta-analysis was that more successful training programmes were more likely concerned with directed and structured exercises aiming at developing specific, task-relevant cognitive skills operating on available knowledge, involving idea production and cognitive training in problem solving strategies [ 6 , 42 ].

There is a considerable evidence revealing beneficial effects on different facets of creative potential. Studies on creativity in education field show an effective and real development of creativity if relevant efforts are made in this direction in all levels of education from pre-school to higher education [ 3 , 8 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 ]. In addition, evidence has been found to suggest the importance of the role of the educator as a basis for the development of creativity and an opportunity to guide the child's early development of creativity [ 49 ]. A recent meta-study, highlights the importance and the need to explain and explore the teaching-learning processes involved in the development of creativity, identifying the techniques and procedures used [ 8 ].

Therefore, there is an insistence on the need to promote educational measures and processes that involve teachers in the development of their students' creative thinking, based on teaching methods that allow them to generate knowledge and respond to social, scientific and technological problems [ 50 , 51 ]. In this regard, a systematic review of 210 studies on education and educational policy suggests that teachers' skills, attitudes, willingness to act as role models, awareness of students' needs, flexible lesson structuring and certain types of classroom interaction are central to the teaching of creativity, and highlights the importance of educational culture in supporting creativity, where it is necessary to generate conceptions of creativity and for teachers to develop their own creativity, working constructively with a mentor, as well as the importance of action research and reflection on one's own educational praxis [ 52 ].

At this point, it is stressed the importance of applying the creative thinking process in problem solving, as it would be the ideal strategy in order to develop creativity, as creativity and problem-solving have many similarities [ 2 , 53 ]. Thus, is applying creative strategies in those processes that require a divergent, productive or idea-generating thinking style and analytical and evaluative strategies in those phases of the process that require a more conventional thinking or a convergent thinking style, aimed at finding a correct answer or its final elaboration.

In this section a distinction between the development of creative skills is made through overcoming the creative thinking barriers as a way to be aware of the internal and external conditioning factors of creativity, and how they are perceived in the educational context. Finally, the most relevant strategies for the development of creative skills are described in order to use them specifically in the educational context, with emphasis on problem solving.

4.1 Knowing and removing barriers to creative thinking

Perceptual blocks. Assume not to see the problem or not to see what is wrong, due to several limitations such as to isolate the problem, define the terms of the problem, use the senses to observe the problem, perceive remote relationships, investigate the obvious or distinguish between cause and effect.

Emotional blocks. Are those from the individual's own insecurities, such as the fear of being wrong or looking foolish, clinging to the first idea or solution that comes to mind, rigidity of thought, high motivation to succeed quickly, excessive desire of security, fear and distrust superiors, lack of energy to solve a problem, the experience and the lack of will to implement a new solution.

Cultural blocks. Are those that derive from what is taught and has learned to accept as good or bad, such as the desire to adapt to an accepted rule, the desire to be practical and economical, the tendency to adopt an attitude of all or nothing, having too many or little knowledge about something, being too competitive, having too much faith in statistics or logic, believe that fantasy is not worth it and believe that is not polite to be very curious or doubtful.

Lorna [ 56 ] describes creativity barriers as obstacles affecting the creative and innovative skills of individuals. She considers that knowledge, identification and awareness of the barriers to creative thinking, could prevent their emergence and allow for the creative potential of individuals. To this end, Lorna has created the Inventory of Barriers to Creative Thinking and Innovative Action .

These blocks and barriers have also been summarised in two types: internal and external barriers. Internal barriers have been related to the perceptual blocks and the emotional blocks and external ones have been related to the cultural blocks.

More recent literature provides various examples of how people can be effectively cognitively stimulated in the context of creativity enhancement, and significant performance gains psychometrically determined creativity were also seen as a result of continuous engagement in divergent thinking task [ 57 ].

4.2 Strategies to develop creative thinking skills in the classroom

From this approach, the optimal methodology for the development of creativity would be the development of students' strategic thinking through the teaching of different creative strategies in the classroom. Creative strategies are an adaptive procedure or set of procedures by which action is sequentially organized to achieve the desired purpose or goal [ 58 ]. These strategies are characterized by flexibility in planning, contextual adaptation, the creation of a relaxed and rewarding atmosphere, participatory and interactive roles among students and between students and teachers, productivity or personal achievements, high degree of satisfaction and awareness of self-learning [ 58 ]. These strategies seek, among other aspects, to develop capacities and skills of ideation, interaction, elaboration, communicative competence, argumentation to express and defend one's own points of view, collaborative work and role-playing. They are characterized by being strategies oriented towards the development of attitudes, values, emotional sensitivity and persistence in the task initiated [ 59 ].

Classic creative strategies to develop creative thinking skill began to apply in training courses from the industrial field started in 1930 and 1940. These strategies could help to unlock and stimulate the divergent thinking and facilitate the development of creativity. Nowadays these strategies are applied in the educational context in different divergent thinking tasks [ 57 ]. These creative strategies are involved in idea production which is particularly effective in improving creative-related skills [ 42 , 60 ].

Analogical: is based on the similarity or the likeness as a solution of the problem.

Antithetical: is based on solving the problem of the counter tide it had been done before.

Randomly: once discussed the problem with similar methods and opposite, there is an area of seemingly unrelated concepts to the problem and random estimates are used for their solution.

Brainstorming [ 55 ]. Its objective is to conduct a group or a project to get as many ideas, suggestions, valid alternatives and original ideas as possible. This strategy can be applied in a single phase, in which each participant prepares its own list of ideas and then be shared with other individuals, in a second phase of work in pairs and in a third phase of group work. Eventually it is needed to evaluate all the ideas and choose the best.

This strategy has four basic rules:

Critical judgment is excluded. Do not reject or censor any idea how absurd or strange it may seem.

The free imagination is welcomed.

The amount is demanded.

The combination and improvement of the proposed ideas is sought.

Attribute listing [ 62 ]. This strategy consists of moving the attributes of an object or situation to another object or situation. Its aim is to sensitise the student to grasp the characteristics of the objects and transforming them to generate significant wealth of new ones. This technique should be applied as follows:

Focusing on a target or topic of a potential job.

Display various attributes or characteristics of the target of topic (e.g., if it is an object: shape, color, size, etc.).

Select those attributes that best describe the object or subject.

Thinking about possible changes in each.

Modify the characteristics of an attribute without changing other attributes and see what happens.

Checklist [ 55 ]. This strategy is based on the formulation of questions, because the questions are one of the supports of creative attitudes. Prior knowledge of a problem predisposes to the development of questions, because knowing involves wanting to know more and this can lead to many discoveries. This strategy proposes a number of questions issued by the educator to encourage creative thinking; these are the follows:

Use the existing elements that have been already used for other purposes.

Adapt or copy other similar realities to improve what we have.

Modify; giving new forms, colors, aspects.

Increase, make larger, stronger, higher, that multiplies the effects or appears more often.

Reduce; make smaller, lighter, delete parts or complications, divide or ignore.

Replace; change something by other ingredients, materials, procedures, techniques, etc.

Change the order or sequence of its components.

Reverse the object; replace the positive with the negative, to start at the end, to reverse a situation, use of irony.

Combine the ideas to improve the object.

Synectics [ 63 ]. The word comes from Greek and means the union of different elements and seemingly irrelevant. Is applied in group problem solving to increase the possibilities of its resolution. To applied it, activities are proposed to make the strange familiar and the familiar strange through free associations, involving four forms of metaphorical analogy, which are as follow:

Personal analogy: imagine that you are the object or situation of the problem to identify its elements.

Direct analogy: look for some phenomenon or similar solution in other areas of knowledge or disciplines.

Symbolic analogy: interpersonal or object images are used to describe the problem. Poetical and metaphorical type of responses can be used.

Fantastic analogy: fantastic events, imaginary or irrational ideas can be used to challenge the established laws and to create another kind of reality.

Invention of products [ 64 ]. This strategy proposes the creation of inventions. The strategy to develop the invention comprises the following steps:

Analyse the design and the creation objectives.

Generate ideas. New ideas from different categories, original and infrequent ideas and detailed ideas are seeking.

Assess the ideas generated.

Designing something new or improve an existing design.

Storywritting [ 65 ]. This strategy encourage imagination by the development of stories and provides the description of different ways for it. Some of these ideas are: create stories from a word or from a randomly selected image, change the main character of a familiar story, transforming traditional stories introducing changes to its continuation or ending, imagine a fantastic character and create a story from this character (e.g., a man of glass; a man of iron), setting riddles and metaphors of their characteristics, using analogies, synectics, etc.

Method of the Six Thinking Hats [ 66 ]. This method tries to stimulate simultaneously six different ways of thinking related to the symbolic use of six different hats, including:

The white hat is neutral and objective. It relates to the facts, data and objectives.

The red hat suggests anger and emotions. It provides the emotional standpoint.

The black hat is somber and serious. Is cautious and careful, says the weaknesses and difficulties of the ideas.

The yellow hat is cheerful and positive. It includes optimistic hope and positive thinking.

The green hat symbolizes the abundant, fertile growth and new ideas.

The blue hat is cool, symbolizes the color of the sky that is above all. It relates to the control, organization of thought processes and the use of other hats. One could assume that this hat symbolises the use of metacognition.

Design Thinking. Design thinking offers teachers needed support and skills. Design is a process of “making” solutions, and a well-recognized by-product of creative confidence and self-efficacy. Design thinking is an iterative process that repeatedly reformulates a problem to find its core and then analyses possible solutions to find the most favourable, allowing for the formation of ‘creative bridges’ between problems and solutions [ 53 ]. Thus, both analytical thinking and divergent creative thinking are key to design processes, worked through five core design thinking skills: Empathising, Defining Problems, Ideating, Prototyping, and Testing [ 67 ].

Creative, metacognitive and critical thinking skills problem-solving model. Adapted from Allueva [ 68 ] is based on complex thinking and higher order thinking processes in problem solving [ 2 ]. See Figure 3 . This model stresses the importance of developing creative thinking skills in problem solving, applying creative strategies in those processes that require a divergent, productive or idea-generating style of thinking and a more analytical and evaluative strategies in those phases of the process that require a more conventional or convergent thinking, aimed at finding a suitable response or its final elaboration. Throughout all the process, metacognitive skills involved in problem-solving are proposed. In this sense, there is some recent research on the implication of metacognition for the development of creativity [ 37 , 69 ].

Creative, metacognitive and critical thinking skills problem-solving model.

Figure 3 shows how to apply the creative, metacognitive and critical thinking process in problem solving. First, the problem is presented and simultaneously, divergent production processes (in those tasks that require the generation of novel and valuable ideas) and convergent production processes are applied (in those tasks that require valid and reliable answers). During the task, metacognitive thinking processes (planning, regulating-controlling and checking the task). The three mentioned thinking skills are applied until a mental product of the problem is achieved.

At the beginning of the session: enquiry into prior knowledge: brainstorming, posing questions about subject content, knowledge activation questions, etc.;

During the session: stimulate the creative thinking, creative strategies are proposed: brainstorming, synectis, proposing examples and counterexamples, generating lists of attributes to certain questions, visualisation, make questions, etc.;

At the end of the session: relevance and educational implications in the classroom of the issues raised (creation of scenarios and narratives and search for solutions using divergent thinking skills in different cases).

Presentation of the activity through cooperative work in the classroom. Creative strategies are proposed to solve the different practical activities through the stimulation of divergent thinking and lateral thinking: "what if", creative narrative techniques, brainstorming, use of analogies, list of attributes, synectics, creative visualisation, among others. The explanation of each strategy will be done prior to the solution of the proposed activities;

Development and supervision of the creative performance for the practical activities proposed;

Shared discussion. Small group discussion and large group presentation of the proposals put forward, explaining the creative process carried out for their solution. To this end, the hypothesizing of possible alternative solutions will be encouraged, promoting hypothetical-deductive thinking, creative and metacognitive thinking skills are supported;

Evaluation: group feedback on the creative resolution of the activity is done, suggestions for improvement of the solutions are proposed. Individual and group student’s self-evaluation is carried out to analyse the creative strategies application during the learning process. Finally, teacher's evaluation of the activity resolution (i.e., using a weighted evaluation scale) is proposed which is based on previously established evaluation criteria. Thus evaluation, should assess the main implemented creativity factors that were involved in the teaching sessions, as the indicators of creative thinking developed: fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration, among others.

5. Conclusions

It can be affirmed that development involves skills of increasing complexity and, in general, it has been shown that human thinking is diverse, complex and multifaceted and that it requires the coordination of multiple cognitive processes.

For this reason, we highlight the importance of the development of higher order thinking skills, more specifically those that have been shown to be most effective in teaching-learning processes, namely critical, creative and metacognitive thinking skills. Traditionally, more attention has been paid in education to the development of critical, analytical or formal thinking skills, and creative thinking processes have been neglected. For this reason, it is highlight creative skills as an object of development and study in this chapter.

Creativity is a complex and multidimensional construct, which makes it difficult to define in a precise and consensual way. However, it can be affirmed that the different existing approaches to the study of creativity provide a complementary vision of creativity and shed more light for future research, which will serve to discover the mental processes and mechanisms involved in creative and human thinking and the factors that influence them.

So far, it has been highlighted the importance of creativity in society and in education, as well as the importance of creativity in everyday life, while it has been shown through research that the development of creativity can provide an improvement in educational quality and student learning. Accordingly, we believe that creative skills should be developed in all possible contexts, taking into account the personal characteristics of each student, so that they are able to generate creative products in a variety of contexts. It has also been highlighted that essential indicators of creative potential are creative thinking processes applied to problem solving in the curriculum and, more specifically, those involving divergent thinking for the generation of ideas.

From this approach, it is proposed that the development of creative thinking skills should be carried out in the different areas of the curriculum as a transversal competence and in a deliberate and specific way. Likewise, evaluation is proposed, with the intention of assessing whether their development has been effective. In order to develop creative skills and creative thinking, barriers it should be removed and it should be applied creative skills involved in the problem-solving process. The aim is to generate creative products through the use and application of creative strategies intentionally in the teaching-learning process.

