In the 27 years since Worth Publishers invited me (David Myers) to write this book, so much has changed in the world, in psychology, and within these course resources, across ten editions. With this edition, I continue as lead author while beginning a gradual, decad e- long process of welcoming a successor author, the awar d- winning teache r- schola r- writer Nathan DeWall.

Yet across nearly three decades of Exploring Psychology there has also been a stability of purpose: to merge rigorous science with a broad human perspective that engages both mind and heart. We aim to offer a stat e- o f- th e- art introduction to psychological science that speaks to students’ needs and interests. We aspire to help students understand and appreciate the wonders of their everyday lives. And we seek to convey the inquisitive spirit with which psychologists do psychology.

We are enthusiastic about psychology and its applicability to our lives. Psychological science has the potential to expand our minds and enlarge our hearts. By studying and applying its tools, ideas, and insights, we can supplement our intuition with critical thinking, restrain our judgmentalism with compassion, and replace our illusions with understanding. By the time students complete this guided tour of psychology, they will also, we hope, have a deeper understanding of our moods and memories, about the reach of our unconscious, about how we flourish and struggle, about how we perceive our physical and social worlds, and about how our biology and culture in turn shape us. (See TABLE 1 and TABLE 2 .)

Believing with Thoreau that “anything living is easily and naturally expressed in popular language,” we seek to communicate psychology’s scholarship with crisp narrative and vivid storytelling. We hope to tell psychology’s story in a way that is warmly personal as well as rigorously scientific. We love to reflect on connections between psychology and other realms, such as literature, philosophy, history, sports, religion, politics, and popular culture. And we love to provoke thought, to play with words, and to laugh. For his pioneering 1890 Principles of Psychology, William James sought “humor and pathos.” And so do we.

We are grateful for the privilege of assisting with the teaching of this min d- expanding discipline to so many students, in so many countries, through so many different languages. To be entrusted with discerning and communicating psychology’s insights is both an exciting honor and a great responsibility.

Creating this book is a team sport. Like so many human achievements, it reflects a collective intelligence. Woodrow Wilson spoke for us: “I not only use all the brains I have, but all I can borrow.” The thousands of instructors and millions of students across the globe who have taught or studied (or both!) with our books have contributed immensely to their development. Much of this contribution has occurred spontaneously, through correspondence and conversations. For this edition, we also formally involved dozens of researchers, teaching psychologists, and students in our efforts to gather accurate and u p- t o- date information about psychology and instructor and student needs. And we look forward to continuing feedback as we strive, over future editions, to create an ever better set of resources for this course.

New C o- Author

For this edition I [DM] welcome my new c o- author, University of Kentucky professor Nathan DeWall. (For more information and videos that introduce Nathan and our collaboration, see www.MacmillanHigherEd.com/ DeWallVideos .) Nathan is not only one of psychology’s “rising stars” (as the Association for Psychological Science rightly said in 2011), he also is an awar d- winning teacher and someone who shares my passion for writin g— and for communicating psychological science through writing. Although I continue as lead author, Nathan’s fresh insights and contributions are already enriching this book, especially for this tenth edition, through his leading the revision of Chapters 2 , 4 , 11 , and 13 . But my fingerprints are also on those chapter revisions, even as his are on the other chapters. With support from our wonderful editors, this is a team project. In addition to our work together on the textbook, Nathan and I enjoy contributing to the monthly Teaching Current Directions in Psychological Science column in the APS Observer ( tinyurl.com/ MyersDeWall ) . We also blog at www.TalkPsych.com , where we share exciting new findings, everyday applications, and observations on all things psychology.

What Else Is New in the Tenth Edition?

This tenth edition is the most carefully reworked and extensively updated of all the revisions to date. This new edition features improvements to the organization and presentation, especially to our system of supporting student learning and remembering. And we offer the exciting new Immersive Learning: How Would You Know? feature in LaunchPad, engaging students in the scientific process.

“Immersive Learning: How Would You Know?” Research Activities

We [ND and DM] created these online activities to engage students in the scientific process, showing them how psychological research begins with a question, and how key decision points can alter the meaning and value of a psychological study. In a fun, interactive environment, students learn about important aspects of research design and interpretation, and develop scientific literacy and critical thinking skills in the process. I [ND] have enjoyed taking the lead on this project and sharing my research experience and enthusiasm with students. Topics include: “How Would You Know If a Cup of Coffee Can Warm Up Relationships?,” “How Would You Know If People Can Learn to Reduce Anxiety?,” and “How Would You Know If Schizophrenia Is Inherited?”

New Visual Scaffolding Chapter Openers

We were aware that students often skip over a text’s typical tw o- page chapter opene r— under the assumption it serves little purpose in learning the material to come. So, for this new edition, we worked with a talented artist to make more pedagogically effective use of this space. This new feature provides an enticing and helpful way for students to SURVEY the content in each chapter, before they QUESTION, READ, RETRIEVE, and REVIEW it (SQ3R). We’ve provided visual scaffolding  at the beginning of each chapter, offering students a  basic cognitive structure for the content to come . Flip to the beginning of any chapter to see a sample.

Hundreds of New Research Citations

Our ongoing scrutiny of dozens of scientific periodicals and science news sources, enhanced by commissioned reviews and countless e- mails from instructors and students, enables integrating our field’s most important, though t- provoking, and studen t- relevant new discoveries. Part of the pleasure that sustains this work is learning something new every day! See p. xxxvi for a list of significant Content Changes to this edition.

Reorganized Chapters

In addition to the new research activities, visual scaffolding openers, and updated coverage, we’ve introduced the following organizational changes:

Chapter 1 , Thinking Critically With Psychological Science, now has a clearer organization and greater emphasis on modern approaches, including Cros s- Cultural and Gender Psychology, and new coverage of Positive Psychology (see also TABLE 3 ). This chapter also now offers greater emphasis on designing psychological studies, and on psychology’s research ethics.

Hypnosis is now covered in the Pain discussion in Chapter 6 , Sensation and Perception (moved from Chapter 3 ).

The Social Psychology chapter now precedes the Personality chapter.

LaunchPad for Exploring Psychology , Tenth Edition

Built to solve key challenges in this course, LaunchPad gives students everything they need to prepare for class and exams, while giving instructors everything they need to quickly set up a course, shape the content to their syllabus, craft presentations and lectures, assign and assess homework, and guide the progress of individual students and the class as a whole. LaunchPad for Exploring Psychology, tenth edition, includes LearningCurve formative assessment, and NEW Immersive Learning: How Would You Know? activities, PsychSim 6 tutorials, and Assess Your Strengths projects. (For details, see p. xxviii and www.MacmillanHigherEd.com/ LaunchPad/ Exploring10e .)

For this new edition, you will see that we’ve offered callouts from the text pages to especially pertinent, helpful resources from LaunchPad. (See FIGURE 1 for a sample.)

What Continues?

Eight Guiding Principles

Despite all the exciting changes, this new edition retains its predecessors’ voice, as well as much of the content and organization. It also retains the goal s— the guiding principle s— that have animated the previous nine editions:

Facilitating the Learning Experience

To teach critical thinking By presenting research as intellectual detective work, we illustrate an inquiring, analytical min d- set. Whether students are studying development, cognition, or social behavior, they will become involved in, and see the rewards of, critical reasoning. Moreover, they will discover how an empirical approach can help them evaluate competing ideas and claims for highly publicized phenomen a— ranging from ESP and alternative therapies to group differences in intelligence and repressed and recovered memories.

To integrate principles and applications Throughou t— by means of anecdotes, case histories, and the posing of hypothetical situation s— we relate the findings of basic research to their applications and implications. Where psychology can illuminate pressing human issue s— be they racism and sexism, health and happiness, or violence and wa r— we have not hesitated to shine its light.

To reinforce learning at every step Everyday examples and rhetorical questions encourage students to process the material actively. Concepts presented earlier are frequently applied, and reinforced. For instance, in Chapter 1 , students learn that much of our information processing occurs outside of our conscious awareness. Ensuing chapters drive home this concept. Numbered Learning Objective Questions and Retrieve It sel f- tests throughout each chapter, a Review and Experience the Testing Effect sel f- test at the end of each main text section, and a po p- up glossary help students learn and retain important concepts and terminology.

Demonstrating the Science of Psychology

To exemplify the process of inquiry We strive to show students not just the outcome of research, but how the research process works. Throughout, we try to excite the reader’s curiosity. We invite readers to imagine themselves as participants in classic experiments. Several chapters introduce research stories as mysteries that progressively unravel as one clue after another falls into place. Our new “Immersive Learning: How Would You Know?” activities in LaunchPad encourage students to think about research questions and how they may be studied effectively.

To be as u p- t o- date as possible Few things dampen students’ interest as quickly as the sense that they are reading stale news. While retaining psychology’s classic studies and concepts, we also present the discipline’s most important recent developments. In this edition, 701 references are dated 201 3– 2015. Likewise, new photos and everyday examples are drawn from today’s world.

To put facts in the service of concepts Our intention is not to fill students’ intellectual file drawers with facts, but to reveal psychology’s major concept s— to teach students how to think, and to offer psychological ideas worth thinking about. In each chapter, we place emphasis on those concepts we hope students will carry with them long after they complete the course. Always, we try to follow Albert Einstein’s purported dictum that “everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Learning Objective Questions, Retrieve It questions, and Experience the Testing Effect questions throughout each chapter help students learn and retain the key concepts.

Promoting Big Ideas and Broadened Horizons

To enhance comprehension by providing continuity Many chapters have a significant issue or theme that links subtopics, forming a thread that ties ideas together. The Learning chapter conveys the idea that bold thinkers can serve as intellectual pioneers. The Thinking, Language, and Intelligence chapter raises the issue of human rationality and irrationality. The Psychological Disorders chapter conveys empathy for, and understanding of, troubled lives. Other threads, such as cognitive neuroscience, dual processing, and cultural and gender diversity, weave throughout the whole book, and students hear a consistent voice.

To convey respect for human unity and diversity Throughout the book, readers will see evidence of our human kinshi p— our shared biological heritage, our common mechanisms of seeing and learning, hungering and feeling, loving and hating. They will also better understand the dimensions of our diversit y— our individual diversity in development and aptitudes, temperament and personality, and disorder and health; and our cultural diversity in attitudes and expressive styles, child raising and care for the elderly, and life priorities.

Study System Follows Best Practices From Learning and Memory Research

Exploring Psychology, tenth edition’s learning system harnesses the testing effect, which documents the benefits of actively retrieving information through selftesting ( FIGURE 2 ). Thus, each chapter offers 15 to 20 Retrieve It questions interspersed throughout, with Experience the Testing Effect sel f- test questions at the end of each main section. Creating these desirable difficulties for students along the way optimizes the testing effect, as does immediate feedback .

In addition, text sections begin with numbered questions that establish learning objectives and direct student reading. A Review section follows each main section of text, providing students an opportunity to practice rehearsing what they’ve just learned. The Review offers sel f- testing by repeating the Learning Objective Questions (with answers for checking against), along with a pag e- referenced list of key terms.

Continually Improving Cultural and Gender Diversity Coverage

Discussion of the relevance of cultural and gender diversity begins on the first page and continues throughout the text.