• 1. Craft, A., Jeffrey, B. & Liebling, M. (2001). Creativity in education . London: Biddles
• 2. Larraz, N. (2015). Desarrollo de las habilidades creativas y metacognitivas en la educación secundaria obligatoria [Creativity and metacognitive thinking skills development in secondary school]. Madrid: Dykinson
• 3. Larraz, N., Antoñanzas, J.L., & Cuevas, J. (2020). Creativity skills in undergraduate primary education students. OPPICS 2019. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences . DOI: 10.15405/epsbs.2020.05.11
• 4. Valenzuela, J. (2008). Habilidades del pensamiento y aprendizaje profundo [Thinking skills and deep thinking]. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación , 46 (7), 1-9
• 5. Zambrano, N.I. (2019). El desarrollo de la creatividad en estudiantes universitarios [The development of creativity in university students]. Revista Conrado, 15(67), 355-359
• 6. Klimenko, O. & Botero, A. (2016). Fomento de la capacidad creativa desde las prácticas de enseñanza en una institución universitaria [Fostering creative skills from teaching practices in a university university institution]. Revista Psicoespacios, 10(17), 71-93
• 7. Mitjans, A. (1995). La escuela y el desarrollo de la creatividad [The school and the creativity development]. Revista Educación , 85
• 8. Van der Zanden, P. J. A. C., Meijer, P.C., & Beghetto, R.A. (2020). A review study about creativity in adolescence: Where is the social context? Thinking Skills and Creativity , 100702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100702
• 9. Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis if creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305-310
• 10. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: a componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 45 (2), 357-376
• 11. Barron, F. (1968). Creativity and personal freedom. New York: Van Nostrand
• 12. Gardner, H. (1993). Creativity minds: an anatomy of creativity. New York: Perseus Books Group
• 13. Kim, K. H., Cramond, B., & VanTassel-Baska, J. (2010). The relationship between creativity and intelligence. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 395-412). New York: Cambridge University Press
• 14. Sternberg, R. J., & Kaufman, J.C. (2010). Constraints on creativity. En J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 467- 482). New York: Cambridge University Press
• 15. Boden, M. A. (1990). The creative mind: myths and mechanism. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson Ltd
• 16. Boden, M. A. (2001). Creativity and knowledge. In A. Craft, B. Jeffrey & M. Leibling, Creativity in education (pp. 95-102). London: Biddles
• 17. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: Harper P
• 18. Beghetto, R. A. (2010). Creativity in the classroom. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 447-463). New York: Cambridge University Press
• 19. Richards, R. (2010). Everyday creativity. Process and way of life-four cases issues. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity ( pp. 189-215). New York: Cambridge University Press
• 20. Kozbelt, A., Beghetto, R. A., & Runco, M. (2010). Theories of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 20-47). New York: Cambridge University Press
• 21. Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human Intelligence. New York: McGraw Hill
• 22. Guilford, J. P. (1967b). Factors that aid and hinder creativity. In J. Curtis, G. Demos & E. P. Torrance (Eds.), Creativity: its educational implications. New York: Wiley
• 23. Guilford, J. P. (1994). La creatividad: pasado, presente y futuro [Creativity: past, present and future]. In R. D. Strom (Comp.), Creatividad y educación [Creativity and education] (pp. 9-23). Barcelona: Paidós
• 24. Torrance, E. P. (1966). Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT). Norms Technical Manual. Princenton, N.J: Personal Press
• 25. Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature . Arkana/Penguin Books
• 26. De Bono, E. (1970). Lateral thinking: creativity step by step. New York: Harper & Row
• 27. Feist, G. F. (2010). The function of personality in creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 113-130). New York: Cambridge University Press
• 28. Beaty, R.E., Kenett Y.N., Christensen, A.P., Rosenberg, M.D., Benedek, M., Chen, Q., Fink, A., Qiu, J., Kwapil, T.R., Kane M. J., Silvia, P.J. (2017). Robust prediction of individual creative ability from brain functional connectivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , Jan 2018, 115 (5) 1087-1092; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1713532115
• 29. Flores Miranda, MB. (2020). Un modelo componencial para el desarrollo del potencial creativo. La integración sistémica de los componentes principales resultantes del análisis factorial de los atributos de la creatividad [A componential model for the development of creative potential. Systemic integration of the principal components resulting from the factor analysis of creativity attributes][Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/149386
• 30. Mackinnon, D.W. (1962). The nature of talent. American Psychologist , 17, pp.484-495
• 31. Mackinnon, D.W. (1976). The creative individual: his understanding from the research. Creative Innovation , 2, pp. 5-21
• 32. Sampascual, G. (1987) Creatividad infantil [Creativity in the early childhood]. In J. Mayor (Dir.), La psicología en la escuela infantil [The psychology in the early school] (pp. 440-464). Madrid: Anaya
• 33. Sampascual, G. (2007). El pensamiento creativo [The creative thinking]. In G. Sampascual, Psicología de la educación [Psychology of education], Vol. 2 (pp. 84-122). Madrid: UNED
• 34. Fernández-Díaz, J.R., Llamas-Salguero, F. & Gutiérrez-Ortega, M. (2019). Creatividad: Revisión del concepto[Creativity: revision of the concept]. REIDOCREA , 8, 467-483
• 35. Glăveanu, V. P. (2010). Paradigms in the study of creativity: Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. New Ideas in Psychology , 28, 79-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.07.007
• 36. Glăveanu, V. P., Hanchett Hanson, M., Baer, J., Barbot, B., Clapp, E. P., Corazza, G. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (2019). Advancing creativity theory and research: A sociocultural manifesto. The Journal of Creative Behavior , 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.395
• 37. Gardiner, P. (2020). Learning to think together: creativity, interdisciplinary collaboration and epistemic control. Thinking skills and creativity , 38, 100749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100749
• 38. Henessey, B.A. (2010). The creativity-motivation connection. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 342-365). New York: Cambridge University Press
• 39. Sternberg, R.J., & Lubart, T.I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press
• 40. Beghetto, R. A. (2010). Creativity in the classroom. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 447-463). New York: Cambridge University Press
• 41. Torre, S. de la (1993). La creatividad en la aplicación del método didáctico [Creativity in the application of the didactic method]. In M. L. Sevillano, Estrategias metodológicas en la formación del profesorado [Methodological strategies in teacher training] (pp. 287-309). Madrid. UNED
• 42. Scott, G., Leritz, L.E., & Mumford, M.D. (2004b). Types of creativity training: Approaches and their effectiveness. Journal of Creative Behavior, 38, 149-179. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2004.tb01238.x
• 43. Torre, S. de la, & Violant, V. (2003). Creatividad aplicada [Applied creativity]. Barcelona: PPU
• 44. Larraz-Rábanos, N. & Allueva-Torres, P. (2012). Effects of a program for developing creative thinking skills. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology , 10(3), 1696-2095
• 45. Akcanca, N., & Cerrah Ozsevgec, L. (2018). Effect of activities prepared by different teaching techniques on scientific creativity levels of prospective pre-school teachers. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(1), 71-86. doi: 10.12973/eu-jer.7.1.71
• 46. Bai, H.H., Duan, H.J., Kroesbergen, E.H., Leseman, P.P.M., & Hu, W.P. (2020). The benefits of the learn to think program for preschoolers’s creativity: an explorative study, Journal of Creative Behaviour , 54 (3), 699-711. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.404
• 47. Yates, E. & Twigg, E. (2017). Developing creativity in early childhood studies students. Thinking skills and creativity, 23, 42-57
• 48. Yates, E., & Twigg, E. (2019). Student’s reflections on the place of creativity in early years practice: reflections on second year work placement experience, Thinking Skills and Creativity , 31, 335-345
• 49. Leggett, N. (2017). Early Childhood Creativity: Challenging Educators in Their Role to Intentionally Develop Creative Thinking in Children, Early Childhood Educational Journal , 45, 845-853
• 50. Ríos-Figueroa, P., & Bravo, G. (2017). Proyección de la creatividad en la investigación e innovación de las instituciones de educación superior [Projection of creativity in research and innovation in higher education institutions]. Qualitas , 11, 84-99
• 51. Zambrano, N. I. (2019). El desarrollo de la creatividad en estudiantes universitarios [The development of creativity in university students]. Revista Conrado , 15(67), 355-359. Recuperado de http://conrado.ucf.edu.cu/index.php/conrado
• 52. Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Digby, R., Howe, A. & Collier, C. & Hay, P. (2014). The roles and development needs of teachers to promote creativity: A systematic review of literature. Teaching and Teacher Education , 41, 34-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.03.003
• 53. Calavia, M.B., Blanco, T. & Casas, R. (2020). Fostering creativity as a problem-solving competence through design: Think-Create-Learn, a tool for teachers. Thinking skills and creativity, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100761
• 54. Simberg, A. L. (1971). Training creative thinking . New York: Rinehart and Winston
• 55. Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination. Principles and procedures of creative thinking. New York: Scribner’s Sons
• 56. Lorna, P. M. (1998) . Inventory of barriers to creative thought and innovative action, Vol. 8 (pp. 46-53). The Pfeiffer Library (2nd Ed.)
• 57. Fink, A., Reim, T., Benedek, M. & Grabner, R. (2019). The effects of a verbal and figural creativity training on different facets of creative potential. Journal of creative behavior, 54 (3), 676-685. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.402
• 58. Torre, de la, S. y V. Violant (2002). Estrategias creativas en la enseñanza universitaria. Una investigación con metodología de desarrollo [Creative strategies in university teaching. A research with development methodology]. Creatividad y Sociedad , 3, 21- 38
• 59. Torre, de la, S. (2009). La universidad que queremos. Estrategias creativas en el aula universitaria [The university we want. Creative strategies in the university classroom]. Revista digital universitaria , 10(12), 1067-6079
• 60. Scott, G., Leritz, L.E., & Mumford, M.D. (2004a). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal , 16, 361-388. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534549
• 61. Fustier, M. (1982). Pratique de la créativité. France: SFP [Ed. Spanish: Pedagogía de la creatividad. Madrid: Index, 1993]
• 62. Crawford, R. (1954). Techniques of creative thinking. New York: Hawthorn Books
• 63. Gordon, W. J. J. (1961). Synectics . New York: Harper &Row
• 64. Sánchez De, M. (1996). Programa para el desarrollo de las habilidades del pensamiento: creatividad [Program to develop thinking skills: creativity]. Mexico: Trillas
• 65. Rodari, G. (1983). Grammatica de la fantasia [Grammar of fantasy]. Turin: Guiulio Eunaudi Ed. [Spanish Ed.: Gramática de la fantasía. Introducción al arte de contar historias. Barcelona: Planeta, 2004]
• 66. De Bono, E. (2008). Six thinking hats. UK: Penguin Group
• 67. Herniksen, D. Richardson, C., & Mehta, R. (2017). Design thinking: a creative approach to educational problems of practice. Thinking skills and creativity, 26, 140-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.10.001
• 68. Allueva, P. (2007). Habilidades del Pensamiento [Thinking skills]. In M. Liesa, P. Allueva, & M. Puyuelo (Coords.), Educación y acceso a la vida adulta de Personas con Discapacidad [Education and access to adult life for people with desabilities] (pp. 133-158). Barbastro, Huesca: Fundación R.J. Sender
• 69. Puente-Diaz, R. Cavazos-Arroyo, J. & Vargas-Barrera, F. (2021). Metacognitive feelings as a source of information in the evaluation and selection of creative ideas. Thinking skills and creativity , 39, 100767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100767

© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Teacher education.

Published: 22 September 2021

By Bodil Svendsen

1254 downloads

By Yaniv Biton and Ruti Segal

551 downloads

By Delfín Ortega-Sánchez and César Barba Alonso

471 downloads

Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills

• First Online: 28 April 2022

Cite this chapter

• Heather Negley 2  

507 Accesses

Critical thinking is a type of systematic thinking that is used to solve problems using logic. The first step is to gather the information needed to help you solve your problem. You start by analyzing and evaluating sources for authority to give you the best shot at finding something truthful and unbiased. Watch Out For information overload. Access to information is easier than ever these days, and it is easy to get overwhelmed by it all. As you conduct your research, keep your information organized by filtering, synthesizing, and distilling it. And keep your effort timeboxed. Start broad enough to obtain a wide berth, like a fisherman casting a large net into an ocean. This helps find multiple points of view. But don’t spend more time than necessary. Practicing collecting what is sufficient to answer your questions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Reitz, Joan. Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science: Accessed 11/07/2021

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Fairfax, VA, USA

Heather Negley

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to APress Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Negley, H. (2022). Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills. In: The Salesforce Consultant’s Guide. Apress, Berkeley, CA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-7960-1_13

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-7960-1_13

Published : 28 April 2022

Publisher Name : Apress, Berkeley, CA

Print ISBN : 978-1-4842-7959-5

Online ISBN : 978-1-4842-7960-1

eBook Packages : Professional and Applied Computing Professional and Applied Computing (R0) Apress Access Books

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 11 January 2023

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

• Enwei Xu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6424-8169 1 ,
• Wei Wang 1 &
• Qingxia Wang 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  16 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

16k Accesses

16 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education as well as a key competence for learners in the 21st century. However, the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking remains uncertain. This current research presents the major findings of a meta-analysis of 36 pieces of the literature revealed in worldwide educational periodicals during the 21st century to identify the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and to determine, based on evidence, whether and to what extent collaborative problem solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]); (2) in respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem solving can significantly and successfully enhance students’ attitudinal tendencies (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.58, 0.82]); and (3) the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have an impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. On the basis of these results, recommendations are made for further study and instruction to better support students’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Similar content being viewed by others

Testing theory of mind in large language models and humans

Impact of artificial intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness and safety in education

Interviews in the social sciences

Introduction.

Although critical thinking has a long history in research, the concept of critical thinking, which is regarded as an essential competence for learners in the 21st century, has recently attracted more attention from researchers and teaching practitioners (National Research Council, 2012 ). Critical thinking should be the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education (Peng and Deng, 2017 ) because students with critical thinking can not only understand the meaning of knowledge but also effectively solve practical problems in real life even after knowledge is forgotten (Kek and Huijser, 2011 ). The definition of critical thinking is not universal (Ennis, 1989 ; Castle, 2009 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). In general, the definition of critical thinking is a self-aware and self-regulated thought process (Facione, 1990 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). It refers to the cognitive skills needed to interpret, analyze, synthesize, reason, and evaluate information as well as the attitudinal tendency to apply these abilities (Halpern, 2001 ). The view that critical thinking can be taught and learned through curriculum teaching has been widely supported by many researchers (e.g., Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), leading to educators’ efforts to foster it among students. In the field of teaching practice, there are three types of courses for teaching critical thinking (Ennis, 1989 ). The first is an independent curriculum in which critical thinking is taught and cultivated without involving the knowledge of specific disciplines; the second is an integrated curriculum in which critical thinking is integrated into the teaching of other disciplines as a clear teaching goal; and the third is a mixed curriculum in which critical thinking is taught in parallel to the teaching of other disciplines for mixed teaching training. Furthermore, numerous measuring tools have been developed by researchers and educators to measure critical thinking in the context of teaching practice. These include standardized measurement tools, such as WGCTA, CCTST, CCTT, and CCTDI, which have been verified by repeated experiments and are considered effective and reliable by international scholars (Facione and Facione, 1992 ). In short, descriptions of critical thinking, including its two dimensions of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, different types of teaching courses, and standardized measurement tools provide a complex normative framework for understanding, teaching, and evaluating critical thinking.

Cultivating critical thinking in curriculum teaching can start with a problem, and one of the most popular critical thinking instructional approaches is problem-based learning (Liu et al., 2020 ). Duch et al. ( 2001 ) noted that problem-based learning in group collaboration is progressive active learning, which can improve students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Collaborative problem-solving is the organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning, which takes learners as the center of the learning process and uses problems with poor structure in real-world situations as the starting point for the learning process (Liang et al., 2017 ). Students learn the knowledge needed to solve problems in a collaborative group, reach a consensus on problems in the field, and form solutions through social cooperation methods, such as dialogue, interpretation, questioning, debate, negotiation, and reflection, thus promoting the development of learners’ domain knowledge and critical thinking (Cindy, 2004 ; Liang et al., 2017 ).

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely used in the teaching practice of critical thinking, and several studies have attempted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature on critical thinking from various perspectives. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking. Therefore, the best approach for developing and enhancing critical thinking throughout collaborative problem-solving is to examine how to implement critical thinking instruction; however, this issue is still unexplored, which means that many teachers are incapable of better instructing critical thinking (Leng and Lu, 2020 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, Huber ( 2016 ) provided the meta-analysis findings of 71 publications on gaining critical thinking over various time frames in college with the aim of determining whether critical thinking was truly teachable. These authors found that learners significantly improve their critical thinking while in college and that critical thinking differs with factors such as teaching strategies, intervention duration, subject area, and teaching type. The usefulness of collaborative problem-solving in fostering students’ critical thinking, however, was not determined by this study, nor did it reveal whether there existed significant variations among the different elements. A meta-analysis of 31 pieces of educational literature was conducted by Liu et al. ( 2020 ) to assess the impact of problem-solving on college students’ critical thinking. These authors found that problem-solving could promote the development of critical thinking among college students and proposed establishing a reasonable group structure for problem-solving in a follow-up study to improve students’ critical thinking. Additionally, previous empirical studies have reached inconclusive and even contradictory conclusions about whether and to what extent collaborative problem-solving increases or decreases critical thinking levels. As an illustration, Yang et al. ( 2008 ) carried out an experiment on the integrated curriculum teaching of college students based on a web bulletin board with the goal of fostering participants’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These authors’ research revealed that through sharing, debating, examining, and reflecting on various experiences and ideas, collaborative problem-solving can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking in real-life problem situations. In contrast, collaborative problem-solving had a positive impact on learners’ interaction and could improve learning interest and motivation but could not significantly improve students’ critical thinking when compared to traditional classroom teaching, according to research by Naber and Wyatt ( 2014 ) and Sendag and Odabasi ( 2009 ) on undergraduate and high school students, respectively.

The above studies show that there is inconsistency regarding the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a thorough and trustworthy review to detect and decide whether and to what degree collaborative problem-solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. Meta-analysis is a quantitative analysis approach that is utilized to examine quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. This approach characterizes the effectiveness of its impact by averaging the effect sizes of numerous qualitative studies in an effort to reduce the uncertainty brought on by independent research and produce more conclusive findings (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ).

This paper used a meta-analytic approach and carried out a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking in order to make a contribution to both research and practice. The following research questions were addressed by this meta-analysis:

What is the overall effect size of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills)?

How are the disparities between the study conclusions impacted by various moderating variables if the impacts of various experimental designs in the included studies are heterogeneous?

This research followed the strict procedures (e.g., database searching, identification, screening, eligibility, merging, duplicate removal, and analysis of included studies) of Cooper’s ( 2010 ) proposed meta-analysis approach for examining quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. The relevant empirical research that appeared in worldwide educational periodicals within the 21st century was subjected to this meta-analysis using Rev-Man 5.4. The consistency of the data extracted separately by two researchers was tested using Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and a publication bias test and a heterogeneity test were run on the sample data to ascertain the quality of this meta-analysis.

Data sources and search strategies

There were three stages to the data collection process for this meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 1 , which shows the number of articles included and eliminated during the selection process based on the statement and study eligibility criteria.

This flowchart shows the number of records identified, included and excluded in the article.

First, the databases used to systematically search for relevant articles were the journal papers of the Web of Science Core Collection and the Chinese Core source journal, as well as the Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) source journal papers included in CNKI. These databases were selected because they are credible platforms that are sources of scholarly and peer-reviewed information with advanced search tools and contain literature relevant to the subject of our topic from reliable researchers and experts. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the Web of Science was “TS = (((“critical thinking” or “ct” and “pretest” or “posttest”) or (“critical thinking” or “ct” and “control group” or “quasi experiment” or “experiment”)) and (“collaboration” or “collaborative learning” or “CSCL”) and (“problem solving” or “problem-based learning” or “PBL”))”. The research area was “Education Educational Research”, and the search period was “January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2021”. A total of 412 papers were obtained. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the CNKI was “SU = (‘critical thinking’*‘collaboration’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘collaborative learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘CSCL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem solving’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem-based learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘PBL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem oriented’) AND FT = (‘experiment’ + ‘quasi experiment’ + ‘pretest’ + ‘posttest’ + ‘empirical study’)” (translated into Chinese when searching). A total of 56 studies were found throughout the search period of “January 2000 to December 2021”. From the databases, all duplicates and retractions were eliminated before exporting the references into Endnote, a program for managing bibliographic references. In all, 466 studies were found.

Second, the studies that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were chosen by two researchers after they had reviewed the abstracts and titles of the gathered articles, yielding a total of 126 studies.

Third, two researchers thoroughly reviewed each included article’s whole text in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meanwhile, a snowball search was performed using the references and citations of the included articles to ensure complete coverage of the articles. Ultimately, 36 articles were kept.

Two researchers worked together to carry out this entire process, and a consensus rate of almost 94.7% was reached after discussion and negotiation to clarify any emerging differences.

Eligibility criteria

Since not all the retrieved studies matched the criteria for this meta-analysis, eligibility criteria for both inclusion and exclusion were developed as follows:

The publication language of the included studies was limited to English and Chinese, and the full text could be obtained. Articles that did not meet the publication language and articles not published between 2000 and 2021 were excluded.

The research design of the included studies must be empirical and quantitative studies that can assess the effect of collaborative problem-solving on the development of critical thinking. Articles that could not identify the causal mechanisms by which collaborative problem-solving affects critical thinking, such as review articles and theoretical articles, were excluded.

The research method of the included studies must feature a randomized control experiment or a quasi-experiment, or a natural experiment, which have a higher degree of internal validity with strong experimental designs and can all plausibly provide evidence that critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving are causally related. Articles with non-experimental research methods, such as purely correlational or observational studies, were excluded.

The participants of the included studies were only students in school, including K-12 students and college students. Articles in which the participants were non-school students, such as social workers or adult learners, were excluded.

The research results of the included studies must mention definite signs that may be utilized to gauge critical thinking’s impact (e.g., sample size, mean value, or standard deviation). Articles that lacked specific measurement indicators for critical thinking and could not calculate the effect size were excluded.

Data coding design

In order to perform a meta-analysis, it is necessary to collect the most important information from the articles, codify that information’s properties, and convert descriptive data into quantitative data. Therefore, this study designed a data coding template (see Table 1 ). Ultimately, 16 coding fields were retained.

The designed data-coding template consisted of three pieces of information. Basic information about the papers was included in the descriptive information: the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper.

The variable information for the experimental design had three variables: the independent variable (instruction method), the dependent variable (critical thinking), and the moderating variable (learning stage, teaching type, intervention duration, learning scaffold, group size, measuring tool, and subject area). Depending on the topic of this study, the intervention strategy, as the independent variable, was coded into collaborative and non-collaborative problem-solving. The dependent variable, critical thinking, was coded as a cognitive skill and an attitudinal tendency. And seven moderating variables were created by grouping and combining the experimental design variables discovered within the 36 studies (see Table 1 ), where learning stages were encoded as higher education, high school, middle school, and primary school or lower; teaching types were encoded as mixed courses, integrated courses, and independent courses; intervention durations were encoded as 0–1 weeks, 1–4 weeks, 4–12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks; group sizes were encoded as 2–3 persons, 4–6 persons, 7–10 persons, and more than 10 persons; learning scaffolds were encoded as teacher-supported learning scaffold, technique-supported learning scaffold, and resource-supported learning scaffold; measuring tools were encoded as standardized measurement tools (e.g., WGCTA, CCTT, CCTST, and CCTDI) and self-adapting measurement tools (e.g., modified or made by researchers); and subject areas were encoded according to the specific subjects used in the 36 included studies.

The data information contained three metrics for measuring critical thinking: sample size, average value, and standard deviation. It is vital to remember that studies with various experimental designs frequently adopt various formulas to determine the effect size. And this paper used Morris’ proposed standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation formula ( 2008 , p. 369; see Supplementary Table S3 ).

Procedure for extracting and coding data

According to the data coding template (see Table 1 ), the 36 papers’ information was retrieved by two researchers, who then entered them into Excel (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The results of each study were extracted separately in the data extraction procedure if an article contained numerous studies on critical thinking, or if a study assessed different critical thinking dimensions. For instance, Tiwari et al. ( 2010 ) used four time points, which were viewed as numerous different studies, to examine the outcomes of critical thinking, and Chen ( 2013 ) included the two outcome variables of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, which were regarded as two studies. After discussion and negotiation during data extraction, the two researchers’ consistency test coefficients were roughly 93.27%. Supplementary Table S2 details the key characteristics of the 36 included articles with 79 effect quantities, including descriptive information (e.g., the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper), variable information (e.g., independent variables, dependent variables, and moderating variables), and data information (e.g., mean values, standard deviations, and sample size). Following that, testing for publication bias and heterogeneity was done on the sample data using the Rev-Man 5.4 software, and then the test results were used to conduct a meta-analysis.

Publication bias test

When the sample of studies included in a meta-analysis does not accurately reflect the general status of research on the relevant subject, publication bias is said to be exhibited in this research. The reliability and accuracy of the meta-analysis may be impacted by publication bias. Due to this, the meta-analysis needs to check the sample data for publication bias (Stewart et al., 2006 ). A popular method to check for publication bias is the funnel plot; and it is unlikely that there will be publishing bias when the data are equally dispersed on either side of the average effect size and targeted within the higher region. The data are equally dispersed within the higher portion of the efficient zone, consistent with the funnel plot connected with this analysis (see Fig. 2 ), indicating that publication bias is unlikely in this situation.

This funnel plot shows the result of publication bias of 79 effect quantities across 36 studies.

Heterogeneity test

To select the appropriate effect models for the meta-analysis, one might use the results of a heterogeneity test on the data effect sizes. In a meta-analysis, it is common practice to gauge the degree of data heterogeneity using the I 2 value, and I 2  ≥ 50% is typically understood to denote medium-high heterogeneity, which calls for the adoption of a random effect model; if not, a fixed effect model ought to be applied (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ). The findings of the heterogeneity test in this paper (see Table 2 ) revealed that I 2 was 86% and displayed significant heterogeneity ( P  < 0.01). To ensure accuracy and reliability, the overall effect size ought to be calculated utilizing the random effect model.

The analysis of the overall effect size

This meta-analysis utilized a random effect model to examine 79 effect quantities from 36 studies after eliminating heterogeneity. In accordance with Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1992 ), it is abundantly clear from the analysis results, which are shown in the forest plot of the overall effect (see Fig. 3 ), that the cumulative impact size of cooperative problem-solving is 0.82, which is statistically significant ( z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]), and can encourage learners to practice critical thinking.

This forest plot shows the analysis result of the overall effect size across 36 studies.