This edition presents an even more thoroughly cros s- cultural perspective on psychology ( TABLE 4 )—reflected in research findings, and text and photo examples. Cros s- cultural and gender psychology are now given greater visibility with enhanced coverage moved to Chapter 1 . There is focused coverage of the psychology of women and men in Chapter 5 , Sex, Gender, and Sexuality, with thoroughly integrated coverage throughout the text (see TABLE 5 ). In addition, we are working to offer a worl d- based psychology for our worldwide student readership. We continually search the world for research findings and text and photo examples, conscious that readers may be in Sydney, Seattle, or Singapore. Although we reside in the United States, we travel abroad regularly and maintain contact with colleagues in Canada, Britain, South Africa, China, and many other places; and subscribe to European periodicals. Thus, each new edition offers a broad, worl d- based perspective, and includes research from around the world. We are all citizens of a shrinking world, so American students, too, benefit from information and examples that internationalize their worl d- consciousness. And if psychology seeks to explain human behavior (not just American or Canadian or Australian behavior), the broader the scope of studies presented, the more accurate is our picture of this world’s people. Our aim is to expose all students to the world beyond their own culture, and we continue to welcome input and suggestions from all readers.

Strong Critical Thinking Coverage

We love to write in a way that gets students thinking and keeps them active as they read, and we aim to introduce students to critical thinking throughout the book. Revised and more plentiful Learning Objective Questions at the beginning of text sections, and even more regular Retrieve It questions encourage critical reading to glean an understanding of important concepts. This tenth edition also includes the following opportunities for students to learn or practice their critical thinking skills.

Chapter 1 , Thinking Critically With Psychological Science, introduces students to psychology’s research methods, emphasizing the fallacies of our everyday intuition and common sense and, thus, the need for psychological science. Critical thinking is introduced as a key term on page 3. Appendix A , Statistical Reasoning in Everyday Life, encourages students to “focus on thinking smarter by applying simple statistical principles to everyday reasoning.”

“Thinking Critically About . . .” boxes are found throughout the book, modeling for students a critical approach to some key issues in psychology. For example, see “Thinking Critically About: Why We Fear the Wrong Things” ( Chapter 9 ), or “Thinking Critically About: The Stigma of Introversion” ( Chapter 13 ).

Detectiv e- style stories throughout the narrative get students thinking critically about psychology’s key research questions. For example, in Chapter 14 , we present the causes of schizophrenia piece by piece, showing students how researchers put the puzzle together.

“Apply this” and “Think about it” style discussions keep students active in their study. In Chapter 12 , for example, students take the perspective of participants in a Solomon Asch conformity experiment, and later in one of Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiments. We’ve also asked students to join the fun by taking part in activities they can try along the way. For example, in Chapter 6 , they try out a quick sensory adaptation activity. In Chapter 10 , they try matching expressions to faces and test the effects of different facial expressions on themselves.

Critical examinations of pop psychology spark interest and provide important lessons in thinking critically about everyday topics. For example, Chapter 6 offers an examination of ESP claims, and Chapter 8 examines claims of the repression of painful memories.

See TABLE 6 for a complete list of this text’s coverage of critical thinking topics and Thinking Critically About boxes.

APA Assessment Tools

In 2011, the American Psychological Association (APA) approved the Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology . These broa d- based principles and their associated recommendations were designed to “produce psychologically literate citizens who apply the principles of psychological science at work and at home.” (See www.APA.org/ Education/ Undergrad/ Principles.aspx .)

APA’s more specific 2013 Learning Goals and Outcomes , from their Guidelines for the Undergraduate Psychology Major, Version 2.0, were designed to gauge progress in students graduating with psychology majors. (See www.APA.org/ Ed/ Precollege/ About/ PsyMajor-Guidelines.pdf .) Many psychology departments use these goals and outcomes to help establish their own benchmarks for departmental assessment purposes.

Some instructors are eager to know whether a given text for the introductory course helps students get a good start at achieving these APA benchmarks. TABLE 7 (below) outlines the way Exploring Psychology, tenth edition, could help you to address the 2013 APA Learning Goals and Outcomes in your department.

In addition, an APA working group in 2013 drafted guidelines for Strengthening the Common Core of the Introductory Psychology Course ( http:/ /tinyurl.com/ 14dsdx5 ). Their goals are to “strike a nuanced balance providing flexibility yet guidance.” The group noted that “a mature science should be able to agree upon and communicate its unifying core while embracing diversity.”

MCAT Now Includes Psychology

Since 2015, the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) has devoted 25 percent of its questions to the “Psychological, Social, and Biological Foundations of Behavior,” with most of those questions coming from the psychological science taught in introductory psychology courses. From 1977 to 2014, the MCAT focused on biology, chemistry, and physics. Hereafter, reported the Preview Guide for MCAT 2015, the exam will also recognize “the importance of soci o- cultural and behavioral determinants of health and health outcomes.” The exam’s new psychology section includes the breadth of topics in this text. For example, see TABLE 8a and TABLE 8b , which outline the precise correlation between the topics in this text’s Sensation and Perception chapter and the corresponding portion of the MCAT exam. To improve their MCAT preparation, I [ND] have taught premedical students an intensive course covering the topics that appear in this text. For a complete pairing of the new MCAT psychology topics with this book’s contents, see www.MacmillanHigherEd.com/ Catalog/ Product/ ExploringPsychology-TenthEdition-Myers .

Multimedia for Exploring Psychology , Tenth Edition

Exploring Psychology, tenth edition, boasts impressive multimedia options. For more information about any of these choices, visit Worth Publishers’ online catalog at www.MacmillanHigherEd.com/ Catalog/ Product/ Exploring Psychology-TenthEdition-Myers .

LaunchPad With LearningCurve Quizzing and “Immersive Learning: How Would You Know?” Activities

Built to solve key challenges in the course, LaunchPad ( www.MacmillanHigherEd.com/ LaunchPad/ Exploring10e ) (see FIGURE 3 ) gives students everything they need to prepare for class and exams, while giving instructors everything they need to quickly set up a course, shape the content to their syllabus, craft presentations and lectures, assign and assess homework, and guide the progress of individual students and the class as a whole.

An interactive e- Book integrates the text and all student media, including the new Immersive Learning: How Would You Know? activities, PsychSim 6 tutorials, and Assess Your Strengths activities.

LearningCurve adaptive quizzing gives individualized question sets and feedback based on each student’s correct and incorrect responses. All the questions are tied back to the e- Book to encourage students to read the book in preparation for class time and exams.

PsychSim 6 has arrived! Tom Ludwig’s (Hope College) fabulous new tutorials further strengthen LaunchPad’s abundance of helpful student activity resources.

The new Video Assignment Tool makes it easy to assign and assess vide o- based activities and projects, and provides a convenient way for students to submit video coursework.

LaunchPad Gradebook gives a clear window on performance for the whole class, for individual students, and for individual assignments.

A streamlined interface helps students manage their schedule of assignments, while social commenting tools let them connect with classmates, and learn from one another. 24/7 help is a click away, accessible from a link in the upper righ t- hand corner.

We [DM and ND] curated optional pr e- built chapter units , which can be used as is or customized. Or choose not to use them and build your course from scratch.

Boo k- specific instructor resources include PowerPoint sets, textbook graphics, lecture and activity suggestions, test banks, and more.

LaunchPad offers easy LMS integration into your school’s learning management system.

Faculty Support and Student Resources

Instructor’s Resources available in LaunchPad

Lecture Guides available in LaunchPad

Macmillan Community Created by instructors for instructors, this is an ideal forum for interacting with fellow educator s— including Macmillan author s— in your discipline ( FIGURE 4 , below). Join ongoing conversations about everything from course prep and presentations to assignments and assessments to teaching with media, keeping pace wit h— and influencin g— new directions in your field. Includes exclusive access to classroom resources, blogs, webinars, professional development opportunities, and more.

Enhanced course management solutions (including course cartridges)

e- Book in various available formats

Video and Presentation

The Video Collection is now the single resource for all videos for introductory psychology from Worth Publishers. Available on flash drive and in LaunchPad, this includes more than 130 clips.

Interactive Presentation Slides for Introductory Psychology is an extraordinary series of PowerPoint ® lectures. This is a dynamic, yet eas y- t o- use way to engage students during classroom presentations of core psychology topics. This collection provides opportunities for discussion and interaction, and includes an unprecedented number of embedded video clips and animations.

LearningCurve quizzing in LaunchPad

Diploma Test Banks, downloadable from LaunchPad and our online catalog

Chapter Quizzes in LaunchPad

Clicker Question Presentation Slides now in PowerPoint ®

Study Guide

Pursuing Human Strengths: A Positive Psychology Guide, Second Edition

Critical Thinking Companion, Third Edition

Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society, Second Edition. This project of the FABBS Foundation brought together a virtual “Who’s Who” of contemporary psychological scientists to describ e— in clear, captivating way s— the research they have passionately pursued and what it means to the “real world.” Each contribution is an original essay written for this project.

The Horse That Won’t Go Away Tom Heinzen, Scott Lilienfeld, and Susan Nolan explore the confounding story of Clever Hans and how we continue to be deceived by beliefs with no supporting logic or evidence. This supplemental book shows just how important it is to rely on the scientific method as we navigate our way through everyday life.

In Appreciation

If it is true that “whoever walks with the wise becomes wise” then we are wiser for all the wisdom and advice received from colleagues. Aided by thousands of consultants and reviewers over the last three decades, this has become a better, more effective, more accurate book than two authors alone (these two authors, at least) could write. All of us together are smarter than any one of us.

Our indebtedness continues to each of the teache r- scholars whose influence was acknowledged in the nine previous editions, to the innumerable researchers who have been so willing to share their time and talent to help us accurately report their research, and to the hundreds of instructors who have taken the time to offer feedback over the phone, in a survey or review, or at one of our fac e- t o- face focus groups.

Our gratitude extends to the colleagues who contributed criticism, corrections, and creative ideas related to the content, pedagogy, and format of this new edition and its teaching package. For their expertise and encouragement, and the gifts of their time to the teaching of psychology, we thank the reviewers and consultants listed here.

Steven Alessandri

Rosemont College

Alison Alle n- Hall

Becker College, Worcester Campus

Michael Amlung

University of Missouri

Robin Anderson

St. Ambrose University

Kerri Augusto

Becker College

Renee Babcock

Central Michigan University

Debra Bacon

Bristol Community College

Christi Bamford

Jacksonville University

Darin Baskin

Houston Community College

Kristi Bitz

University of Mary

Kristin Bonnie

Beloit College

Jennifer Breneiser

Valdosta State University

Eurnestine Brown

Winthrop University

Stephen Burgess

Southwestern Oklahoma State University

University of Texas, Arlington

Gregory Cutler

Bay de Noc Community College

Jennifer Dale

Community College of Aurora

Patrick Devine

Kennesaw State University

David Devonis

Graceland College

Virginia Diehl

Western Illinois University

Joshua Feinberg

Saint Peter’s University

Jessica Fortune

Louisiana Delta Community College

Debra Frame

University of Cincinnati, Blue Ash

Kristel Gallagher

Keystone College

Bilal Ghandour

Queens University of Charlotte

Nicholas Greco

Columbia College of Missouri, Lake County

Michael Green

Lone Star College, Montgomery

Jill Haasch

Elizabeth City State University

Matthew Hand

Texas Wesleyan University

Rutgers University, Livingston

Cameron John

Utah Valley University

Barry Johnson

Davidson County Community College

University of Texas, Pan American

Michelle LaBrie

College of the Canyons

Pima Community College

Angelina MacKewn

University of Tennessee, Martin

Crystal March

Kathy McGuire

Kathleen Mentink

Chippewa Valley Technical College

Joanna Schnelker Merrill

Kalamazoo College

Nicholas Palmieri

Palm Beach Atlantic University

W. Gerrod Parrott

Georgetown University

Stephanie Payne

Texas A&M University, College Station

Jennifer Perillo

Winsto n- Salem State University

Virginia Pitts

Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania

Michael Rader

Johnson County Community College

Chris Roddenberry

Wake Technical Community College

Columbus State University

Eastern Nazarene College

Pittsburg State University

Seth Sebold

The City College of New York (CUNY)

Kezia Shirkey

North Park University

Aisha Siddiqui

Midwestern State University

Megan St. Peters

Ferrum College

Elena Stepanova

The University of Southern Mississippi

Michael Stroud

Merrimack College

Helen Sullivan

Rider University

Rachel Sumrall

Grayson College

Lawrence Voight

Washtenaw Community College

Kerri Williams

Lourdes University

Manda Williamson

University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Joseph Wister

Chatham University

Thomas College

Jennifer Yanowitz

Utica College

We were pleased to be supported by a 2012/2013 Content Advisory Board, which helped guide the development of this new edition of Exploring Psychology, tenth edition, as well as our other introductory psychology titles. For their helpful input and support, we thank

Barbara Angleberger, Frederick Community College

Chip (Charles) Barker, Olympic College

Mimi Dumville, Raritan Valley Community College

Paula Friol i- Peters, Truckee Meadows Community College

Deborah Garfin, Georgia State University

Karla Gingerich, Colorado State University

Toni Henderson, Langara College

Bernadette Jacobs, Santa Fe Community College

Mary Livingston, Louisiana Tech University

Molly Lynch, Northern Virginia Community College

Shelly Metz, Central New Mexico Community College

Jake Musgrove, Broward College Central Campus

Robin Musselman, Lehigh Carbon Community College

Dana Narter, The University of Arizona

Lee Osterhout, University of Washington

Nicholas Schmitt, Heartland Community College

Christine She a- Hunt, Kirkwood Community College

Brenda Shook, N ational University

Starlette Sinclair, Columbus State University

David Williams, Spartanburg Community College

Melissa (Liz) Wright, Northwest Vista College

We appreciate the guidance offered by the following teaching psychologists, who reviewed and offered helpful feedback on the development of our new “Immersive Learning: How Would You Know?” feature in LaunchPad. (See www.MacmillanHigherEd.com/ LaunchPad/ Exploring10e for details.)

Pamela Ansburg, Metropolitan State University of Denver

Makenzie Bayles, Jacksonville State University

Lisamarie Bensman, University of Hawaii at Manoa

Jeffrey Blum, Los Angeles City College

Pamela Costa, Tacoma Community College

Jennifer Dale, Community College of Aurora

Michael Devoley, Lone Star College, Montgomery

Rock Doddridge, Ashevill e- Buncombe Technical Community College

Kristen Doran, Delaware County Community College

Nathaniel Douda, Colorado State University

Celeste Favela, El Paso Community College

Nicholas Fernandez, El Paso Community College

Nathalie Franco, Broward College

Sara Garvey, Colorado State University

Nichelle Gause, Clayton State University

Michael Green, Lone Star College, Montgomery

Christine Grela, McHenry County College

Rodney Joseph Grisham, Indian River State College

Jessica Irons, James Madison University

Darren Iwamoto, Chaminade University of Honolulu

Jerwen Jou, University of Texas, Pan American

Rosalyn King, Northern Virginia Community College, Loudoun Campus

Claudia Lampman, University of Alaska Anchorage

Christine Lofgren, University of California, Irvine

Thomas Ludwig, Hope College

Theresa Luhrs, DePaul University

Megan McIlreavy, Coastal Carolina University

Elizabeth Mosser, Harford Community College

Kelly O’Dell, Community College of Aurora

William Keith Pannell, El Paso Community College

Eirini Papafratzeskakou, Mercer County Community College

Jennifer Poole, Langara College

James Rodgers, Hawkeye Community College

Regina Roo f- Ray, Harford Community College

Lisa Routh, Pikes Peak Community College

Conni Rush, Pittsburg State University

Randi Smith, Metropolitan State University of Denver

Laura Talcott, Indiana University, South Bend

Cynthia Turk, Washburn University

Parita Vithlani, Harford Community College

And we are grateful for the dozens of instructors in our Macmillan Community ( http:/ /Community.Macmillan.com ) who so graciously offered input on our new visual scaffolding chapter openers, and for students from the following schools who helpfully reviewed samples:

Creighton University

Lake Superior College

Iowa State University

University of Illinois

University of Minnesota

University of Nebraska Omaha

University of St. Thomas

At Worth Publishers a host of people played key roles in creating this tenth edition.

Although the information gathering is never ending, the formal planning began as the autho r- publisher team gathered for a tw o- day retreat. This happy and creative gathering included John Brink, Thomas Ludwig, Richard Straub, Nathan, and Dave from the author team, along with assistants Kathryn Brownson and Sara Neevel. We were joined by Worth Publishers executives Tom Scotty, Joan Feinberg, Craig Bleyer, Doug Bolton, Catherine Woods, Kevin Feyen, and Elizabeth Widdicombe; editors Christine Brune, Nancy Fleming, Tracey Kuehn, Betty Probert, Trish Morgan, and Dora Figueiredo; sales and marketing colleagues Kate Nurre, Carlise Stembridge, Tom Kling, Lindsay Johnson, Mike Krotine, Kelli Goldenberg, Jen Cawsey, and Janie Pierc e- Bratcher; media specialists Rachel Comerford, Gayle Yamazaki, Andrea Messineo, and Pepper Williams; and special guest Jennifer Peluso (Florida Atlantic University). The input and brainstorming during this meeting of minds gave birth, among other things, to LaunchPad’s new “Immersive Learning: How Would You Know?” activities and the text’s improved and expanded system of study aids.

Publisher Rachel Losh has been a valued team leader, thanks to her dedication, creativity, and sensitivity. Rachel has overseen, encouraged, and guided our autho r- editor team. Media Editor Lauren Samuelson helped envision our new “Immersive Learning: How Would You Know?” activities and directed all the details of their production. Executive Media Editor Rachel Comerford and Media Editor Laura Burden expertly coordinated production of the huge collection of media resources for this edition. Betty Probert efficiently edited and produced the Instructors’ Resources, Lecture Guides, Test Bank, and Study Guide and, in the process, also helped fin e- tune the whole book. Editorial Assistant Katie Pachnos provided invaluable support in commissioning and organizing the multitude of reviews, sending information to instructors, and handling numerous other daily tasks related to the book’s development and production. Lee McKevitt did a splendid job of laying out each page. Robin Fadool and Candice Cheesman worked together to locate the myriad photos. Art Manager Matthew McAdams coordinated our working with artist Evelyn Pence to create the lovely new chapter openers.

Tracey Kuehn, Director of Content Management Enhancement, displayed tireless tenacity, commitment, and impressive organization in leading Worth’s gifted artistic production team and coordinating editorial input throughout the production process. Project Editor Robert Errera and Senior Production Manager Sarah Segal masterfully kept the book to its tight schedule, and Director of Design, Content Management Enhancement Diana Blume skillfully directed creation of the beautiful new design and art program. Production Manager Stacey Alexander, along with Supplements Project Editor Julio Espin, did their usual excellent work of producing the print supplements.

Christine Brune, chief editor for all 10 editions, is a wonder worker. She offers just the right mix of encouragement, gentle admonition, attention to detail, and passion for excellence. An author could not ask for more. Development Editor Nancy Fleming is one of those rare editors who is gifted both at “thinking big” about a chapte r— and with a kindred spirit to our ow n— while also applying her sensitive, graceful, lin e- b y- line touches. Development Editors Trish Morgan and Danielle Slevens amazed us with their meticulous focus, impressive knowledge, and deft editing. And Deborah Heimann did an excellent job with the copyediting.

To achieve our goal of supporting the teaching of psychology, this teaching package not only must be authored, reviewed, edited, and produced, but also made available to teachers of psychology. For their exceptional success in doing that, our author team is grateful to Worth Publishers’ professional sales and marketing team. We are especially grateful to Executive Marketing Manager Kate Nurre and Senior Marketing Manager Lindsay Johnson, both for their tireless efforts to inform our teaching colleagues of our efforts to assist their teaching, and for the joy of working with them.

At Hope College, the supporting team members for this edition included Kathryn Brownson, who researched countless bits of information and proofed hundreds of pages. Kathryn is a knowledgeable and sensitive adviser on many matters, and Sara Neevel is our hig h- tech manuscript developer, par excellence. At the University of Kentucky, Lorie Hailey has showcased a variety of indispensable qualities, including a sharp eye and a strong work ethic.

Again, I [DM] gratefully acknowledge the editing assistance and mentoring of my writing coach, poet Jack Ridl, whose influence resides in the voice you will be hearing in the pages that follow. He, more than anyone, cultivated my delight in dancing with the language, and taught me to approach writing as a craft that shades into art. Likewise, I [ND] am grateful to my intellectual hero and mentor, Roy Baumeister, who taught me how to hone my writing and embrace the writing life.

After hearing countless dozens of people say that this book’s resource package has taken their teaching to a new level, we reflect on how fortunate we are to be a part of a team in which everyone has produced o n- time work marked by the highest professional standards. For their remarkable talents, their lon g- term dedication, and their friendship, we thank John Brink, Thomas Ludwig, and Richard Straub. With this new edition, we also welcome and thank Sue Frantz for her gift of instructors’ resources.

Finally, our gratitude extends to the many students and instructors who have written to offer suggestions, or just an encouraging word. It is for them, and those about to begin their study of psychology, that we have done our best to introduce the field we love.

The day this book went to press was the day we started gathering information and ideas for the next edition. Your input will influence how this book continues to evolve. So, please, do share your thoughts.

Hope College Holland, Michigan 4942 2- 9000 USA www.DavidMyers.org

University of KentuckyLexington, Kentucky 4050 6- 0044 USA www.NathanDeWall.com

Content Changes

Exploring Psychology, tenth edition, includes hundreds of new research citations, new “Immersive Learning: How Would You Know?” research activities in LaunchPad, exciting new “visual scaffolding” tw o- page chapter openers, a lightly revised organization, a fresh new design, and many fun new photos and cartoons. In addition, you will find the following significant content changes in this new tenth edition.

Thinking Critically With Psychological Science

Chapter organization lightly modified and improved. (For example, The Scientific Attitude and Critical Thinking now appear at the beginning of the chapter, establishing these foundational principles at the discussion’s outset.)

The History and Scope of Psychology

Improved organization and expanded coverage of psychology’s historical and contemporary development.

New discussion of cros s- cultural and gender psychology, with new illustrations.

New introduction of positive psychology.

New photos provide examples of famous psychology majors.

Evolutionary psychology and behavior genetics are now key terms.

New material on community psychology, which is now a key term.

New illustration introduces the biopsychosocial approach more effectively.

Updated table of current perspectives.

Research Strategies: How Psychologists Ask and Answer Questions

Updated discussion of critical thinking in public policy.

New research support for hindsight bias in people of all ages from across the world.

Importance of research replication given increased emphasis.

New research with figure on Twitter message moods, and on the relationship between negative emotions on Twitter and heart disease rates in more than a thousand U.S. counties, illustrates discussion of “big data” methods in naturalistic observation.