In addition, this study examined two distinct dimensions of critical thinking to better understand the precise contributions that collaborative problem-solving makes to the growth of critical thinking. The findings (see Table 3 ) indicate that collaborative problem-solving improves cognitive skills (ES = 0.70) and attitudinal tendency (ES = 1.17), with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.95, P  < 0.01). Although collaborative problem-solving improves both dimensions of critical thinking, it is essential to point out that the improvements in students’ attitudinal tendency are much more pronounced and have a significant comprehensive effect (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]), whereas gains in learners’ cognitive skill are slightly improved and are just above average. (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

The analysis of moderator effect size

The whole forest plot’s 79 effect quantities underwent a two-tailed test, which revealed significant heterogeneity ( I 2  = 86%, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01), indicating differences between various effect sizes that may have been influenced by moderating factors other than sampling error. Therefore, exploring possible moderating factors that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis, such as the learning stage, learning scaffold, teaching type, group size, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, in order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking. The findings (see Table 4 ) indicate that various moderating factors have advantageous effects on critical thinking. In this situation, the subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01), and teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05) are all significant moderators that can be applied to support the cultivation of critical thinking. However, since the learning stage and the measuring tools did not significantly differ among intergroup (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05, and chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05), we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These are the precise outcomes, as follows:

Various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively, without significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05). High school was first on the list of effect sizes (ES = 1.36, P  < 0.01), then higher education (ES = 0.78, P  < 0.01), and middle school (ES = 0.73, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the learning stage’s beneficial influence on cultivating learners’ critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is essential for cultivating critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Different teaching types had varying degrees of positive impact on critical thinking, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05). The effect size was ranked as follows: mixed courses (ES = 1.34, P  < 0.01), integrated courses (ES = 0.81, P  < 0.01), and independent courses (ES = 0.27, P  < 0.01). These results indicate that the most effective approach to cultivate critical thinking utilizing collaborative problem solving is through the teaching type of mixed courses.

Various intervention durations significantly improved critical thinking, and there were significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01). The effect sizes related to this variable showed a tendency to increase with longer intervention durations. The improvement in critical thinking reached a significant level (ES = 0.85, P  < 0.01) after more than 12 weeks of training. These findings indicate that the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated, with a longer intervention duration having a greater effect.

Different learning scaffolds influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01). The resource-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.69, P  < 0.01) acquired a medium-to-higher level of impact, the technique-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.63, P  < 0.01) also attained a medium-to-higher level of impact, and the teacher-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.92, P  < 0.01) displayed a high level of significant impact. These results show that the learning scaffold with teacher support has the greatest impact on cultivating critical thinking.

Various group sizes influenced critical thinking positively, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05). Critical thinking showed a general declining trend with increasing group size. The overall effect size of 2–3 people in this situation was the biggest (ES = 0.99, P  < 0.01), and when the group size was greater than 7 people, the improvement in critical thinking was at the lower-middle level (ES < 0.5, P  < 0.01). These results show that the impact on critical thinking is positively connected with group size, and as group size grows, so does the overall impact.

Various measuring tools influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05). In this situation, the self-adapting measurement tools obtained an upper-medium level of effect (ES = 0.78), whereas the complete effect size of the standardized measurement tools was the largest, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 0.84, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the beneficial influence of the measuring tool on cultivating critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Different subject areas had a greater impact on critical thinking, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05). Mathematics had the greatest overall impact, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 1.68, P  < 0.01), followed by science (ES = 1.25, P  < 0.01) and medical science (ES = 0.87, P  < 0.01), both of which also achieved a significant level of effect. Programming technology was the least effective (ES = 0.39, P  < 0.01), only having a medium-low degree of effect compared to education (ES = 0.72, P  < 0.01) and other fields (such as language, art, and social sciences) (ES = 0.58, P  < 0.01). These results suggest that scientific fields (e.g., mathematics, science) may be the most effective subject areas for cultivating critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

According to this meta-analysis, using collaborative problem-solving as an intervention strategy in critical thinking teaching has a considerable amount of impact on cultivating learners’ critical thinking as a whole and has a favorable promotional effect on the two dimensions of critical thinking. According to certain studies, collaborative problem solving, the most frequently used critical thinking teaching strategy in curriculum instruction can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking (e.g., Liang et al., 2017 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Cindy, 2004 ). This meta-analysis provides convergent data support for the above research views. Thus, the findings of this meta-analysis not only effectively address the first research query regarding the overall effect of cultivating critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills) utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving, but also enhance our confidence in cultivating critical thinking by using collaborative problem-solving intervention approach in the context of classroom teaching.

Furthermore, the associated improvements in attitudinal tendency are much stronger, but the corresponding improvements in cognitive skill are only marginally better. According to certain studies, cognitive skill differs from the attitudinal tendency in classroom instruction; the cultivation and development of the former as a key ability is a process of gradual accumulation, while the latter as an attitude is affected by the context of the teaching situation (e.g., a novel and exciting teaching approach, challenging and rewarding tasks) (Halpern, 2001 ; Wei and Hong, 2022 ). Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting and interesting, as well as rewarding and challenging; because it takes the learners as the focus and examines problems with poor structure in real situations, and it can inspire students to fully realize their potential for problem-solving, which will significantly improve their attitudinal tendency toward solving problems (Liu et al., 2020 ). Similar to how collaborative problem-solving influences attitudinal tendency, attitudinal tendency impacts cognitive skill when attempting to solve a problem (Liu et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ), and stronger attitudinal tendencies are associated with improved learning achievement and cognitive ability in students (Sison, 2008 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). It can be seen that the two specific dimensions of critical thinking as well as critical thinking as a whole are affected by collaborative problem-solving, and this study illuminates the nuanced links between cognitive skills and attitudinal tendencies with regard to these two dimensions of critical thinking. To fully develop students’ capacity for critical thinking, future empirical research should pay closer attention to cognitive skills.

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

In order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking, exploring possible moderating effects that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis. The findings show that the moderating factors, such as the teaching type, learning stage, group size, learning scaffold, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, could all support the cultivation of collaborative problem-solving in critical thinking. Among them, the effect size differences between the learning stage and measuring tool are not significant, which does not explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

In terms of the learning stage, various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively without significant intergroup differences, indicating that we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking.

Although high education accounts for 70.89% of all empirical studies performed by researchers, high school may be the appropriate learning stage to foster students’ critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving since it has the largest overall effect size. This phenomenon may be related to student’s cognitive development, which needs to be further studied in follow-up research.

With regard to teaching type, mixed course teaching may be the best teaching method to cultivate students’ critical thinking. Relevant studies have shown that in the actual teaching process if students are trained in thinking methods alone, the methods they learn are isolated and divorced from subject knowledge, which is not conducive to their transfer of thinking methods; therefore, if students’ thinking is trained only in subject teaching without systematic method training, it is challenging to apply to real-world circumstances (Ruggiero, 2012 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Teaching critical thinking as mixed course teaching in parallel to other subject teachings can achieve the best effect on learners’ critical thinking, and explicit critical thinking instruction is more effective than less explicit critical thinking instruction (Bensley and Spero, 2014 ).

In terms of the intervention duration, with longer intervention times, the overall effect size shows an upward tendency. Thus, the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated. Critical thinking, as a key competency for students in the 21st century, is difficult to get a meaningful improvement in a brief intervention duration. Instead, it could be developed over a lengthy period of time through consistent teaching and the progressive accumulation of knowledge (Halpern, 2001 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Therefore, future empirical studies ought to take these restrictions into account throughout a longer period of critical thinking instruction.

With regard to group size, a group size of 2–3 persons has the highest effect size, and the comprehensive effect size decreases with increasing group size in general. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a group composed of two to four members is most appropriate for collaborative learning (Schellens and Valcke, 2006 ). However, the meta-analysis results also indicate that once the group size exceeds 7 people, small groups cannot produce better interaction and performance than large groups. This may be because the learning scaffolds of technique support, resource support, and teacher support improve the frequency and effectiveness of interaction among group members, and a collaborative group with more members may increase the diversity of views, which is helpful to cultivate critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

With regard to the learning scaffold, the three different kinds of learning scaffolds can all enhance critical thinking. Among them, the teacher-supported learning scaffold has the largest overall effect size, demonstrating the interdependence of effective learning scaffolds and collaborative problem-solving. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a successful strategy is to encourage learners to collaborate, come up with solutions, and develop critical thinking skills by using learning scaffolds (Reiser, 2004 ; Xu et al., 2022 ); learning scaffolds can lower task complexity and unpleasant feelings while also enticing students to engage in learning activities (Wood et al., 2006 ); learning scaffolds are designed to assist students in using learning approaches more successfully to adapt the collaborative problem-solving process, and the teacher-supported learning scaffolds have the greatest influence on critical thinking in this process because they are more targeted, informative, and timely (Xu et al., 2022 ).

With respect to the measuring tool, despite the fact that standardized measurement tools (such as the WGCTA, CCTT, and CCTST) have been acknowledged as trustworthy and effective by worldwide experts, only 54.43% of the research included in this meta-analysis adopted them for assessment, and the results indicated no intergroup differences. These results suggest that not all teaching circumstances are appropriate for measuring critical thinking using standardized measurement tools. “The measuring tools for measuring thinking ability have limits in assessing learners in educational situations and should be adapted appropriately to accurately assess the changes in learners’ critical thinking.”, according to Simpson and Courtney ( 2002 , p. 91). As a result, in order to more fully and precisely gauge how learners’ critical thinking has evolved, we must properly modify standardized measuring tools based on collaborative problem-solving learning contexts.

With regard to the subject area, the comprehensive effect size of science departments (e.g., mathematics, science, medical science) is larger than that of language arts and social sciences. Some recent international education reforms have noted that critical thinking is a basic part of scientific literacy. Students with scientific literacy can prove the rationality of their judgment according to accurate evidence and reasonable standards when they face challenges or poorly structured problems (Kyndt et al., 2013 ), which makes critical thinking crucial for developing scientific understanding and applying this understanding to practical problem solving for problems related to science, technology, and society (Yore et al., 2007 ).

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Other than those stated in the discussion above, the following suggestions are offered for critical thinking instruction utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

First, teachers should put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, to design real problems based on collaborative situations. This meta-analysis provides evidence to support the view that collaborative problem-solving has a strong synergistic effect on promoting students’ critical thinking. Asking questions about real situations and allowing learners to take part in critical discussions on real problems during class instruction are key ways to teach critical thinking rather than simply reading speculative articles without practice (Mulnix, 2012 ). Furthermore, the improvement of students’ critical thinking is realized through cognitive conflict with other learners in the problem situation (Yang et al., 2008 ). Consequently, it is essential for teachers to put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, and design real problems and encourage students to discuss, negotiate, and argue based on collaborative problem-solving situations.

Second, teachers should design and implement mixed courses to cultivate learners’ critical thinking, utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving. Critical thinking can be taught through curriculum instruction (Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), with the goal of cultivating learners’ critical thinking for flexible transfer and application in real problem-solving situations. This meta-analysis shows that mixed course teaching has a highly substantial impact on the cultivation and promotion of learners’ critical thinking. Therefore, teachers should design and implement mixed course teaching with real collaborative problem-solving situations in combination with the knowledge content of specific disciplines in conventional teaching, teach methods and strategies of critical thinking based on poorly structured problems to help students master critical thinking, and provide practical activities in which students can interact with each other to develop knowledge construction and critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Third, teachers should be more trained in critical thinking, particularly preservice teachers, and they also should be conscious of the ways in which teachers’ support for learning scaffolds can promote critical thinking. The learning scaffold supported by teachers had the greatest impact on learners’ critical thinking, in addition to being more directive, targeted, and timely (Wood et al., 2006 ). Critical thinking can only be effectively taught when teachers recognize the significance of critical thinking for students’ growth and use the proper approaches while designing instructional activities (Forawi, 2016 ). Therefore, with the intention of enabling teachers to create learning scaffolds to cultivate learners’ critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem solving, it is essential to concentrate on the teacher-supported learning scaffolds and enhance the instruction for teaching critical thinking to teachers, especially preservice teachers.

Implications and limitations

There are certain limitations in this meta-analysis, but future research can correct them. First, the search languages were restricted to English and Chinese, so it is possible that pertinent studies that were written in other languages were overlooked, resulting in an inadequate number of articles for review. Second, these data provided by the included studies are partially missing, such as whether teachers were trained in the theory and practice of critical thinking, the average age and gender of learners, and the differences in critical thinking among learners of various ages and genders. Third, as is typical for review articles, more studies were released while this meta-analysis was being done; therefore, it had a time limit. With the development of relevant research, future studies focusing on these issues are highly relevant and needed.

Conclusions

The subject of the magnitude of collaborative problem-solving’s impact on fostering students’ critical thinking, which received scant attention from other studies, was successfully addressed by this study. The question of the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking was addressed in this study, which addressed a topic that had gotten little attention in earlier research. The following conclusions can be made:

Regarding the results obtained, collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster learners’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]). With respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving can significantly and effectively improve students’ attitudinal tendency, and the comprehensive effect is significant (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

As demonstrated by both the results and the discussion, there are varying degrees of beneficial effects on students’ critical thinking from all seven moderating factors, which were found across 36 studies. In this context, the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have a positive impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. Since the learning stage (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05) and measuring tools (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05) did not demonstrate any significant intergroup differences, we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included within the article and its supplementary information files, and the supplementary information files are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IPFJO6 .