Updated research examples reinforce correlational studies’ not being caus e- effect.

New research updates breas t- feeding versus bottl e- feeding example.

New research examples update discussion of the placebo effect, and indicate that the effect persists even upon learning that one has received a placebo.

New Thinking Critically About Research Design: How Would You Know? feature explores research design in psychological science and introduces the new “Immersive Learning: How Would You Know?” LaunchPad activities.

The Biology of Behavior

New c o- author Nathan DeWall led the revision of this chapter for the tenth edition.

Neural and Hormonal Systems

New research explores our inaccurate tendency to consider biological and psychological influences on behavior separately.

Research updates discussion of neural network pruning throughout life.

New photo illustrates complex network of human cortical neurons.

Expanded discussion of how neurons generate electricity from chemical events, with new figure.

Improved figure more effectively demonstrates action potential.

New discussion, with refractory period as new key term.

Al l- o r- none response and reuptake are now key terms.

New coverage of agonists and antagonists, which are now key terms.

Sensory neurons are now identified as afferent (inward), and motor neurons as efferent (outward).

Expanded illustration of the functional divisions of the nervous system.

Updated research on the effect of oxytocin on social trust.

Tools of Discovery and Older Brain Structures

The Tools of Discovery boxed essay has been expanded, updated, and transformed into text discussion.

New photo shows living human brain.

New research on use of neuroimaging in the media and advertising.

Updated information on massive Human Connectome Project.

Hippocampus now a key term here as well as in the Memory chapter , with new research example.

New research examples demonstrate the amygdala’s role in fear and rage.

Updated discussion of the hypothalamus with new research on hedonic hotspots, desire, and substance use disorders.

The Cerebral Cortex and Our Divided Brain

New research example of robotic limbs controlled by a device implanted in the motor cortex.

Coverage of the somatosensory cortex (previously referred to as the “sensory cortex”) has been fully updated.

New research notes the effects of simple versus complex tasks on brain activity.

New research updates discussion of Phineas Gage, with new art.

New photo example of brain injury, crime, and punishment.

New diffusion spectrum image shows neural networks connecting hemispheres.

Includes new research on brain plasticity in those who cannot hear.

Genetics, Evolutionary Psychology, and Behavior

New photo explains the natur e– nurture interaction.

Heredity and genome are new key terms.

Updated discussion of twin and adoption studies, includes autism spectrum disorder diagnoses, and personality and behavioral similarities.

New photo examples of identical twins and unrelated lookalikes.

New photo examples of celebrities who were adopted.

Gen e- Environment Interaction includes new research on identical twins creating shared experiences.

New photo example of space study with astronauts Scott and Mark Kelly.

Distinction between genetics and epigenetics clarified.

Additional examples demonstrate effects of environmental factors on epigenetic molecules.

New research examples illustrate the mismatch of our prehistoric genetic legacy with modern life.

Updated discussion of evolution and faith.

Consciousness and the Tw o- Track Mind

Consciousness: Some Basic Concepts

Expanded coverage of conscious awareness, with new research examples.

New art illustrates inattentional blindness.

New research example illustrates the effects of driver distraction on traffic accidents.

Includes new Eric Kandel estimate that 80 to 90 percent of what we do is unconscious.

Parallel processing is now a key term in this chapter, as well as in Chapter 6 .

Sleep and Dreams

New research updates discussion of night “owls” and morning “larks.”

New research examples illustrate sleep pattern variations.

Suprachiasmatic nucleus figure is improved.

Updated research on sleep’s functions and benefits, sleep deprivation, and the function of dreams.

Updated table on natural sleep aids.

New photo illustrates CPAP machine for sleep apnea.

New research example explores “The Great Sleep Recession.”

New research suggests slee p- deprived brains find fatty foods more enticing.

Updated research on slee p- deprived students experiencing more relationship conflicts.

What We Dream section updated with new research, including cases of those unable to see or walk from birth having these abilities in their dreams.

Lightly updated table compares dream theories.

New figure illustrates sleep’s consolidation of learning into lon g- term memory.

New research suggests we can learn to associate sounds with odors while asleep.

New figure and photo illustrate sleep patterns across the life span.

Drugs and Consciousness

Coverage of hypnosis now appears in a Thinking Critically box on pain control in Chapter 6 , Sensation and Perception.

Cocaine is now a key term.

New table outlines When Is Drug Use a Disorder?

New research on alcohol “intervention studies” that have lowered college students’ positive expectations and also reduced consumption.

Powerful new photo shows firefighters reenacting an alcoho l- related car accident.

Expanded explanation of the opiates and their effects.

Updates on lethal effects of smoking, including life expectancy 10+ years shorter.

New research on smokers’ relapse under stress.

New coverage of synthetic marijuana, or “spice,” and its effects.

New research suggests drop in IQ scores among persistent teen marijuana users.

Discussion of biological influences on drug use updated with new research.

Table showing selected psychoactive drugs has been expanded and updated.

New photo shows media models of smoking that influence teens.

Updated graph of high school trends in drug use.

Developing Through the Life Span

Developmental Issues, Prenatal Development, and the Newborn

Discussions of Nature and Nurture, Continuity and Stages, and Stability and Change moved to this section (from later in the chapter), creating a more cohesive introduction.

Figure comparing stage theories moved here from later in the chapter.

New research expands Stability and Change discussion.

Conception discussion expanded and clarified.

New research demonstrates newborns’ preference for hearing their mother’s language.

New research shows effects of smoking and extreme stress during pregnancy.

Infancy and Childhood

New research explores relationship between rapid increase in infant brain size and early development.

New research in Brain Development shows that premature babies given ski n- t o- skin contact are better off even 10 years later.

New research notes that mice and monkeys, like human children, forget their early life.

New photo shows egocentrism in action.

New sam e- sex marriage example illustrates accommodation.

New research demonstrates the ways preschoolers think like scientists.

New rea l- life example illustrates the curse of knowledge.

New research suggests social benefits for children with advanced ability to take another’s perspective.

New research suggests benefits of positive sel f- talk are not limited to children.

“Autism Spectrum Disorder and Min d- Blindness” boxed essay has been updated and improved and has become its own text section, “Autism Spectrum Disorder.”

New photo of twins with ASD.

Expanded perspective on the Harry Harlow experiments includes quotes from Harlow and his biographer.

New research demonstrates relationship between heredity, temperament, and attachment style.

Attachment Styles and Later Relationships updated with new research examples demonstrating the later effects of secure and insecure attachments.

New table outlines dua l- parenting facts.

New research illuminates the effects of deprivation of attachment and growing up under adversity.

New research shows effects of abuse and conflict on children’s brains, and epigenetic marks left by child abuse.

New research discussion of Western parents’ assertions that their children are more special than other children.

New Gallup survey illustrates joy and stress of raising children.

Adolescence

New research and new figure explores adolescent decision making and risk taking, and effects of frontal lobe immaturity in juvenile offenders and drug users.

Developing Morality section updated with new research demonstrating development of moral judgment, benefits of moral action, effects of delayed gratification on human flourishing, and connections to the tw o- track mind.

New photo illustrates moral reasoning during Superstorm Sandy.

Includes new research on American teens’ contentment with their lives and the importance of emotional intimacy to adolescent identity formation.

New research illustrates increased brain activation in adolescents when in one another’s company, and the effects of this activation.

Updated research notes the different types of tee n- parent bickering that typically occur with adolescent boys versus adolescent girls.

Thinking Critically About: How Much Credit or Blame Do Parents Deserve? feature updated with new research on cultural differences in parenting.

New research notes teens’ tendency to discount the future and focus on immediate rewards when in the presence of their peers.

New research notes prevalence of online social networking and its effects on peer relationships.

Emerging Adulthood discussion includes updated figure on the lengthening transition to adulthood.

New research on baseball players demonstrating that humans peak physically in their mi d- twenties.

New research explains effects of aging on the brain, and the brain’s plasticity.

New research supports benefits of exercising on aging.

New research on “reminiscence bump,” and older adults’ greater tendency for ti p- o f- th e- tongue memories.

New section on Sustaining Mental Abilities includes concept of “brain fitness.”

New research indicates human tendency to prefer social connection over learning when facing death.

Personal examples from authors demonstrate importance of chance events in our development.

New research shows lowering divorce rates.

Adulthood’s Commitments section expanded and updated.

New figure illustrates increased online meeting of relationship partners.

New photo illustrates connection between job satisfaction and life satisfaction.

New figure shows importance of social connecting throughout life.

New research explores older adults’ experience of complex emotions, tendency to attend more to positive information, and reduced number and increased stability of friendships.

New research with grieving parents explores factors that may prolong the grieving process.

Sex, Gender, and Sexuality

Chapter title changed from “Gender and Sexuality” in previous edition, reflecting new discussion of the distinction between gender and biological sex.

Updated introduction includes new research on women’s and men’s evolving gender roles and women in business, as well as new personal stories from the authors.

Gender Development

Sex, now a key term, is included in an updated, expanded discussion of differentiating sex and gender.

New photo example illustrates tragic effects of relational aggression, which is now a key term.

Thoroughly updated discussion of mal e- female differences in aggression, social power, and social connectedness, with new research examples throughout.

Expanded and updated discussion of biological sex, including differences in sexual development, with new research examples throughout.

Spermarche is now a key term.

Disorder of sexual development is now a key term.

The Nurture of Gender section revised and updated with new research throughout, including preferential hiring of female professors to teach STEM classes.

New coverage of gender cognition in transgender children.

How Do We Learn Gender? section updated with new photos of Caitlyn Jenner’s transition.

Androgyny is now a key term.

Human Sexuality

New research indicates that people’s brains crave their partner’s presence.

New research updates discussion of effects of women’s hormonal surges at ovulation.

New research considers whether women’s mate preferences change across the menstrual cycle.

Statistics updated on the worldwide prevalence of sexually transmitted infections.

New data on the proportion of women with HIV and number of worldwide HIV deaths.

New research explores relationship of fantasy to orgasms in women.

Teen Pregnancy updated with new research.

New photo illustrates the hypersexualization of female characters in video games.

New research indicates the cros s- cultural differences in attitudes toward sam e- sex unions.

New research updates the numbers of people who identify with particular sexual orientations, and explores accuracy of sel f- identification.

New research explores effects of a lack of social support on nonheterosexual teens.

Updated research on the relative fluidity of women’s sexual orientation.

Discussion of genetic influences on sexuality updated with new research examples.

New hand s- on activity asks students to predict research answers to questions about mal e- female sexuality differences.

Mal e- Female Differences in Sexuality updated with new research on sex drives and sexual habits of heterosexual and homosexual men and women.

Reworked and updated Natural Selection and Mating Preferences section includes new research on what men and women seek in potential mates.

New research examples question evolutionary psychology’s explanation of mating preferences.

Critiquing the Evolutionary Perspective includes new counte r- argument noting the smaller behavioral differences between men and women in cultures with greater gender equality, and the influence of social scripts.

New Sex and Human Values section includes new research on benefits of sex in committed relationships and the interplay between sexual desire and love.

Sensation and Perception

Basic Concepts of Sensation and Perception

New neuroscience research on the ability of priming to evoke brain activity without conscious awareness.

New coverage of the adaptation of emotion perception, with photo example for students to try.

New figure illustrates perceptual set.

New photo asks students to identify an emotion removed from its context.

New research example notes the effect of holding a firearm on one’s perceptions of others as gu n- toting, and the tragic consequences of this phenomenon.

Updated research on music’s effect on perception.

New research on how emotions and motives color our social and environmental perceptions.

Vision: Sensory and Perceptual Processing

New research details the effects of light intensit y— including even imagined light intensit y— and our cognitive and emotional states on the pupil and iris.

Color Processing section shifted up to follow discussion of Retinal Processing.

Updated art more effectively demonstrates the figur e- ground relationship.

New research example explores the role of learning in infants’ depth perception.

New research supports performing cataract surgery in children at as young an age as possible.

The Nonvisual Senses

New coverage of the speed of audition.

Updated coverage of hearing loss, including global statistics and cochlear implants, with new art.

Includes new research on the influence of cognition on response to touch, including the effect of familiar touch on experience of pain.

New research shows women’s greater sensitivity to pain.

New photo example illustrates powerful effect of distraction on experience of pain.

New research shows women’s tendency to recall pain of childbirth in terms of average of peak and end pain.

New research shows how the ending of an experience affects perception of pain and also pleasure.

New research supports maximizing pain relief with placebos, distraction, and hypnosis.

Hypnosis moved here from ninth edition Chapter 3 ; now covered in a new Thinking Critically About: Hypnosis and Pain Relief box.

Includes new research example of learning to like what we eat.

New research notes that each taste receptor has a matching partner cell in the brain.

New cognitive neuroscience research helps explain smel l- cognition connection.

New research illustrates blending of tactile and social judgments.

New photo example demonstrates value of sensory interaction for har d- o f- hearing people.

Updated Summarizing the Senses table includes new column noting the key brain areas in which events take place.

ESP discussion includes new research on psychic predictions about missin g- person cases, and on multiple unsuccessful attempts to replicate experiments demonstrating psychic abilities.

Compelling new chapter introduction.

Basic Learning Concepts and Classical Conditioning

New figure illustrates Pavlov’s device for recording salivation.

New research shows how we tend to fall back on old habits when our willpower is low.

Research update supports finding that we generalize our like or dislike based on learned facial features.

New information on what happened to “Little Albert.”

Operant Conditioning

New research supports idea that children’s compliance increases after “time out” punishment.

Discussion of physical punishment and increased aggressiveness updated with new research, as well as global figures on legal protections for children.

New research supports idea that punishment should focus on prohibitions rather than positive obligations.

Updated research on how adaptive learning software supports individualized learning.

Updated summary of how best to reinforce desired behaviors.

Biology, Cognition, and Learning

New photo illustrates research on the association of the color red with sexual attractiveness.

New research suggests that a focus on intrinsic rewards in schooling and career may lead to extrinsic rewards as well.

New research supports children’s and infants’ natural propensity for imitation.

New research supports vicarious reinforcement, with even learned fears being extinguished when we observe others safely navigating the feared situation.

New discussion of current debate regarding importance of mirror neurons.

Updated research on the prevalence of imitation in other species.

Expanded coverage, with new photos, of social learning among other animals.

Includes new research on the effects of a vicarious prompt on empathy and imitation.

New research notes how prosocial media boosts helping behaviors.

Thinking Critically About: Does Viewing Media Violence Trigger Violent Behavior? feature updated with new research examples.

Studying and Encoding Memories

Includes new music and face recognition research examples, and new photo of face recognition in sheep research.

New research shows those with large working memory capacity retain more after sleep and tend to be creative problem solvers.

New research details the spacing effect’s influence on motor skills and online game performance, and the benefits of distributed practice.

New research supports testing effect and notes ineffectiveness of other common study habits.

Storing and Retrieving Memories

New research shows memory components’ distribution across a network, with some of those brain cells activating again upon memory retrieval.

Episodic memory and semantic memory are now key terms.

New research notes activity of the hippocampus and nearby brain networks as people form explicit memories, with new image of the hippocampus.

Memory consolidation is now a key term.

Updated discussion of infantile amnesia includes new research on increased retention in the maturing hippocampus.

New research on flashbulb memory and tunnel vision memory.

Research update on how experience and learning increase synaptic number as well as efficiency.

Hippocampus is now a key term.

New personal story from author illustrates effect of having insufficient time for memory consolidation.

Discussion of synaptic changes in memory processing includes new research on memor y- blocking drugs.

Updated research explores how priming can influence behaviors.

New examples illustrate contex t- dependent memory.

Forgetting, Memory Construction, and Improving Memory

New research updates discussion of those with superior autobiographical memories.

Discussion of Henry Molaison updated with new research on the effects of his hippocampus removal, and his nondeclarative memory abilities.

Includes new research on wide belief in repression of traumatic memories.

Reconsolidation is now a key term.

Memory construction now demonstrated with author’s personal experience at Loftus presentation.

New research updates discussion of memory reconsolidation of negative or traumatic events.

Updated research on false memories examines mistakenly convicted people who were victims of faulty eyewitness identification.

New photo illustrates research on false memories.

Discussion of memories of abuse includes new research and has become a Thinking Critically About feature.

New research offers more tips for effective study habits.

New research updates discussion of encoding failure.

Thinking, Language, and Intelligence

New narrative and photo examples of prototype.

New figure demonstrates how categorizing faces influences recollection.

New research shows how insight improves when electrical stimulation disrupts assumptions created by past experiences.

Updated research supports effectiveness of intuitive judgments.

Discussion of availability heuristic enhanced with climate change example.

Includes new research about cigarette package warnings.

Updated discussion of why we fear the wrong things, with new research examples throughout.

New research example demonstrates how overconfidence can feed extreme political views.

New research explains the planning fallacy.

Includes new research on value and perils of using intuition for complex decisions; new examples relate to attitudes and decision making.

Research updates discussion of unconsciously learned associations.

Includes new research on importance of intelligence and working memory for aptitude.

Includes new research and photo example on the development of creative traits in girls.

New research expands discussion of fostering creativity.

Discussion of animals’ cognitive skills updated with new research.

Language and Thought

Updated research shows humans, regardless of language, prefer some syllables over others.

New research updates discussion of babies’ language comprehension and productive language development.

New research supports diversity of human language.

Discussion of the brain and language updated with new research on distributed processing of language in the brain.

Includes new research on animal cognition, as well as neuroscience research on a gene unique to humans that helps enable speech.

Improved figure illustrates brain activity when speaking and hearing words.

New research updates discussion of language’s ability to influence our thinking, emotions, and cultural associations.

Additional research example demonstrates language’s impact on perceived differences.

Includes new research on the advantages of bilingualism.

Intelligence and Its Assessment

Discussion of the g factor includes new research exploring how distinct brain networks enable distinct abilities.

Now includes Gardner’s ninth possible intelligence, existential intelligence.

Includes new photo example of savant syndrome.

New photo demonstrates spatial intelligence genius.

New research with professional musicians demonstrates importance of both natural talent and sel f- disciplined grit in achieving success.

Updated table comparing theories of intelligence includes new category, emotional intelligence.

Expanded discussion of history of intelligence tests includes more on Alfred Binet’s research and Lewis Terman’s support of the eugenics movement.

Discussion of intelligence’s stability over the life span includes new data from the Scottish intelligence survey of 1932, with new figure.

Updated discussion of intelligence extremes includes new research on adult achievements of those who scored high on SAT in their youth.

Genetic and Environmental Influences on Intelligence

New research updates and clarifies discussion of the heritability of intelligence.

New research supports quality preschool programs and experiences, nutritional supplements for newborns and mothers, and interactive reading programs.

New research notes the increased variability of males’ intelligence.

New photo example of Shakuntala Devi, “the human computer.”

New cros s- cultural research supports impact of cultural and other expectations on academic flourishing.

New research updates discussion of intelligence variation due to racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic differences.

New research discusses influence of stereotype threat on gender gap in hig h- level math achievements.

Includes updated discussion of stereotype threat, importance of a growth min d- set and sel f- discipline, belief in the power of effort, and intellectual curiosity for rea l- world achievements.

New research notes the limitations of general intelligence tests in reflecting competence.

Motivation and Emotion

Powerful new chapter introduction.

Basic Motivational Concepts, Affiliation, and Achievement

New research on ris k- taking behavior, and on uncertainty amplifying motivation.

New research examples illustrate the search for arousal in the absence of stimulation and the effects of overstimulation.

New research suggests decreasing arousal can decrease stress.

Hunger Games example now illustrates Maslow’s hierarchy.

New table compares Classic Motivation Theories.

Affiliation need is now a key term.

Includes new research on attachment bonds, whom we befriend, and the benefits of close friendship.

Updated research on the relationship between marriage and life satisfaction.

New research example notes increased doctor visits in lonely older adults.

Includes new research on need to belong driving formation of social connections, and benefits of these connections.

The Pain of Being Shut Out updated with new research, with ostracism a new key term.

Connecting and Social Networking section fully updated, with narcissism now a key term.

New research in Achievement Motivation demonstrates importance of grit, now a key term.

New Unbroken photo example illustrates how hunger can drive an obsession with food.

New research illustrates power of motivational “hot” states from hunger, fatigue, or sexual arousal.

New research on the body’s weight regulation.

New research updates discussion of biological and cultural influences on taste preferences and situational influences on eating.

New research offers ways to encourage healthier eating in children.

Obesity and Weight Control updated with cros s- cultural comparisons and global statistics; new research on physiology of obesity; negative social, health, and memory effects of obesity; and genetic basis for weight.

Waist Management boxed essay is now a table of evidenc e- based tips for weight loss.

Theories and Physiology of Emotion

New research shows subjectivity of emotional experience.

New research illustrates brain activity underlying emotions and emotio n- fed actions.

Includes new research on reappraisal and its effects.

Expressing and Experiencing Emotion

New research updates discussion of gender differences in emotional experience.

New research on humans’ ability to detect nonverbal threats and status signs.

New research updates discussion of effects of facial expressions, including findings on Botox, depression, and the facial feedback effect.

Behavior feedback effect now a key term.

Stress, Health, and Human Flourishing

Stress and Illness

New figure demonstrates how researchers study stress.

New research shows effects of stress on workers and pregnant women.

Includes new research on stress effects of traumatic events.

Now introduces concept of acculturative stress.

New research shows younger adults reporting higher daily stress.

New research updates discussion of daily hassles and social stress.

Includes new research on lasting effects of childhood stress.

New research shows effects of stress on vaccine effectiveness.

Discussion of stress and AIDS updated with new research and current data.

Updated research on the stres s- cancer link.

New research and data updates discussion of stress and heart disease.

The ninth edition boxed essay on Handling Anger has been revised and updated to become Thinking Critically About: Anger Management.

Includes new discussion of the Type D personality.

New research updates the discussion of the health effects of pessimism and depression.

Health and Happiness

Coping With Stress updated with new research.

Includes expanded explanation of learned helplessness.

New research updates Depleting and Strengthening Sel f- Control.

Includes new research on the traits of optimists and pessimists, and the potential for learning optimism.

New research demonstrates importance of social support to psychological and physical wel l- being, with information on cultural differences in seeking support.

New research illustrates effect of aerobic exercise on longevity, depression, and relationships, and the recent decline of Americans’ physical activity.

Relaxation and Meditation section revised and updated, including research showing link between meditation and decreased depression and anxiety, and improved decision making.

Mindfulness meditation is now a key term.

New research suggests happiest 2 0- yea r- olds were later more likely to marry and less likely to divorce.

New research illustrates d o- good, fee l- good phenomenon.