Bensley DA, Spero RA (2014) Improving critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive monitoring through direct infusion. Think Skills Creat 12:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Castle A (2009) Defining and assessing critical thinking skills for student radiographers. Radiography 15(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2007.10.007

Chen XD (2013) An empirical study on the influence of PBL teaching model on critical thinking ability of non-English majors. J PLA Foreign Lang College 36 (04):68–72

Google Scholar  

Cohen A (1992) Antecedents of organizational commitment across occupational groups: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130602

Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: a step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, London, England

Cindy HS (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 51(1):31–39

Duch BJ, Gron SD, Allen DE (2001) The power of problem-based learning: a practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline. Stylus Educ Sci 2:190–198

Ennis RH (1989) Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res 18(3):4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004

Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Eric document reproduction service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed315423

Facione PA, Facione NC (1992) The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the CCTDI test manual. California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Forawi SA (2016) Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Think Skills Creat 20:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005

Halpern DF (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J Gen Educ 50(4):270–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/27797889

Hu WP, Liu J (2015) Cultivation of pupils’ thinking ability: a five-year follow-up study. Psychol Behav Res 13(05):648–654. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2015.05.010

Huber K (2016) Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 86(2):431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Kek MYCA, Huijser H (2011) The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. High Educ Res Dev 30(3):329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074

Kuncel NR (2011) Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). National Research Council, Washington, DC

Kyndt E, Raes E, Lismont B, Timmers F, Cascallar E, Dochy F (2013) A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educ Res Rev 10(2):133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Leng J, Lu XX (2020) Is critical thinking really teachable?—A meta-analysis based on 79 experimental or quasi experimental studies. Open Educ Res 26(06):110–118. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2020.06.011

Liang YZ, Zhu K, Zhao CL (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ Res 38(10):87–92. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2017.10.014

Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical meta-analysis. International Educational and Professional, London, pp. 92–160

Liu Z, Wu W, Jiang Q (2020) A study on the influence of problem based learning on college students’ critical thinking-based on a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Explor High Educ 03:43–49

Morris SB (2008) Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organ Res Methods 11(2):364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Mulnix JW (2012) Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educ Philos Theory 44(5):464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Naber J, Wyatt TH (2014) The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 34(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002

National Research Council (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Niu L, Behar HLS, Garvan CW (2013) Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 9(12):114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Peng ZM, Deng L (2017) Towards the core of education reform: cultivating critical thinking skills as the core of skills in the 21st century. Res Educ Dev 24:57–63. https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2017.24.011

Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13(3):273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2

Ruggiero VR (2012) The art of thinking: a guide to critical and creative thought, 4th edn. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

Schellens T, Valcke M (2006) Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput Educ 46(4):349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.010

Sendag S, Odabasi HF (2009) Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 53(1):132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008

Sison R (2008) Investigating Pair Programming in a Software Engineering Course in an Asian Setting. 2008 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2008.61

Simpson E, Courtney M (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Mary Courtney 8(2):89–98

Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S (2006) Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? Publication bias in meta-analysis. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, pp. 261–286

Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K (2010) A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med Educ 40(6):547–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x

Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G (2006) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2):89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Wei T, Hong S (2022) The meaning and realization of teachable critical thinking. Educ Theory Practice 10:51–57

Xu EW, Wang W, Wang QX (2022) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2

Yang YC, Newby T, Bill R (2008) Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: a quasi-experimental study on promoting learners’ critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 50(4):1572–1585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.006

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007) The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 5(4):559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Zhang T, Zhang S, Gao QQ, Wang JH (2022) Research on the development of learners’ critical thinking in online peer review. Audio Visual Educ Res 6:53–60. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2022.06.08

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the graduate scientific research and innovation project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region named “Research on in-depth learning of high school information technology courses for the cultivation of computing thinking” (No. XJ2022G190) and the independent innovation fund project for doctoral students of the College of Educational Science of Xinjiang Normal University named “Research on project-based teaching of high school information technology courses from the perspective of discipline core literacy” (No. XJNUJKYA2003).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science, Xinjiang Normal University, 830017, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Enwei Xu, Wei Wang & Qingxia Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Enwei Xu or Wei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary tables, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Xu, E., Wang, W. & Wang, Q. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Download citation

Received : 07 August 2022

Accepted : 04 January 2023

Published : 11 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Impacts of online collaborative learning on students’ intercultural communication apprehension and intercultural communicative competence.

• Hoa Thi Hoang Chau
• Hung Phu Bui
• Quynh Thi Huong Dinh

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis

Sustainable electricity generation and farm-grid utilization from photovoltaic aquaculture: a bibliometric analysis.

• A. A. Amusa
• M. Alhassan

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

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

7 Critical Thinking and Evaluating Information

In this chapter, you will read a chapter on Critical Thinking and Evaluating Information from a module on Effective Learning Strategies, Student Success by Jazzabel Maya at Austin Community College, Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike

Use warming up, working out, and cooling down strategies to read the chapter. You will participate in a discussion and write a journal after you finish reading.

Remember to write down the strategies you’re using to warm up, work out, and cool down.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Define critical thinking
• Describe the role that logic plays in critical thinking
• Describe how both critical and creative thinking skills can be used to problem-solve
• Describe how critical thinking skills can be used to evaluate information
• Apply the CRAAP test to evaluate sources of information
• Identify strategies for developing yourself as a critical thinker

Critical Thinking and Evaluating Information

Critical Thinking

As a college student, you are tasked with engaging and expanding your thinking skills. One of the most important of these skills is critical thinking because it relates to nearly all tasks, situations, topics, careers, environments, challenges, and opportunities. It is a “domain-general” thinking skill, not one that is specific to a particular subject area.

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking  is clear, reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do. It means asking probing questions like “How do we know?” or “Is this true in every case or just in this instance?” It involves being skeptical and challenging assumptions rather than simply memorizing facts or blindly accepting what you hear or read.

Imagine, for example, that you’re reading a history textbook. You wonder who wrote it and why, because you detect certain biases in the writing. You find that the author has a limited scope of research focused only on a particular group within a population. In this case, your critical thinking reveals that there are “other sides to the story.”

Who are critical thinkers, and what characteristics do they have in common? Critical thinkers are usually curious and reflective people. They like to explore and probe new areas and seek knowledge, clarification, and new solutions. They ask pertinent questions, evaluate statements and arguments, and they distinguish between facts and opinion. They are also willing to examine their own beliefs, possessing a manner of humility that allows them to admit lack of knowledge or understanding when needed. They are open to changing their mind. Perhaps most of all, they actively enjoy learning, and seeking new knowledge is a lifelong pursuit. This may well be you!

No matter where you are on the road to being a critical thinker, you can always more fully develop and finely tune your skills. Doing so will help you develop more balanced arguments, express yourself clearly, read critically, and glean important information efficiently. Critical thinking skills will help you in any profession or any circumstance of life, from science to art to business to teaching. With critical thinking, you become a clearer thinker and problem solver.

Critical Thinking and Logic

Critical thinking is fundamentally a process of questioning information and data. You may question the information you read in a textbook, or you may question what a politician or a professor or a classmate says. You can also question a commonly-held belief or a new idea. With critical thinking, anything and everything is subject to question and examination for the purpose of logically constructing reasoned perspectives.

What Is Logic?

The word  logic  comes from the Ancient Greek  logike , referring to the science or art of reasoning. Using logic, a person evaluates arguments and reasoning and strives to distinguish between good and bad reasoning, or between truth and falsehood. Using logic, you can evaluate the ideas and claims of others, make good decisions, and form sound beliefs about the world. [1]

Questions of Logic in Critical Thinking

Let’s use a simple example of applying logic to a critical-thinking situation. In this hypothetical scenario, a man has a Ph.D. in political science, and he works as a professor at a local college. His wife works at the college, too. They have three young children in the local school system, and their family is well known in the community. The man is now running for political office. Are his credentials and experience sufficient for entering public office? Will he be effective in the political office? Some voters might believe that his personal life and current job, on the surface, suggest he will do well in the position, and they will vote for him. In truth, the characteristics described don’t guarantee that the man will do a good job. The information is somewhat irrelevant. What else might you want to know? How about whether the man had already held a political office and done a good job? In this case, we want to think critically about how much information is adequate in order to make a decision based on  logic  instead of  assumptions.

The following questions, presented in Figure 1, below, are ones you may apply to formulating a logical, reasoned perspective in the above scenario or any other situation:

• What’s happening?  Gather the basic information and begin to think of questions.
• Why is it important?  Ask yourself why it’s significant and whether or not you agree.
• What don’t I see?  Is there anything important missing?
• How do I know?  Ask yourself where the information came from and how it was constructed.
• Who is saying it?  What’s the position of the speaker and what is influencing them?
• What else?   What if?  What other ideas exist and are there other possibilities?

Problem-Solving with Critical Thinking

For most people, a typical day is filled with critical thinking and problem-solving challenges. In fact, critical thinking and problem-solving go hand-in-hand. They both refer to using knowledge, facts, and data to solve problems effectively. But with problem-solving, you are specifically identifying, selecting, and defending your solution. Below are some examples of using critical thinking to problem-solve:

• Your roommate was upset and said some unkind words to you, which put a crimp in the relationship. You try to see through the angry behaviors to determine how you might best support the roommate and help bring the relationship back to a comfortable spot.
• Your campus club has been languishing due to lack of participation and funds. The new club president, though, is a marketing major and has identified some strategies to interest students in joining and supporting the club. Implementation is forthcoming.
• Your final art class project challenges you to conceptualize form in new ways. On the last day of class when students present their projects, you describe the techniques you used to fulfill the assignment. You explain why and how you selected that approach.
• Your math teacher sees that the class is not quite grasping a concept. She uses clever questioning to dispel anxiety and guide you to a new understanding of the concept.
• You have a job interview for a position that you feel you are only partially qualified for, although you really want the job and you are excited about the prospects. You analyze how you will explain your skills and experiences in a way to show that you are a good match for the prospective employer.
• You are doing well in college, and most of your college and living expenses are covered. But there are some gaps between what you want and what you feel you can afford. You analyze your income, savings, and budget to better calculate what you will need to stay in college and maintain your desired level of spending.

Problem-Solving Action Checklist

Problem-solving can be an efficient and rewarding process, especially if you are organized and mindful of critical steps and strategies. Remember to assume the attributes of a good critical thinker: if you are curious, reflective, knowledge-seeking, open to change, probing, organized, and ethical, your challenge or problem will be less of a hurdle, and you’ll be in a good position to find intelligent solutions. The steps outlined in this checklist will help you adhere to these qualities in your approach to any problem:

Critical and Creative Thinking

Critical and creative thinking (described in more detail in Chapter 6: Theories of Learning) complement each other when it comes to problem-solving. The following words, by Dr. Andrew Robert Baker, are excerpted from his “Thinking Critically and Creatively” essay. Dr. Baker illuminates some of the many ways that college students will be exposed to critical and creative thinking and how it can enrich their learning experiences.

THINKING CRITICALLY AND CREATIVELY Critical thinking skills are perhaps the most fundamental skills involved in making judgments and solving problems. You use them every day, and you can continue improving them. The ability to think critically about a matter—to analyze a question, situation, or problem down to its most basic parts—is what helps us evaluate the accuracy and truthfulness of statements, claims, and information we read and hear. It is the sharp knife that, when honed, separates fact from fiction, honesty from lies, and the accurate from the misleading. We all use this skill to one degree or another almost every day. For example, we use critical thinking every day as we consider the latest consumer products and why one particular product is the best among its peers. Is it a quality product because a celebrity endorses it? Because a lot of other people may have used it? Because it is made by one company versus another? Or perhaps because it is made in one country or another? These are questions representative of critical thinking. The academic setting demands more of us in terms of critical thinking than everyday life. It demands that we evaluate information and analyze myriad issues. It is the environment where our critical thinking skills can be the difference between success and failure. In this environment we must consider information in an analytical, critical manner. We must ask questions—What is the source of this information? Is this source an expert one and what makes it so? Are there multiple perspectives to consider on an issue? Do multiple sources agree or disagree on an issue? Does quality research substantiate information or opinion? Do I have any personal biases that may affect my consideration of this information? It is only through purposeful, frequent, intentional questioning such as this that we can sharpen our critical thinking skills and improve as students, learners and researchers. While critical thinking analyzes information and roots out the true nature and facets of problems, it is creative thinking that drives progress forward when it comes to solving these problems. Exceptional creative thinkers are people that invent new solutions to existing problems that do not rely on past or current solutions. They are the ones who invent solution C when everyone else is still arguing between A and B. Creative thinking skills involve using strategies to clear the mind so that our thoughts and ideas can transcend the current limitations of a problem and allow us to see beyond barriers that prevent new solutions from being found. Brainstorming is the simplest example of intentional creative thinking that most people have tried at least once. With the quick generation of many ideas at once, we can block-out our brain’s natural tendency to limit our solution-generating abilities so we can access and combine many possible solutions/thoughts and invent new ones. It is sort of like sprinting through a race’s finish line only to find there is new track on the other side and we can keep going, if we choose. As with critical thinking, higher education both demands creative thinking from us and is the perfect place to practice and develop the skill. Everything from word problems in a math class, to opinion or persuasive speeches and papers, call upon our creative thinking skills to generate new solutions and perspectives in response to our professor’s demands. Creative thinking skills ask questions such as—What if? Why not? What else is out there? Can I combine perspectives/solutions? What is something no one else has brought-up? What is being forgotten/ignored? What about ______? It is the opening of doors and options that follows problem-identification. Consider an assignment that required you to compare two different authors on the topic of education and select and defend one as better. Now add to this scenario that your professor clearly prefers one author over the other. While critical thinking can get you as far as identifying the similarities and differences between these authors and evaluating their merits, it is creative thinking that you must use if you wish to challenge your professor’s opinion and invent new perspectives on the authors that have not previously been considered. So, what can we do to develop our critical and creative thinking skills? Although many students may dislike it, group work is an excellent way to develop our thinking skills. Many times I have heard from students their disdain for working in groups based on scheduling, varied levels of commitment to the group or project, and personality conflicts too, of course. True—it’s not always easy, but that is why it is so effective. When we work collaboratively on a project or problem we bring many brains to bear on a subject. These different brains will naturally develop varied ways of solving or explaining problems and examining information. To the observant individual we see that this places us in a constant state of back and forth critical/creative thinking modes. For example, in group work we are simultaneously analyzing information and generating solutions on our own, while challenging other’s analyses/ideas and responding to challenges to our own analyses/ideas. This is part of why students tend to avoid group work—it challenges us as thinkers and forces us to analyze others while defending ourselves, which is not something we are used to or comfortable with as most of our educational experiences involve solo work. Your professors know this—that’s why we assign it—to help you grow as students, learners, and thinkers! —Dr. Andrew Robert Baker,  Foundations of Academic Success: Words of Wisdom

Evaluating Information with Critical Thinking

Evaluating information can be one of the most complex tasks you will be faced with in college. But if you utilize the following four strategies, you will be well on your way to success:

• Read for understanding
• Examine arguments
• Clarify thinking
• Cultivate “habits of mind”

Read for Understanding

When you read, take notes or mark the text to track your thinking about what you are reading. As you make connections and ask questions in response to what you read,  you monitor your comprehension and enhance your long-term understanding of the material. You will want to mark important arguments and key facts. Indicate where you agree and disagree or have further questions. You don’t necessarily need to read every word, but make sure you understand the concepts or the intentions behind what is written. See the chapter on  Active Reading Strategies  for additional tips.