New research suggests mood rebounds after bad events, and happiness levels can return to nea r- normal after significant trauma.

New research updates list of tips for being happier.

New research explores connection between wealth and wel l- being, including wel l- being effects of income inequality.

Social Psychology

Social Psychology ( Chapter 12 ) now precedes Personality ( Chapter 13 ).

Social Thinking and Social Influence

New research updates discussion of the effect of attribution on our judgment of others.

New photo example of Charleston Bible study murders demonstrates dispositional versus situational attributions.

Discussion of effect of attitudes on actions updated with climat e- change debate example.

Role Playing updated with new research on reliability of Zimbardo study and effects of military training.

New research illuminates brain activity associated with cognitive dissonance.

Discussion of automatic mimicry updated with new research.

Milgram discussion includes updated coverage of replications of his research with different groups, and new discoveries about his data.

New research example considers how the circumstances of the Rwandan genocide promoted obedience.

Includes updates on the Internet as social amplifier, demonstrating group polarization online.

New table compares social facilitation, social loafing, and deindividuation.

Antisocial Relations

New research demonstrates accuracies and inaccuracies of stereotypes.

Updated research on sexual orientation prejudice.

New research explores unfounded prejudice toward Muslims, with new photo example.

New photo example of Trayvon Martin illustrates the updated discussion of rac e- influenced perceptions.

New research explores effects of networking and mutual support on ingroup bias.

New research offers additional contributors to aggression, and updates the biopsychosocial understanding of aggression figure.

New research updates discussion of media models for aggression.

Prosocial Relations

New research updates discussion of modern matchmaking, including meeting online, with new graph.

New photo example of Angela Merkel illustrates the mere exposure effect.

Includes new research clarifying the reward theory of attraction.

New research suggests charitable donations increase the giver’s happiness levels.

New research shows people who are generously treated tend later to be generous themselves.

New research illustrates mirro r- image perceptions feeding global hostilities.

Sel f- fulfilling prophecy is a new key term.

New research updates discussion of promoting peace.

Personality

Personality ( Chapter 13 ) now follows Social Psychology ( Chapter 12 ).

Classic Perspectives on Personality

Updated coverage of Freud’s ideas and their significance.

Now includes brief explanation of Thematic Apperception Test (TAT).

New research updates critique of Rorschach test.

New research expands discussion of the modern unconscious mind.

New research supports value of humanistic psychology’s positive regard and empathic listening.

Contemporary Perspectives on Personality

New Thinking Critically About: The Stigma of Introversion feature.

Big Five discussion updated with new research on cultural changes over time and brain structure/function, with new figure.

New research examples, and new personal example from author, explore stability and endurance of personality traits.

New research explores maladaptive personality traits.

New research suggests music preferences, personal and online spaces, and written communications relate to personality traits.

Socia l- Cognitive Theories revised and updated; now includes gen e- environment interaction.

New photo example from the TV show Chopped demonstrates the value of assessing behavior in situations.

Table comparing major personality theories lightly updated.

Exploring the Self section updated with new research.

New research outlines importance of positive goa l- setting in considering possible selves.

Benefits of Sel f- Esteem updated with new research, including on the damaging effects of undeserved praise, and on effects of threats to sel f- esteem.

Revised and updated discussion of sel f- serving bias and its effects.

Discussion of narcissism updated with new research.

Expanded, revised, and updated discussion of individualism and collectivism, with new cros s- cultural research examples.

New discussion explores effects of social history and biology on cultural differences, and introduces subfield of cultural neuroscience.

Psychological Disorders

New organization groups the disorders into four manageable sections and better reflects the DS M- 5 updates: Basic Concepts of Psychological Disorders; Anxiety Disorders, OCD, and PTSD; Major Depressive Disorder and Bipolar Disorder; and Schizophrenia and Other Disorders.

Basic Concepts of Psychological Disorders

New table demonstrates how care providers use the DS M- 5.

New photos illustrate different cultures’ perceptions of normality.

New photo of Stone Age trephination demonstrates brutal “therapies” of the past.

Updated research on prevalence of mental health problems on college campuses.

Discussion of biopsychosocial approach enriched with coverage of epigenetics, with associated updates throughout the chapter; epigenetics is a new key term.

New research updates discussion of ADHD, including controversies related to higher diagnoses.

Thinking Critically About: Insanity feature significantly revised, with new focus and titl e— Are People With Psychological Disorders Dangerous? Includes new photo example of Newtown shootings.

New Iron Man 3 photo example of improved media portrayals of psychological disorders.

Anxiety Disorders, OCD, and PTSD

New research updates discussion of stimuli perception for those with anxiety disorders.

New research shows greater panic symptoms in smokers.

New pro golfer photo example illustrates successful coping with panic disorder.

Updated statistics on OCD prevalence.

Discussion of PTSD updated with new research and prevalence information, with new photo example.

New research and examples update discussion of learning and neural, hormonal, and genetic influences on anxiety disorders, OCD, and PTSD.

New research supports genetic basis for anxiety disorders and the interaction between genes and experience.

New research discusses brain activity of those with PTSD when viewing traumatic images.

New research shows infants attending more to sounds of ancient than moder n- day threats.

Major Depressive Disorder and Bipolar Disorder

New art offers insight into the experience of bipolar disorder.

Updated research on relationship of low sel f- esteem to depressed mood.

New research shows mild sadness improves recall of faces.

Discussion of major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder updated with new research, including current statistics and data on gender and age differences and cultural influences.

Explanation of heritability expanded and clarified.

Includes new research on factors that put women at greater risk for depression.

Discussion of bipolar disorder updated with new data on prevalence, including among those in creative professions.

Understanding Major Depressive Disorder and Bipolar Disorder updated with new research exploring genetic, biochemical, cognitive, and behavioral predictors, with new photo example.

Rumination is a new key term.

Discussion of suicide rates and nonsuicidal sel f- injury updated.

Includes new suicid e- prevention guidelines and resources.

Schizophrenia and Other Disorders

Chronic and acute schizophrenia are new key terms.

New information on schizophrenia recovery rates.

New research updates discussion of schizophrenia’s symptoms, onset, and development.

Includes new research on brain abnormalities (and their genetic basis) in people with schizophrenia.

Updated discussion of prenatal environment contributing to risk of schizophrenia.

Includes new international study of genome locations linked with schizophrenia.

Updated research on the debates surrounding dissociative identity disorder, including abnormal brain anatomy that may accompany DID, and new photo example of Shirley Mason.

New research on emotional intelligence and impulsivity in antisocial personality disorder.

Understanding Antisocial Personality Disorder updated and improved with new genetics research and discussion of adaptive aspects of some symptoms of psychopathy, such as fearlessness and dominance.

Eating Disorders updated with new examples and new research (including genetic), with new photo.

Introduction to Therapy and the Psychological Therapies

Discussion now distinguishes psychotherapy and biomedical therapy more clearly.

Psychoanalysis and Psychodynamic Therapy revised and updated with new research examples.

New photos illustrate virtual reality exposure therapy.

New research on positive reinforcement in children with ASD.

Cognitive Therapies discussion updated with new research and examples.

New paragraph discusses techniques and goals of dialectical behavior therapy.

Updated discussion of sel f- help groups notes importance of redemptive narrative for maintaining sobriety.

New research updates discussion of psychotherapy’s effectiveness.

New research and new photo support importance of therapeutic alliance, now a key term.

New research suggests “culture of honor” may prompt reluctance to seek mental health care.

The Biomedical Therapies and Preventing Psychological Disorders

Includes updated explanation of who now prescribes psychiatric drugs.

New research suggests exposure to advertising about a drug’s effectiveness can increase its effect.

Includes new research on newe r- generation antipsychotics for those with severe symptoms.

Revised explanation more explicitly differentiates today’s gentler ECT from its earlier forms.

New research introduces possibility of quicke r- acting antidepressants.

Includes new neuroscience research on how ECT may work.

New research updates discussion of neurostimulation, including rTMS, for depression.

New image from Human Connectome Project shows possible “depression switch” in the brain.

Therapeutic Lifestyle Change updated with new research supporting value of healthy choices, including time spent outdoors.

Updated research suggests importance of envisioning new possibilities to foster posttraumatic growth, now a key term.

Appendix A : Statistical Reasoning in Everyday Life

New research and rea l- life examples demonstrate that we find precise numbers more credible.

Now explains and distinguishes descriptive and inferential statistics.

New research demonstrates the dangers of statistical illiteracy.

Appendix B : Psychology at Work

New research suggests intrinsic motivation predicts performance.

Includes new research on training programs’ positive effect on job seeking.

New research demonstrates stability of people’s interests, and shows interests predicting academic and career success.

Revised, expanded Discovering Your Interests and Strengths section includes links to several resources helping students to discover their personal strengths and vocational interests.

New research suggests those who are conscientious and agreeable will flourish in many work settings.

New research suggests interviewers judge people relative to those interviewed just before and after them.

Includes new photo example of positive coaching.

New research shows social leadership and team building increase morale and productivity.

New research suggests workers in famil y- friendly organizations with flexibl e- time hours report greater job satisfaction and loyalty to their employers.

Appendix C : Subfields of Psychology

This appendix focuses on educational requirements, type of work, and likely places to work for each of psychology’s main subfields. LaunchPad offers a related, regularly updated Careers in Psychology unit.

New photo examples illustrate community psychology and forensic psychology.

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

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

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

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List

Logo of jintell

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

Diane f. halpern.

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

Dana S. Dunn

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

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

1. Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Analyzing Arguments to Determine Degree of Support for a Conclusion

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

7. Conclusions

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

Author Contributions

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

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

No IRB Review.

Informed Consent Statement

No Informed Consent.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

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

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

United States Store

Find what you need to succeed.

  • Our Mission
  • Our Leadership
  • Learning Science
  • Macmillan Learning AI
  • Sustainability
  • Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
  • Accessibility
  • Astronomy Biochemistry Biology Chemistry College Success Communication Economics Electrical Engineering English Environmental Science Geography Geology History Mathematics Music & Theater Nutrition and Health Philosophy & Religion Physics Psychology Sociology Statistics Value
  • Digital Offerings
  • Inclusive Access
  • Lab Solutions
  • LMS Integration
  • Curriculum Solutions
  • Training and Demos
  • First Day of Class
  • Administrators
  • Affordable Solutions
  • Badging & Certification
  • iClicker and Your Content
  • Student Store
  • News & Media
  • Contact Us & FAQs
  • Find Your Rep
  • Booksellers
  • Macmillan International Support
  • International Translation Rights
  • Request Permissions
  • Report Piracy

Exploring Psychology

Look Inside

Psychology in Everyday Life

Twelfth edition | ©2022 david g. myers; c. nathan dewall, tour achieve →.

ISBN:9781319433222

Access all your course tools in one place!

ISBN:9781319432379

Come to class prepared with quizzing and an e-book.

ISBN:9781319429805

Take notes, add highlights, and download our mobile-friendly e-books.

ISBN:9781319432355

Save money with our hole-punched, loose-leaf textbook.

ISBN:9781319132118

Read and study old-school with our bound texts.

ISBN:9781319470760

This package includes Achieve and Loose-Leaf.

ISBN:9781319470722

This package includes Paperback and Read & Practice.

ISBN:9781319469924

This package includes Achieve and Paperback.

ISBN:9781319471422

This package includes Loose-Leaf and Read & Practice.

GO DIGITAL—NOW WITH ACHIEVE Innovative engagement. Enduring retention. The most effective way to explore psychological science, now with even more support for instructors.