Examine Arguments

When you examine arguments or claims that an author, speaker, or other source is making, your goal is to identify and examine the hard facts. You can use the spectrum of authority strategy for this purpose. The spectrum of authority strategy assists you in identifying the “hot” end of an argument—feelings, beliefs, cultural influences, and societal influences—and the “cold” end of an argument—scientific influences. The most compelling arguments balance elements from both ends of the spectrum. The following video explains this strategy in further detail:

Clarify Thinking

When you use critical thinking to evaluate information, you need to clarify your thinking to yourself and likely to others. Doing this well is mainly a process of asking and answering probing questions, such as the logic questions discussed earlier. Design your questions to fit your needs, but be sure to cover adequate ground. What is the purpose? What question are we trying to answer? What point of view is being expressed? What assumptions are we or others making? What are the facts and data we know, and how do we know them? What are the concepts we’re working with? What are the conclusions, and do they make sense? What are the implications?

Cultivate “Habits of Mind”

“Habits of mind” are the personal commitments, values, and standards you have about the principle of good thinking. Consider your intellectual commitments, values, and standards. Do you approach problems with an open mind, a respect for truth, and an inquiring attitude? Some good habits to have when thinking critically are being receptive to having your opinions changed, having respect for others, being independent and not accepting something is true until you’ve had the time to examine the available evidence, being fair-minded, having respect for a reason, having an inquiring mind, not making assumptions, and always, especially, questioning your own conclusions—in other words, developing an intellectual work ethic. Try to work these qualities into your daily life.

In 2010, a textbook being used in fourth-grade classrooms in Virginia became big news for all the wrong reasons. The book,  Our Virginia  by Joy Masoff, had caught the attention of a parent who was helping her child do her homework, according to  an article in  The Washington Post . Carol Sheriff was a historian for the College of William and Mary and as she worked with her daughter, she began to notice some glaring historical errors, not the least of which was a passage which described how thousands of African Americans fought for the South during the Civil War.

Further investigation into the book revealed that, although the author had written textbooks on a variety of subjects, she was not a trained historian. The research she had done to write  Our Virginia,  and in particular the information she included about Black Confederate soldiers, was done through the Internet and included sources created by groups like the Sons of Confederate Veterans, an organization which promotes views of history that de-emphasize the role of slavery in the Civil War.

How did a book with errors like these come to be used as part of the curriculum and who was at fault? Was it Masoff for using untrustworthy sources for her research? Was it the editors who allowed the book to be published with these errors intact? Was it the school board for approving the book without more closely reviewing its accuracy?

There are a number of issues at play in the case of  Our Virginia , but there’s no question that evaluating sources is an important part of the research process and doesn’t just apply to Internet sources. Using inaccurate, irrelevant, or poorly researched sources can affect the quality of your own work. Being able to understand and apply the concepts that follow is crucial to becoming a more savvy user and creator of information.

When you begin evaluating sources, what should you consider? The  CRAAP test  is a series of common evaluative elements you can use to evaluate the  C urrency,  R elevance,  A uthority,  A ccuracy, and  P urpose of your sources. The CRAAP test was developed by librarians at California State University at Chico and it gives you a good, overall set of elements to look for when evaluating a resource. Let’s consider what each of these evaluative elements means. You can visit the ACC Library’s Web page for a tutorial on  Evaluating Information  using the CRAAP test.

One of the most important and interesting steps to take as you begin researching a subject is selecting the resources that will help you build your thesis and support your assertions. Certain topics require you to pay special attention to how current your resource is—because they are time sensitive, because they have evolved so much over the years, or because new research comes out on the topic so frequently. When evaluating the currency of an article, consider the following:

• When was the item written, and how frequently does the publication come out?
• Is there evidence of newly added or updated information in the item?
• If the information is dated, is it still suitable for your topic?
• How frequently does information change about your topic?

Understanding what resources are most applicable to your subject and why they are applicable can help you focus and refine your thesis. Many topics are broad and searching for information on them produces a wide range of resources. Narrowing your topic and focusing on resources specific to your needs can help reduce the piles of information and help you focus in on what is truly important to read and reference. When determining relevance consider the following:

• Does the item contain information relevant to your argument or thesis?
• Read the article’s introduction, thesis, and conclusion.
• Scan main headings and identify article keywords.
• For book resources, start with the index or table of contents—how wide a scope does the item have? Will you use part or all of this resource?
• Does the information presented support or refute your ideas?
• If the information refutes your ideas, how will this change your argument?
• Does the material provide you with current information?
• What is the material’s intended audience?

Understanding more about your information’s source helps you determine when, how, and where to use that information. Is your author an expert on the subject? Do they have some personal stake in the argument they are making? What is the author or information producer’s background? When determining the authority of your source, consider the following:

• What are the author’s credentials?
• What is the author’s level of education, experience, and/or occupation?
• What qualifies the author to write about this topic?
• What affiliations does the author have? Could these affiliations affect their position?
• What organization or body published the information? Is it authoritative? Does it have an explicit position or bias?

Determining where information comes from, if the evidence supports the information, and if the information has been reviewed or refereed can help you decide how and whether to use a source. When determining the accuracy of a source, consider the following:

• Is the source well-documented? Does it include footnotes, citations, or a bibliography?
• Is information in the source presented as fact, opinion, or propaganda? Are biases clear?
• Can you verify information from the references cited in the source?
• Is the information written clearly and free of typographical and grammatical mistakes? Does the source look to be edited before publication? A clean, well-presented paper does not always indicate accuracy, but usually at least means more eyes have been on the information.

Knowing why the information was created is a key to evaluation. Understanding the reason or purpose of the information, if the information has clear intentions, or if the information is fact, opinion, or propaganda will help you decide how and why to use information:

• Is the author’s purpose to inform, sell, persuade, or entertain?
• Does the source have an obvious bias or prejudice?
• Is the article presented from multiple points of view?
• Does the author omit important facts or data that might disprove their argument?
• Is the author’s language informal, joking, emotional, or impassioned?
• Is the information clearly supported by evidence?

When you feel overwhelmed by the information you are finding, the CRAAP test can help you determine which information is the most useful to your research topic. How you respond to what you find out using the CRAAP test will depend on your topic. Maybe you want to use two overtly biased resources to inform an overview of typical arguments in a particular field. Perhaps your topic is historical and currency means the past hundred years rather than the past one or two years. Use the CRAAP test, be knowledgeable about your topic, and you will be on your way to evaluating information efficiently and well!

Developing Yourself As a Critical Thinker

Critical thinking is a fundamental skill for college students, but it should also be a lifelong pursuit. Below are additional strategies to develop yourself as a critical thinker in college and in everyday life:

• Reflect and practice : Always reflect on what you’ve learned. Is it true all the time? How did you arrive at your conclusions?
• Use wasted time : It’s certainly important to make time for relaxing, but if you find you are indulging in too much of a good thing, think about using your time more constructively. Determine when you do your best thinking and try to learn something new during that part of the day.
• Redefine the way you see things : It can be very uninteresting to always think the same way. Challenge yourself to see familiar things in new ways. Put yourself in someone else’s shoes and consider things from a different angle or perspective.  If you’re trying to solve a problem, list all your concerns: what you need in order to solve it, who can help, what some possible barriers might be, etc. It’s often possible to reframe a problem as an opportunity. Try to find a solution where there seems to be none.
• Analyze the influences on your thinking and in your life : Why do you think or feel the way you do? Analyze your influences. Think about who in your life influences you. Do you feel or react a certain way because of social convention, or because you believe it is what is expected of you? Try to break out of any molds that may be constricting you.
• Express yourself : Critical thinking also involves being able to express yourself clearly. Most important in expressing yourself clearly is stating one point at a time. You might be inclined to argue every thought, but you might have greater impact if you focus just on your main arguments. This will help others to follow your thinking clearly. For more abstract ideas, assume that your audience may not understand. Provide examples, analogies, or metaphors where you can.
• Enhance your wellness : It’s easier to think critically when you take care of your mental and physical health. Try taking activity breaks throughout the day to reach 30 to 60 minutes of physical activity each day. Scheduling physical activity into your day can help lower stress and increase mental alertness. Also,  do your most difficult work when you have the most energy . Think about the time of day you are most effective and have the most energy. Plan to do your most difficult work during these times. And be sure to  reach out for help i f you feel you need assistance with your mental or physical health (see  Maintaining Your Mental and Physical Health  for more information).

Complete Section #2 Below: ACTIVITY: REFLECT ON CRITICAL THINKING

Key takeaways.

• Critical thinking is logical and reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do.
• Critical thinking involves questioning and evaluating information.
• Critical and creative thinking both contribute to our ability to solve problems in a variety of contexts.
• Evaluating information is a complex, but essential, process. You can use the CRAAP test to help determine if sources and information are reliable.
• You can take specific actions to develop and strengthen your critical thinking skills.

Use the warm up, work out, and cool down strategies for a discussion.

Prepare for a discussion by writing down the main ideas and most important supporting points in this chapter. Prepare several of your own responses to the supporting points. These might be examples of how you use critical thinking in your life. What questions might you be prepared to ask your fellow students during this discussion.

After the discussion, reflect on what you’ve learned from the other students.

Use warm up, work out, and cool down strategies for this journal writing activity.

Think about someone you consider to be a critical thinker (friend, professor, historical figure, etc). What qualities does he/she have?

• Review some of the critical thinking strategies discussed on this page. Pick one strategy that makes sense to you. How can you apply this critical thinking technique to your academic work?
• Habits of mind are attitudes and beliefs that influence how you approach the world (i.e., inquiring attitude, open mind, respect for truth, etc). What is one habit of mind you would like to actively develop over the next year? How will you develop a daily practice to cultivate this habit?
• Write your responses in journal form, and submit according to your instructor’s guidelines.

Academic Literacy Copyright © by Lori-Beth Larsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Search Search Search …
• Search Search …

The Role of Intuition in Critical Thinking: Unraveling the Connection

Intuition plays a significant role in the process of critical thinking . As an innate ability, intuition allows individuals to make decisions and judgments swiftly, based on their subconscious knowledge and experiences. It acts as an internal compass, guiding individuals in various mental and emotional situations by providing them with a sense of direction. In contrast to analytical thinking, which involves a step-by-step evaluation of data and evidence, intuitive thinking requires less conscious effort and can be more efficient in certain circumstances.

However, balancing intuition with analytical thinking is crucial for effective critical thinking. Relying solely on intuition can lead to biased judgments and flawed decision-making , while overanalyzing information can inhibit creativity and create unnecessary roadblocks in the resolution of problems. In various fields, such as nursing, business, and arts, both analytical and intuitive thinking contribute to the development of well-rounded decision-making strategies.

Key Takeaways

• Intuition is an essential component of critical thinking, helping individuals make fast judgments based on subconscious knowledge.
• It is crucial to balance intuition with analytical thinking to avoid biases and improve decision-making abilities.
• The integration of intuition and analytical thinking can lead to effective problem-solving strategies across diverse disciplines. 

Intuition and Critical Thinking

Definitions.

Intuition refers to the ability to quickly gain an understanding or make judgments without actively engaging in logical reasoning, often based on previous experiences or subconscious processes. It is a mode of thinking that can be trained and can play a constructive role in decision-making. In contrast, critical thinking involves the explicit and rational evaluation of information to arrive at reasoned conclusions, making use of logic and other intellectual skills.

Both intuition and critical thinking play important roles in various aspects of life, including art and decision-making processes. These two modes of thought can complement each other, with intuition providing quick insights, while critical thinking ensures a more thorough analysis of the situation.

Intuitive thinking has been found to be valuable in certain complex fields like dentistry , where experienced practitioners might rely on their intuition to make time-sensitive decisions. These choices are often superior to those made based on clear evidence and rational thought alone due to the wealth of deeply stored knowledge acquired over the years.

In the realm of art , both intuition and critical thinking contribute to the creative process. Intuitive thought can lead to the genesis of novel ideas, while critical thinking helps artists refine and evaluate these ideas, ultimately shaping their work.

It is crucial to strike a balance between these two modes of thought in order to benefit from the insights provided by intuition while still ensuring that decisions made are well-considered and grounded in logic. Teaching for intuitive understanding can help individuals develop this balance, enabling them to make effective decisions more efficiently.

In conclusion, the roles of intuition and critical thinking are closely intertwined, and understanding how to leverage both modes of thought can significantly enhance decision-making and problem-solving abilities across various domains, such as art, professional fields, and everyday life.

The Role of Intuition in Decision Making

Experts and trust.

Intuition plays a significant role in decision-making, especially among experts in various fields. Experienced professionals, such as nurses and dentists , have been found to rely on their intuition when making crucial judgments. These individuals trust their gut feelings, which stem from years of practice and memory. This trust allows experts to make swift and effective decisions while maintaining high levels of confidence in their choices.

Instincts and Insights

The ability to quickly assess situations and draw on past experience is a critical aspect of intuition. This instinctual process provides insights that may not be immediately apparent through rational analysis. In many cases, decision-makers who rely on intuition can process complex information rapidly and efficiently, making it a valuable tool for professionals who must make time-sensitive decisions. For instance, experienced physicians often use their instincts to assess patients’ conditions and determine appropriate treatments.

Risks and Comfort

Although intuition can be powerful in decision-making, it also comes with risks. When individuals rely too heavily on their gut feelings, they may experience cognitive biases that cloud their judgment. That is why it is essential for decision-makers to strike a balance between trusting their instincts and conducting a thorough evaluation of the situation. By doing so, they can minimize the risks associated with purely intuitive decision-making and achieve a level of comfort in their decisions that reflects both instinct and reason.

In summary, intuition plays a significant role in decision-making, particularly for experts who have honed their abilities through years of practice. By acknowledging the advantages of intuition while remaining mindful of its limitations, decision-makers can make well-informed choices that draw on both their instincts and rational assessments.

The Balance of Intuition and Analytical Thinking

Analytical approaches.

In the realm of decision-making and problem-solving, striking a balance between intuition and analytical thinking is essential. Analytical thinking involves a deliberate, step-by-step process to examine a problem, gather information, and draw conclusions. This mode of thinking offers a systematic approach to breaking down complex issues, making it easier to arrive at an informed decision.

Several tools and techniques can be employed to facilitate analytical thinking, such as SWOT analysis, decision trees, and logic models. These methodologies provide a structured approach, ensuring that all aspects of a problem are considered, thus reducing the chances of overlooking important factors.

Rational versus Gut Feelings

On the other hand, intuition can be seen as the opposite of analytical thinking. It involves making decisions based on gut feelings, inner knowledge, or subconscious cues. Intuition is often faster than analytical reasoning, as it bypasses the need for conscious deliberation.

Although intuition may seem less reliable than analytical thinking, research suggests that it can play a constructive role in decision-making ( Scientific American ). The key to maximizing the effectiveness of both intuition and analytical thinking is in understanding when to use each mode.

For instance, intuition might be useful when:

• Time is a limiting factor and quick decisions are needed.
• The decision involves personal preferences or values.
• The situation calls for creativity and out-of-the-box thinking.

Conversely, analytical thinking might be more appropriate when:

• The problem involves multiple variables and requires a systematic approach.
• A detailed understanding of the issue is necessary before making a decision.
• The stakes are high, and errors could have significant consequences.

Maintaining a balance between intuition and analytical thinking requires a delicate calibration of both modes. By being aware of the strengths and limitations of each, individuals can harness their full potential in critical thinking and decision-making.

Intuition in Various Fields

Intuition plays a significant role in various fields, including nursing, business, and education. It is often considered an essential component of decision-making processes, especially in complex and uncertain situations. This section will discuss how intuition is utilized in nursing and clinical decision-making, business and operations, and education and teaching.

Nursing and Clinical Decision Making

In the field of nursing, intuition is frequently used for making clinical decisions. Nurses often rely on their tacit knowledge and experience to make quick, accurate judgments, especially when a patient’s condition requires immediate attention. Proficiency in clinical decision-making is crucial for providing safe and effective patient care. Intuitive thinking can be particularly helpful in assessing patient pain levels, detecting changes in patient status, and anticipating potential complications. In summary, intuition enables nursing professionals to make critical decisions and provide high-quality care.

Business and Operations

Intuition is also valuable in the business world, particularly in areas such as operations, management, and strategy development. Tacit knowledge gained through experience and organizational culture often helps professionals in these fields make informed decisions. For instance, managers may use their intuition to prioritize tasks, allocate resources, and assess team dynamics. Additionally, intuition is frequently used in operation management , as it allows individuals to identify potential issues and solutions quickly. Overall, the use of intuition in business and operations enables professionals to navigate complex situations, drive innovation, and achieve desired outcomes.

Education and Teaching

In education, teachers and instructors often rely on intuition to make informed decisions and adapt their teaching methods. Intuition can help them identify the best approach to communicate complex topics, assess student understanding, and foster a positive classroom environment. Educators may also utilize their intuition to anticipate student needs, recognize potential learning obstacles, and provide effective feedback. Thus, intuition plays a vital role in the field of education and teaching , contributing to successful learning experiences.

Developing Intuitive Skills

Practice and experience.

One of the most important aspects of developing intuitive skills is through practice and experience . Consistently engaging in problem-solving tasks, making decisions, and reacting to various situations can help enhance and sharpen intuition. As individuals repetitively encounter and adapt to different scenarios, their memory and pattern-recognition abilities improve, thereby fostering the growth of their intuitive abilities.

• Memory: Strong memory plays a pivotal role in refining intuitive skills, as it allows individuals to draw upon past experiences and analyze data to make informed decisions.
• Skills: Acquiring relevant skills in a particular field or area of expertise can enhance the accuracy and relevance of an individual’s intuition, making it more reliable.

Creativity and New Ideas

Intuition can also be significantly strengthened by fostering creativity and the exploration of new ideas. Embracing novel perspectives allows individuals to evaluate their thoughts and experiences in different ways, which can enhance both their cognitive and intuitive abilities.

• Routine: Breaking away from routine practices and embracing unique approaches can encourage the development of intuition. By exploring alternative methods of thinking and analyzing information, individuals can cultivate the ability to intuitively assess situations and make accurate predictions.
• Novel: Encouraging novel ideas and concepts can lead to innovative problem-solving methods, which can vastly improve an individual’s ability to think intuitively and critically.
• Unique: Embracing uniqueness and individuality can help in sharpening intuitive skills, as it allows one to approach problems or situations from a fresh perspective that might have been previously overlooked.

In conclusion, the development of intuitive skills is a crucial aspect of honing critical thinking abilities. By focusing on practice, experience, memory, skill-building, creativity, breaking routines, and exploring novel and unique ideas, individuals can effectively improve their intuitive capacities in both personal and professional contexts.

Cognitive Processes and Unconscious Mind

Cumulative knowledge.

Cognitive processes play a significant role in critical thinking, involving both conscious and unconscious elements. Employing a confident, knowledgeable, neutral, and clear tone of voice, we can discuss the importance of cumulative knowledge in the decision-making process. The accumulation of knowledge and experiences over time helps individuals build a foundation for their intuition, which can guide them in problem-solving and decision-making. This intuitive thinking , also known as System 1 thinking, occurs rapidly and often without conscious awareness.

On the other hand, analytical or System 2 thinking is a more conscious, slower, and deliberate process. It relies on reasoning and critical thinking skills to evaluate the information and make decisions. Cumulative knowledge is essential in both types of thinking processes, as it provides a solid background for making informed choices and assessments.

Despite the benefits of intuitive thinking, biases can arise from the unconscious mind. These biases are mental shortcuts that can influence our decisions, sometimes leading to errors in judgment. One such example is the availability heuristic , where people tend to rely on readily available information rather than seeking out all relevant data to make a decision.

Confirmation bias is another common pitfall, in which people unconsciously seek information that supports their existing beliefs and ignore contrary evidence. To mitigate the effects of these biases in critical thinking, it’s essential to recognize and counterbalance them by engaging in analytical thinking and actively questioning assumptions.

In conclusion, cognitive processes and the unconscious mind impact critical thinking through the interplay of cumulative knowledge and biases. A balanced approach, employing both intuitive and analytical thinking, can lead to more accurate and informed decision-making.

The Dangers and Benefits of Relying on Intuition

Intuition can play an essential role in critical thinking, helping us make quick and seemingly instinctive judgments and decisions. However, it is crucial to approach intuition with caution and balance, as relying too heavily on it can lead to potential dangers.

One of the benefits of intuition is its ability to provide rapid feedback . Our intuitive capacities, such as automatic processing, subliminal priming, and implicit memory, can quickly offer information when making decisions ( Psychology Today ). This can be particularly useful in situations where we need to act promptly, such as during an emergency or under time pressure.

On the other hand, intuition can be misleading when it comes to interpreting feedback. Intuitive judgments are often based on simple associations, which may not accurately reflect complex or fast-changing environments. As a result, intuition can sometimes lead us astray and negatively impact our decision-making process ( Psychology Today: The Dangers of Intuition ).

Decision Making

Intuition can effectively assist decision making in certain situations. For example, when facing a familiar problem, relying on intuition can lead to efficient solutions due to our past experiences and pattern recognition abilities ( Risely ). Additionally, intuitive thinking may contribute to creative problem-solving by tapping into nonconscious, nonverbal, and non-deliberative cognitive processes.

However, the danger lies in uncritically trusting intuition for every decision. Since intuition relies on simple associations and automatic responses, it can be easily influenced by biases and magical thinking – beliefs that suggest a causal relationship between unrelated thoughts, actions, or events ( Psychology Today: Why You Should Not Always Trust Your Intuition ). Directly relying on intuition in complex or unfamiliar situations can lead to suboptimal decisions or major errors.

In summary, while intuition can provide valuable insights and feedback in certain circumstances, it is essential to maintain a balanced approach to decision-making. Recognizing the potential dangers and limitations of intuition can help us critically assess the information it provides and make informed, thoughtful choices.

You may also like

Tips on How to Use Critical Thinking in Reading and Writing

Have you ever heard of the phrase, “to read between the lines?” It means digging deeper into the text you’ve just read, […]

How to Overcome Critical Thinking Barriers

Critical thinking is typically needed when graded performances and livelihoods are involved. However, its true value shines outside of academic and professional […]

Examples of Critical Thinking in Everyday

Most people think of high academia when they hear the phrase “critical thinking.” They have a natural tendency to associate it with […]

Best Decision Making Books: Top Picks for Strategic Minds

In today’s fast-paced world, making informed and effective decisions is a skill that can have a profound impact on both personal and […]

Intuitive Thinking: A Revolutionary Approach to Problem-Solving

Introduction.

Welcome to “Intuitive Thinking: A Revolutionary Approach to Problem-Solving”! In this blog, we will explore the power of intuitive thinking and how it can transform the way we tackle challenges and find innovative solutions.

Traditional problem-solving often relies on analytical thinking, which involves a logical and methodical approach to analyzing information, breaking down problems into smaller parts, and applying established frameworks and models. While analytical thinking is undoubtedly valuable, it has its limitations. It is often constrained by existing knowledge and can be slow and cumbersome, especially when faced with complex or ambiguous problems.

Intuitive thinking, on the other hand, offers a different approach. It taps into our subconscious mind, allowing us to access knowledge, insights, and creative ideas that may not be readily available to our conscious mind. It is a form of thinking that is instinctive, spontaneous, and automatic, and many successful individuals credit their achievements to their ability to trust their intuition.

This blog aims to delve into the world of intuitive thinking, exploring its definition, the science behind it, and how it differs from analytical thinking. We will debunk common misconceptions surrounding intuition and provide techniques to develop and strengthen our intuitive thinking skills.

In the following chapters, we will examine how intuitive thinking can be applied to problem-solving. We will explore case studies and examples of successful problem-solving through intuition, and discuss the integration of intuitive thinking with analytical thinking. We will also address the challenges that can arise when relying on intuition, such as biases, prejudices, uncertainty, and doubt, and provide strategies to navigate these hurdles effectively.

Furthermore, we will look into the future and explore the potential of intuitive thinking in various fields. We will examine how intuitive thinking can foster innovation and creativity, and discuss the ethical considerations and limitations of relying on intuition alone.

By the end of this blog, you will have a comprehensive understanding of intuitive thinking and its role in problem-solving. You will have gained valuable insights and techniques that can help you enhance your intuitive thinking skills and apply them in various aspects of your life.

So, let’s embark on this journey of discovery together and unlock the power of intuitive thinking to revolutionize our problem-solving approach!

Chapter 1: Understanding Intuition

Intuition is often described as a “gut feeling,” a hunch, or a sense of knowing without any logical explanation. It is a powerful and often overlooked tool in problem-solving that can lead to innovative and creative solutions.

Defining Intuition

Intuition can be defined as the ability to understand or know something instinctively, without the need for conscious reasoning. It is an instantaneous understanding or insight that arises without conscious thought. Unlike analytical thinking, which relies on logical reasoning and evidence, intuition relies on unconscious knowledge and experiences. It bypasses the limitations of conscious thought and can provide unique perspectives on a problem.

The Science behind Intuitive Thinking

Numerous scientific studies have explored the nature and mechanisms of intuition. It is believed that intuition is a result of our brain’s ability to process information at a subconscious level. Our brains continuously collect, store, and analyze data from our experiences, creating a vast repository of tacit knowledge. Intuition taps into this repository and provides us with insights and solutions that go beyond conscious thought.

Research in neuroscience has shown that intuition involves the interplay between the conscious and unconscious parts of the brain. The unconscious mind processes information, makes connections, and sends signals to the conscious mind when it detects patterns or identifies relevant information. This process happens rapidly and often without our awareness, leading to sudden insights or “lightbulb moments.”

Common Misconceptions about Intuition

There are several common misconceptions about intuition that can hinder its effective use in problem-solving. One misconception is that intuition is purely based on guesswork or irrationality. However, intuition is not random or illogical; it is based on the deep-seated knowledge and experiences that our brain has accumulated over time.

Another misconception is that intuition is a mystical or supernatural phenomenon. While intuition may feel mysterious, it is a natural and inherent human ability. It is a product of our brain’s complex cognitive processes, and its effectiveness can be developed and enhanced through practice.

It is important to recognize that intuition is not infallible. It can be influenced by biases, emotions, and other cognitive limitations. However, by understanding the role of intuition and learning to discern valid intuitive insights from personal biases, we can harness its power and use it as a valuable tool in problem-solving.

In the next chapter, we will explore techniques and strategies that can help develop and strengthen our intuitive thinking skills, allowing us to tap into this powerful resource for finding innovative solutions.

Chapter 2: Developing Intuition

Developing intuition is a crucial step in harnessing the power of intuitive thinking. While some people may naturally have a strong intuition, it is a skill that can be cultivated and honed through practice. In this chapter, we will explore various techniques and strategies to develop and strengthen your intuitive thinking skills.

Tuning into your inner voice

One of the fundamental aspects of developing intuition is learning to listen and trust your inner voice. This inner voice often provides valuable insights and guidance, but it can be easily drowned out by the noise and distractions of everyday life. Here are some techniques to help you tune into your inner voice:

Meditation : Regular meditation practice can help quiet the mind and create space for intuitive thoughts and feelings to surface. Find a quiet and comfortable place, focus on your breath, and allow your thoughts to come and go without judgment. Through meditation, you can learn to distinguish between your inner wisdom and unnecessary mental noise.

Spend time in nature : Nature has a way of calming our mind and connecting us to our innate intuition. Take regular walks in nature, go hiking or camping, or simply sit in a park and observe the beauty of the natural world. Being in nature helps us slow down and tap into our intuitive senses.