With digital content available for the first time in the breakthrough online platform, Achieve, the new edition of Myers and DeWall’s bestseller, Exploring Psychology offers creative ways to help students connect with the course, retain psychology’s key principles, and do better in all their classes, not just psychology. Like all previous editions, the authors combine market-leading currency, fresh teaching ideas, fascinating applications, effective new study tools and technologies, and a compassionate and compelling storytelling voice. Myers and DeWall base their text on the same guiding principles that made Myers the world’s bestselling introductory psychology author: Facilitate understanding by teaching critical thinking, applying principles to students’ lives, and reinforcing learning at every step. Demonstrate that psychology is a science by showing the process of inquiry and sharing the field’s most exciting new discoveries. Emphasize  psychology's big ideas , especially  respect for human unity and diversity --what drives us, distinguishes us, unifies us. With Achieve, our most powerful learning option is also our most affordable. Achieve brings all of the best aspects of the text and digital resources together in one place. Built on best practices in research in psychology and learning science, Achieve provides students with robust tools to succeed in their introductory course, while giving instructors insights into their students' understanding and performance. And it is the exclusive home of the extraordinary new resource, the Introductory Psychology Video Collection.

New to This Edition

Patrick Cheek, University of Maine at Augusta “I think it's a good, accessible textbook for an intro psych class. It is approachable for majors and non-majors.”   Jennifer M. Hart, Eastern Wyoming College “I have always liked this book as a great introductory text. It is written at an appropriate level for undergraduate students who are learning about psychology for the first time. It is clear and engaging. It is full of relevant and interesting examples.”   Dava Brock, Arkansas State University “The concepts are presented in a way that I think students would understand.  The textbook uses multiple charts and diagrams, and is in an outline form that students are used to. ...I have always liked David Myers' textbooks.  I think the textbook offers more information than many textbooks. This provides many concepts for professors to decide to teach.” Elizabeth J. Moseley, Cleveland State Community College “These [the tables, graphs, and other illustrations] were good.  They helped support the content that was being presented.” Cherry Sawyerr, Lone Star College - North Harris “I like [the historical timeline] a lot! It was great, it can and will be useful.  Nice pictures and a nice balance with women and men of different ethnicities.” Widaad Zaman, University of Central Florida “Students love the digital textbook, as well as the digital resources that come with the text.” Kathy Coiner, Scott Community College “The text does a wonderful job of using relevant pictures, cartoons, diagrams, graphs, etc. to expose the student to the content….Having used Myers/DeWall for over two decades says a lot… There is a reason this has been the top psychology textbook since who knows when so whatever you're doing, keep doing it!” Kevin S. Autry, California State Polytechnic Pomona “I appreciate the review sections placed throughout the chapter instead of just at the end.” Larry Todd Allen, Three Rivers Community College “I have taught [the Myers/Dewall] course study for about 15 years and find that many of my students have changed major and developed a more empathetic scope to their lives taking my psychology classes.” Dawn Rodgers-DeFouw, Grace Christian University “Each edition gets better!”

Twelfth Edition | ©2022

David G. Myers; C. Nathan DeWall

Digital Options

Read & practice.

Achieve Read & Practice is the marriage of our LearningCurve adaptive quizzing and our mobile, accessible e-book, in one easy-to-use and affordable product.

Learn About Read & Practice Schedule Read & Practice Demo Go to Read & Practice

Achieve is a comprehensive set of interconnected teaching and assessment tools that incorporate the most effective elements from Macmillan Learning's market leading solutions in a single, easy-to-use platform.

Schedule Achieve Demo Go to Achieve

Read online (or offline) with all the highlighting and notetaking tools you need to be successful in this course.

Learn About E-book

Twelfth Edition | 2022

Table of Contents

critical thinking exploring psychology

David G. Myers

David Myers received his B.A. in chemistry from Whitworth University, and his psychology Ph.D. from the University of Iowa. He has spent his career at Hope College, Michigan, where he has taught dozens of introductory psychology sections. Hope College students have invited him to be their commencement speaker and voted him “outstanding professor.” His research and writings have been recognized by the Gordon Allport Intergroup Relations Prize, an Honored Scientist award from the Federation of Associations in Behavioral & Brain Sciences, an Award for Distinguished Service on Behalf of Social-Personality Psychology, a Presidential Citation from APA Division 2, election as an American Association for the Advancement of Science Fellow, and three honorary doctorates. With support from National Science Foundation grants, Myers’ scientific articles have appeared in three dozen scientific periodicals, including Science , American Scientist , Psychological Science , and American Psychologist . In addition to his scholarly and textbook writing, he digests psychological science for the general public. His writings have appeared in four dozen magazines, from Today’s Education to Scientific American . He also has authored six general audience books, including, in 2022, How Do We Know Ourselves? Curiosities and Marvels of the Human Mind . And he blogs about psychology and life at TalkPsych.com. David Myers has chaired his city’s Human Relations Commission, helped found a thriving assistance center for low-income families, and spoken to hundreds of college, community, and professional groups worldwide. Drawing on his experience of hearing loss, which now includes a cochlear implant, he also has written articles and a book ( A Quiet World ) about hearing loss, and he is advocating a transformation in U.S. assistive listening technology (see HearingLoop.org). For his leadership, he has received awards from the American Academy of Audiology, the hearing industry, and the Hearing Loss Association of America. David and Carol Myers met and married while undergraduates, and have raised sons Peter and Andrew, and a daughter, Laura. They have one grandchild, Allie.

critical thinking exploring psychology

C. Nathan DeWall

Nathan DeWall is professor of psychology at the University of Kentucky. He received his bachelor’s degree from St. Olaf College, a master’s degree in social science from the University of Chicago, and a master’s degree and Ph.D. in social psychology from Florida State University. DeWall received the College of Arts and Sciences Outstanding Teaching Award, which recognizes excellence in undergraduate and graduate teaching. The Association for Psychological Science identified DeWall as a “Rising Star” early in his career for “making significant contributions to the field of psychological science.” He has been included in the top 1 percent of all cited scientists in psychology and psychiatry on the Institute for Scientific Information list, according to the Web of Science. DeWall conducts research on close relationships, self-control, aggression, the psychology of religion, and intellectual humility. With funding from the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, and the John Templeton Foundation, he has published 225 scientific articles and chapters. DeWall’s research awards include the SAGE Young Scholars Award from the Foundation for Personality and Social Psychology, the Young Investigator Award from the International Society for Research on Aggression, and the Early Career Award from the International Society for Self and Identity. His research has been covered by numerous media and entertainment outlets, including Good Morning America, The Wall Street Journal , Newsweek , The Atlantic Monthly , The New York Times , The Los Angeles Times , Harvard Business Review , USA Today , National Public Radio, The Guardian , the BBC, and Netflix. He has lectured nationally and internationally, including in Hong Kong, China, the Netherlands, England, Greece, Hungary, Sweden, Australia, and France. Nathan is happily married to Alice DeWall and is the proud father of Beverly “Bevy” and Ellis. He also enjoys taking care of the family dog, “Artie.” As an ultramarathon runner, he completed numerous races, including the Badwater 135 in 2017 (dubbed “the World’s toughest foot race”). In his spare time now, he enjoys hiking, attending live concerts, setting up and maintaining aquariums, watching sports, and playing guitar and singing in local rock bands.

Twelfth Edition | 2022

Instructor Resources

Need instructor resources for your course, access test bank.

You need to sign in as a verified instructor to access the Test Bank.

Test Bank for Exploring Psychology

Learn more about our Test Banks or Sign up for training.

Download Resources

You need to sign in to unlock your resources.

APA Correlation to Quality Principles (.docx)

Image slides and tables (accessible), instructor's resource manual for exploring psychology (online only), lecture slides for exploring psychology (online only), mcat correlation guide (.docx), test bank preface (.zip), iclicker questions for exploring psychology (online only).

You've selected:

Click the E-mail Download Link button and we'll send you an e-mail at with links to download your instructor resources. Please note there may be a delay in delivering your e-mail depending on the size of the files.

Your download request has been received and your download link will be sent to .

Please note you could wait up to 30 to 60 minutes to receive your download e-mail depending on the number and size of the files. We appreciate your patience while we process your request.

Check your inbox, trash, and spam folders for an e-mail from [email protected] .

If you do not receive your e-mail, please visit macmillanlearning.com/support .

Related Titles

David Myers: Thinking Critically in our "Post-Truth" World

Get To Know David Myers

Get To Know Nathan DeWall

Make Things Memorable

David Myers, best-selling introductory psychology author from Worth Publishers, talks about how to make things memorable and study more effectively through the "Testing Effect."

Self Control: Teaching Students About Their Greatest Inner Strength with Nathan DeWall

Select a demo to view:

critical thinking exploring psychology

These materials are owned by Macmillan Learning or its licensors and are protected by United States copyright law. They are being provided solely for evaluation purposes only by instructors who are considering adopting Macmillan Learning's textbooks or online products for use by students in their courses. These materials may not be copied, distributed, sold, shared, posted online, or used, in print or electronic format, except in the limited circumstances set forth in the Macmillan Learning Terms of Use and any other reproduction or distribution is illegal. These materials may not be made publicly available under any circumstances. All other rights reserved. © 2020 Macmillan Learning. BY CLICKING ON THE SAMPLE CHAPTER LINK BELOW, YOU ARE AGREEING TO USE THESE MATERIALS ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH MACMILLAN LEARNING'S TERMS OF USE.

Select a file to view:

Chapter 8: Memory

We are happy to offer free Achieve access in addition to the physical sample you have selected. Sample this version now as opposed to waiting for the physical edition.

SEP home page

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

Bibliography

Academic tools.

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

Critical Thinking

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

2.1 Dewey’s Three Main Examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. Examples and Non-Examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8. Critical Thinking Dispositions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