Developing your sensory awareness

Intuition often manifests itself through our senses. Developing your sensory awareness can help you become more attuned to your intuition. Here are some techniques to enhance your sensory awareness:

Body scan : Perform a body scan meditation where you focus on each part of your body and observe any sensations or discomfort. This practice helps you develop a deeper connection with your body and enhances your ability to pick up subtle signals and messages.

Practice mindfulness : Engage in activities with heightened awareness of your senses. Whether it’s eating a meal, taking a shower, or going for a walk, consciously pay attention to the sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and sensations you experience. This helps train your brain to be more present and tuned into your surroundings.

Cultivating creativity and imagination

Intuition is closely linked to creativity and imagination. Cultivating these traits can help you tap into your intuitive thinking abilities. Here are some techniques to stimulate your creativity and imagination:

Engage in creative activities : Take up activities that inspire your creativity, such as painting, writing, playing a musical instrument, or dancing. These activities help loosen up your mind and open it to new possibilities.

Visualize and daydream : Set aside time each day to visualize and daydream about the topics or problems you want to gain insights into. Allow your mind to wander freely and see where it takes you. Sometimes, the most innovative solutions can come from these moments of unfocused imagination.

Reflecting and journaling

Reflection and journaling are powerful tools for developing intuition. They allow you to capture your thoughts, feelings, and experiences, making it easier to recognize patterns and insights. Here are some ways to incorporate reflection and journaling into your intuitive development process:

Write in a journal : Set aside time each day to write in a journal. Reflect on your experiences, thoughts, and emotions. This practice helps you gain clarity, process your feelings, and identify recurring themes or patterns.

Review past journal entries : Periodically review your past journal entries to identify any recurring themes, ideas, or insights. This retrospective analysis can give you a deeper understanding of your intuitive guidance and help you trust it more confidently.

In conclusion, developing intuition is a transformative process that requires dedication and practice. By tuning into your inner voice, enhancing your sensory awareness, cultivating creativity and imagination, and reflecting through journaling, you can strengthen your intuitive thinking skills and unlock a powerful tool for problem-solving and decision-making.

Chapter 3: Applying Intuitive Thinking to Problem-Solving

In this chapter, we will explore how to apply intuitive thinking to problem-solving and how it can complement analytical thinking. By combining both approaches, we can maximize our chances of finding innovative solutions to complex problems.

Integrating Intuitive Thinking with Analytical Thinking

Intuitive thinking and analytical thinking are often viewed as opposing approaches, but they can actually work together synergistically. Intuition allows us to tap into our subconscious knowledge and experience, while analytical thinking helps us analyze and structure our thoughts.

To integrate intuitive thinking with analytical thinking, it is important to follow these steps:

Recognize the problem : Identifying a problem is the first step in the problem-solving process. Using analytical thinking, define the problem and break it down into its component parts.

Gather information : Use analytical thinking to gather relevant data, facts, and evidence related to the problem. This information will serve as a foundation for intuitive thinking to build upon.

Engage your intuition : Once you have gathered enough information, allow your intuition to come into play. Disconnect from conscious thinking and let your mind wander. Listen to your gut feelings and pay attention to any insights that arise.

Trust your instincts : Intuitive thinking often provides us with initial ideas or hunches about potential solutions. Trust these instincts and use them as a starting point for further exploration.

Combine intuition and analysis : After trusting your instincts, switch back to analytical thinking to analyze and evaluate the potential solutions generated by your intuition. Use logic, critical thinking, and evidence to validate and refine your ideas.

Iterate and refine : Problem-solving is rarely linear, so be prepared to iterate and refine your ideas based on feedback and new insights. This process of going back and forth between intuitive and analytical thinking allows for creative and dynamic problem-solving.

By integrating intuitive thinking with analytical thinking, we can benefit from the strengths of both approaches, leading to more holistic problem-solving outcomes.

Case Studies and Examples

To illustrate the application of intuitive thinking to problem-solving, let’s explore a few real-life case studies:

Steve Jobs and Apple : Steve Jobs, the co-founder of Apple, famously relied on his intuition to drive innovation. His intuition led to the development of game-changing products like the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, which revolutionized the technology industry.

Albert Einstein and the theory of relativity : Einstein’s breakthroughs in physics were often credited to his intuitive thinking. He would imagine and visualize complex theories, trusting his intuition to guide him towards the correct answers.

Marie Curie and radioactivity : Curie’s discovery of radioactivity was driven by her intuitive thinking. She followed her instincts and pursued unconventional research paths, leading to groundbreaking findings in the field of science.

These examples demonstrate how intuitive thinking can lead to extraordinary breakthroughs and advancements in various fields.

When to Rely on Intuition

While intuitive thinking is a valuable problem-solving tool, it is essential to understand when it is appropriate to rely on it and when to use other methods. Here are some factors to consider:

Complexity of the problem : Intuitive thinking works best when dealing with complex problems that cannot be easily solved through analytical thinking alone. Intuition can offer unique insights and unconventional approaches to such challenges.

Experience and expertise : Intuitive thinking becomes more reliable when individuals have a deep understanding and expertise in a specific domain. The more knowledge and experience one has, the more reliable their intuition becomes.

Time constraints : Intuitive thinking can be a faster approach to problem-solving, making it suitable for situations with tight deadlines. However, it is crucial to balance speed with thoughtful analysis to ensure the validity of the solutions generated.

Supporting evidence : While intuitive insights can be powerful, it is important to critically evaluate them and seek supporting evidence. Analytical thinking can help validate and provide additional context for intuitive ideas.

By considering these factors, one can determine when to rely on intuitive thinking and when to leverage other problem-solving methods.

In conclusion, applying intuitive thinking to problem-solving requires a combination of intuition and analysis. Integrating both approaches allows for a more comprehensive and innovative problem-solving process. By understanding when to rely on intuition and when to use other methods, individuals can harness the power of intuitive thinking to find creative solutions to complex problems.

Chapter 4: Overcoming Challenges in Intuitive Thinking

Addressing biases and prejudices in intuitive thinking.

Intuitive thinking is not immune to biases and prejudices that can cloud our judgment and hinder effective problem-solving. It is important to be aware of these biases and actively work towards mitigating their influence. Here are some key strategies to address biases and prejudices in intuitive thinking:

Recognize your biases : The first step in overcoming biases is to acknowledge their presence. Take the time to reflect on your thought processes and identify any preconceived notions or biases that may be influencing your intuitive thinking.

Seek diverse perspectives : Engage with a diverse group of people, each bringing their unique perspectives and experiences to the table. This can help counteract biases by presenting alternative viewpoints and challenging existing assumptions.

Challenge your assumptions : Question your own beliefs and assumptions. Adopt a critical mindset and actively seek evidence that contradicts your intuitive thoughts. This will help you think more objectively and consider a wider range of possibilities.

Practice empathy : Empathy is a powerful tool in overcoming biases as it allows us to put ourselves in someone else’s shoes, understand their perspective, and empathize with their experience. By practicing empathy, we can broaden our own thinking and overcome biases rooted in our limited viewpoint.

Dealing with uncertainty and ambiguity in problem-solving

Uncertainty and ambiguity are inherent in many problem-solving situations, and they can pose challenges when relying on intuitive thinking. Here are some techniques to help you navigate uncertainty and ambiguity while utilizing intuitive thinking:

Embrace the unknown : Instead of fearing or avoiding uncertainty, embrace it as an opportunity for growth and exploration. Recognize that uncertainty can lead to breakthrough solutions and innovative ideas.

Develop tolerance for ambiguity : Cultivate a mindset that is comfortable with ambiguity. This involves accepting that not all problems have clear-cut solutions and being open to exploring multiple possibilities.

Experiment and iterate : When faced with uncertainty, it can be helpful to approach problem-solving as an iterative process. Test different ideas, gather feedback, and make adjustments along the way. This allows you to adapt to changing circumstances and refine your intuitive thinking over time.

Seek feedback and collaboration : Engage with others and seek their feedback when dealing with uncertainty. Collaborative problem-solving can provide valuable insights and help validate or challenge your intuitive ideas.

Strategies for overcoming fear and doubt when trusting your intuition

Trusting your intuition requires a certain level of confidence and self-assurance. It is common to experience fear and doubt when relying heavily on intuitive thinking. Here are some strategies for overcoming these challenges:

Cultivate self-awareness : Develop a deep understanding of your own strengths, abilities, and limitations. This self-awareness will help you build confidence in your intuitive thinking and navigate doubts more effectively.

Keep a record of successful intuitions : Maintain a journal or log of past instances where your intuition has led to successful outcomes. Reflecting on these successes can help build trust in your intuition and alleviate doubts.

Practice mindfulness and self-reflection : Engage in mindfulness practices that help you tune into your intuition and connect with your inner wisdom. Regular self-reflection can also help you identify patterns and gain insights into the accuracy of your intuitive thinking.

Take calculated risks : Overcoming fear and doubt often requires taking calculated risks. Start by experimenting with smaller decisions or situations and gradually build your confidence in making bolder choices based on intuition.

Remember, intuitive thinking is a skill that can be developed and refined over time. By addressing biases, embracing uncertainty, and building trust in your intuition, you can overcome the challenges that may arise and leverage intuitive thinking as a powerful problem-solving tool.

Chapter 5: The Future of Intuitive Thinking

Intuitive thinking has the potential to revolutionize problem-solving across various fields. As we continue to advance technologically and face increasingly complex challenges, the role of intuition becomes increasingly important. This chapter explores the potential of intuitive thinking in different areas and highlights its significance for innovation and creativity.

Intuitive Thinking in Science and Technology

Intuitive thinking has the power to transform scientific and technological advancements. By tapping into our innate ability to perceive patterns and connections, scientists can make breakthrough discoveries and develop groundbreaking technologies. For example, scientists often rely on their intuition to come up with new hypotheses and design experiments that lead to major scientific advances.

In the field of technology, intuitive thinking allows engineers and designers to create user-friendly and intuitive interfaces. By understanding how users think and interact with technology, intuitive designers can develop products that seamlessly integrate into our lives and enhance our overall experience. This approach has already been applied to the design of smartphones, virtual reality devices, and smart home technologies, among others.

Intuitive Thinking in Business and Entrepreneurship

In the business world, intuitive thinking plays a crucial role in innovation and entrepreneurial success. The ability to identify market trends, anticipate customer needs, and make strategic decisions based on intuition can give companies a significant competitive advantage. Intuitive entrepreneurs often have a natural ability to spot opportunities that others may overlook and can make bold and innovative moves that drive business growth.

Additionally, intuitive thinking can enhance problem-solving within organizations. By encouraging employees to tap into their intuitions, organizations can foster a culture of creativity and innovation, leading to more effective and efficient problem-solving approaches. This can translate into improved products and services, enhanced customer satisfaction, and increased profitability.

Ethical Considerations and Limitations of Intuitive Thinking

While intuitive thinking holds great promise, it is essential to recognize its limitations and the ethical considerations that come with it. Intuition is not infallible and can be influenced by biases and prejudices. Therefore, it is crucial to remain aware of our own biases and actively engage in critical thinking to avoid making biased decisions.

Moreover, intuitive thinking may not always be the best approach in every situation. It is essential to strike a balance between intuitive and analytical thinking, depending on the nature of the problem at hand. Some problems may require logical reasoning and extensive analysis, while others may benefit from a more intuitive and creative approach. Recognizing when to rely on intuition and when to switch to analytical thinking is a crucial skill.

Embracing the Power of Intuitive Thinking

As we enter a future shaped by constant change and increasing complexity, intuitive thinking will become an indispensable tool for problem-solving and innovation. By actively developing and harnessing our intuition, we can unlock our creative potential and find innovative solutions to the challenges we face.

To embrace the power of intuitive thinking, we must be willing to trust ourselves and our abilities. It requires overcoming fear and doubt, as well as cultivating a mindset that values and encourages intuitive thinking. By doing so, we can tap into our innate wisdom and individual experiences to uncover insights and make better decisions.

In conclusion, intuitive thinking is a revolutionary approach to problem-solving that has the potential to transform various fields. By understanding the science behind intuition and developing our intuitive thinking skills, we can leverage this powerful tool to tackle complex challenges and drive innovation. As we navigate the future, let us embrace intuitive thinking and harness its transformative power to create a better world.

In conclusion, intuitive thinking is a revolutionary approach to problem-solving that can lead to innovative and creative solutions. Throughout this guide, we have explored the power of intuition and how it differs from traditional analytical thinking. We have debunked common misconceptions about intuition and provided techniques to develop and strengthen our intuitive thinking skills.

Integrating intuitive thinking with analytical thinking can result in a well-rounded problem-solving approach. By considering both logical analysis and intuitive insights, we can uncover unique perspectives and breakthrough solutions. The case studies and examples provided have demonstrated the effectiveness of intuitive thinking in real-world problem-solving scenarios.

It is important to note that intuitive thinking is not without its challenges. We must address biases and prejudices in order to ensure that our intuitive insights are objective and impartial. Additionally, dealing with uncertainty and ambiguity can be intimidating, but by trusting our intuition, we can navigate through these challenges with confidence.

Looking towards the future, there is great potential for intuitive thinking to revolutionize various fields. From business and technology to the arts and sciences, intuitive thinking can fuel innovation and creativity. However, it is important to recognize the limitations and ethical considerations of intuitive thinking. We must use our intuition responsibly and ethically to ensure that we are making informed decisions.

In conclusion, intuitive thinking is a powerful tool for problem-solving that should not be overlooked. By embracing and cultivating our intuitive thinking skills, we can uncover new possibilities and find innovative solutions to the complex challenges we face. So, let us harness the power of intuition and embark on a journey of intuitive problem-solving.

7 Shocking Reasons Why Cognitive Development Drops in Teens

Mastering knowledge recall, intuitive thinking for entrepreneurs: unlock your potential, can intuitive thinking improve your relationships.

A Beginner's Guide to Intuitive Thinking: How-To

5 Simple Tips to Help You Unlock Your Intuition