12. Controversies

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • Abrami, Philip C., Robert M. Bernard, Eugene Borokhovski, David I. Waddington, C. Anne Wade, and Tonje Person, 2015, “Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-analysis”, Review of Educational Research , 85(2): 275–314. doi:10.3102/0034654314551063
  • Aikin, Wilford M., 1942, The Story of the Eight-year Study, with Conclusions and Recommendations , Volume I of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers. [ Aikin 1942 available online ]
  • Alston, Kal, 1995, “Begging the Question: Is Critical Thinking Biased?”, Educational Theory , 45(2): 225–233. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00225.x
  • –––, 2001, “Re/Thinking Critical Thinking: The Seductions of Everyday Life”, Studies in Philosophy and Education , 20(1): 27–40. doi:10.1023/A:1005247128053
  • American Educational Research Association, 2014, Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing / American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education , Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
  • Anderson, Lorin W., David R. Krathwohl, Peter W. Airiasian, Kathleen A. Cruikshank, Richard E. Mayer, Paul R. Pintrich, James Raths, and Merlin C. Wittrock, 2001, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , New York: Longman, complete edition.
  • Bailin, Sharon, 1987, “Critical and Creative Thinking”, Informal Logic , 9(1): 23–30. [ Bailin 1987 available online ]
  • –––, 1988, Achieving Extraordinary Ends: An Essay on Creativity , Dordrecht: Kluwer. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-2780-3
  • –––, 1995, “Is Critical Thinking Biased? Clarifications and Implications”, Educational Theory , 45(2): 191–197. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00191.x
  • Bailin, Sharon and Mark Battersby, 2009, “Inquiry: A Dialectical Approach to Teaching Critical Thinking”, in Juho Ritola (ed.), Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 09 , CD-ROM (pp. 1–10), Windsor, ON: OSSA. [ Bailin & Battersby 2009 available online ]
  • –––, 2016a, “Fostering the Virtues of Inquiry”, Topoi , 35(2): 367–374. doi:10.1007/s11245-015-9307-6
  • –––, 2016b, Reason in the Balance: An Inquiry Approach to Critical Thinking , Indianapolis: Hackett, 2nd edition.
  • –––, 2021, “Inquiry: Teaching for Reasoned Judgment”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 31–46. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_003
  • Bailin, Sharon, Roland Case, Jerrold R. Coombs, and Leroi B. Daniels, 1999a, “Common Misconceptions of Critical Thinking”, Journal of Curriculum Studies , 31(3): 269–283. doi:10.1080/002202799183124
  • –––, 1999b, “Conceptualizing Critical Thinking”, Journal of Curriculum Studies , 31(3): 285–302. doi:10.1080/002202799183133
  • Blair, J. Anthony, 2021, Studies in Critical Thinking , Windsor, ON: Windsor Studies in Argumentation, 2nd edition. [Available online at https://windsor.scholarsportal.info/omp/index.php/wsia/catalog/book/106]
  • Berman, Alan M., Seth J. Schwartz, William M. Kurtines, and Steven L. Berman, 2001, “The Process of Exploration in Identity Formation: The Role of Style and Competence”, Journal of Adolescence , 24(4): 513–528. doi:10.1006/jado.2001.0386
  • Black, Beth (ed.), 2012, An A to Z of Critical Thinking , London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
  • Bloom, Benjamin Samuel, Max D. Engelhart, Edward J. Furst, Walter H. Hill, and David R. Krathwohl, 1956, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , New York: David McKay.
  • Boardman, Frank, Nancy M. Cavender, and Howard Kahane, 2018, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life , Boston: Cengage, 13th edition.
  • Browne, M. Neil and Stuart M. Keeley, 2018, Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking , Hoboken, NJ: Pearson, 12th edition.
  • Center for Assessment & Improvement of Learning, 2017, Critical Thinking Assessment Test , Cookeville, TN: Tennessee Technological University.
  • Cleghorn, Paul. 2021. “Critical Thinking in the Elementary School: Practical Guidance for Building a Culture of Thinking”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessmen t, Leiden: Brill, pp. 150–167. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_010
  • Cohen, Jacob, 1988, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2nd edition.
  • College Board, 1983, Academic Preparation for College. What Students Need to Know and Be Able to Do , New York: College Entrance Examination Board, ERIC document ED232517.
  • Commission on the Relation of School and College of the Progressive Education Association, 1943, Thirty Schools Tell Their Story , Volume V of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers.
  • Council for Aid to Education, 2017, CLA+ Student Guide . Available at http://cae.org/images/uploads/pdf/CLA_Student_Guide_Institution.pdf ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • Dalgleish, Adam, Patrick Girard, and Maree Davies, 2017, “Critical Thinking, Bias and Feminist Philosophy: Building a Better Framework through Collaboration”, Informal Logic , 37(4): 351–369. [ Dalgleish et al. available online ]
  • Dewey, John, 1910, How We Think , Boston: D.C. Heath. [ Dewey 1910 available online ]
  • –––, 1916, Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education , New York: Macmillan.
  • –––, 1933, How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process , Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
  • –––, 1936, “The Theory of the Chicago Experiment”, Appendix II of Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 463–477.
  • –––, 1938, Logic: The Theory of Inquiry , New York: Henry Holt and Company.
  • Dominguez, Caroline (coord.), 2018a, A European Collection of the Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions Needed in Different Professional Fields for the 21st Century , Vila Real, Portugal: UTAD. Available at http://bit.ly/CRITHINKEDUO1 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • ––– (coord.), 2018b, A European Review on Critical Thinking Educational Practices in Higher Education Institutions , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http://bit.ly/CRITHINKEDUO2 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • ––– (coord.), 2018c, The CRITHINKEDU European Course on Critical Thinking Education for University Teachers: From Conception to Delivery , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http:/bit.ly/CRITHINKEDU03; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • Dominguez Caroline and Rita Payan-Carreira (eds.), 2019, Promoting Critical Thinking in European Higher Education Institutions: Towards an Educational Protocol , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http:/bit.ly/CRITHINKEDU04; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • Ennis, Robert H., 1958, “An Appraisal of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal”, The Journal of Educational Research , 52(4): 155–158. doi:10.1080/00220671.1958.10882558
  • –––, 1962, “A Concept of Critical Thinking: A Proposed Basis for Research on the Teaching and Evaluation of Critical Thinking Ability”, Harvard Educational Review , 32(1): 81–111.
  • –––, 1981a, “A Conception of Deductive Logical Competence”, Teaching Philosophy , 4(3/4): 337–385. doi:10.5840/teachphil198143/429
  • –––, 1981b, “Eight Fallacies in Bloom’s Taxonomy”, in C. J. B. Macmillan (ed.), Philosophy of Education 1980: Proceedings of the Thirty-seventh Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society , Bloomington, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, pp. 269–273.
  • –––, 1984, “Problems in Testing Informal Logic, Critical Thinking, Reasoning Ability”, Informal Logic , 6(1): 3–9. [ Ennis 1984 available online ]
  • –––, 1987, “A Taxonomy of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities”, in Joan Boykoff Baron and Robert J. Sternberg (eds.), Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice , New York: W. H. Freeman, pp. 9–26.
  • –––, 1989, “Critical Thinking and Subject Specificity: Clarification and Needed Research”, Educational Researcher , 18(3): 4–10. doi:10.3102/0013189X018003004
  • –––, 1991, “Critical Thinking: A Streamlined Conception”, Teaching Philosophy , 14(1): 5–24. doi:10.5840/teachphil19911412
  • –––, 1996, “Critical Thinking Dispositions: Their Nature and Assessability”, Informal Logic , 18(2–3): 165–182. [ Ennis 1996 available online ]
  • –––, 1998, “Is Critical Thinking Culturally Biased?”, Teaching Philosophy , 21(1): 15–33. doi:10.5840/teachphil19982113
  • –––, 2011, “Critical Thinking: Reflection and Perspective Part I”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 26(1): 4–18. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews20112613
  • –––, 2013, “Critical Thinking across the Curriculum: The Wisdom CTAC Program”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 28(2): 25–45. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20132828
  • –––, 2016, “Definition: A Three-Dimensional Analysis with Bearing on Key Concepts”, in Patrick Bondy and Laura Benacquista (eds.), Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 18–21 May 2016 , Windsor, ON: OSSA, pp. 1–19. Available at http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/105 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • –––, 2018, “Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum: A Vision”, Topoi , 37(1): 165–184. doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4
  • Ennis, Robert H., and Jason Millman, 1971, Manual for Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level X, and Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level Z , Urbana, IL: Critical Thinking Project, University of Illinois.
  • Ennis, Robert H., Jason Millman, and Thomas Norbert Tomko, 1985, Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual , Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publication, 3rd edition.
  • –––, 2005, Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual , Seaside, CA: Critical Thinking Company, 5th edition.
  • Ennis, Robert H. and Eric Weir, 1985, The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test: Test, Manual, Criteria, Scoring Sheet: An Instrument for Teaching and Testing , Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
  • Facione, Peter A., 1990a, Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction , Research Findings and Recommendations Prepared for the Committee on Pre-College Philosophy of the American Philosophical Association, ERIC Document ED315423.
  • –––, 1990b, California Critical Thinking Skills Test, CCTST – Form A , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
  • –––, 1990c, The California Critical Thinking Skills Test--College Level. Technical Report #3. Gender, Ethnicity, Major, CT Self-Esteem, and the CCTST , ERIC Document ED326584.
  • –––, 1992, California Critical Thinking Skills Test: CCTST – Form B, Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
  • –––, 2000, “The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking: Its Character, Measurement, and Relationship to Critical Thinking Skill”, Informal Logic , 20(1): 61–84. [ Facione 2000 available online ]
  • Facione, Peter A. and Noreen C. Facione, 1992, CCTDI: A Disposition Inventory , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
  • Facione, Peter A., Noreen C. Facione, and Carol Ann F. Giancarlo, 2001, California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory: CCTDI: Inventory Manual , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
  • Facione, Peter A., Carol A. Sánchez, and Noreen C. Facione, 1994, Are College Students Disposed to Think? , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press. ERIC Document ED368311.
  • Fisher, Alec, and Michael Scriven, 1997, Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment , Norwich: Centre for Research in Critical Thinking, University of East Anglia.
  • Freire, Paulo, 1968 [1970], Pedagogia do Oprimido . Translated as Pedagogy of the Oppressed , Myra Bergman Ramos (trans.), New York: Continuum, 1970.
  • Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2001, “The Adaptive Toolbox”, in Gerd Gigerenzer and Reinhard Selten (eds.), Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 37–50.
  • Glaser, Edward Maynard, 1941, An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking , New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
  • Groarke, Leo A. and Christopher W. Tindale, 2012, Good Reasoning Matters! A Constructive Approach to Critical Thinking , Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press, 5th edition.
  • Halpern, Diane F., 1998, “Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer Across Domains: Disposition, Skills, Structure Training, and Metacognitive Monitoring”, American Psychologist , 53(4): 449–455. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449
  • –––, 2016, Manual: Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment , Mödling, Austria: Schuhfried. Available at https://pdfcoffee.com/hcta-test-manual-pdf-free.html; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • Hamby, Benjamin, 2014, The Virtues of Critical Thinkers , Doctoral dissertation, Philosophy, McMaster University. [ Hamby 2014 available online ]
  • –––, 2015, “Willingness to Inquire: The Cardinal Critical Thinking Virtue”, in Martin Davies and Ronald Barnett (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education , New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 77–87.
  • Haran, Uriel, Ilana Ritov, and Barbara A. Mellers, 2013, “The Role of Actively Open-minded Thinking in Information Acquisition, Accuracy, and Calibration”, Judgment and Decision Making , 8(3): 188–201.
  • Hatcher, Donald and Kevin Possin, 2021, “Commentary: Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking Assessment”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 298–322. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_017
  • Haynes, Ada, Elizabeth Lisic, Kevin Harris, Katie Leming, Kyle Shanks, and Barry Stein, 2015, “Using the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT) as a Model for Designing Within-Course Assessments: Changing How Faculty Assess Student Learning”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 30(3): 38–48. doi:10.5840/inquiryct201530316
  • Haynes, Ada and Barry Stein, 2021, “Observations from a Long-Term Effort to Assess and Improve Critical Thinking”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 231–254. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_014
  • Hiner, Amanda L. 2021. “Equipping Students for Success in College and Beyond: Placing Critical Thinking Instruction at the Heart of a General Education Program”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 188–208. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_012
  • Hitchcock, David, 2017, “Critical Thinking as an Educational Ideal”, in his On Reasoning and Argument: Essays in Informal Logic and on Critical Thinking , Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 477–497. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-53562-3_30
  • –––, 2021, “Seven Philosophical Implications of Critical Thinking: Themes, Variations, Implications”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 9–30. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_002
  • hooks, bell, 1994, Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom , New York and London: Routledge.
  • –––, 2010, Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom , New York and London: Routledge.
  • Johnson, Ralph H., 1992, “The Problem of Defining Critical Thinking”, in Stephen P, Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking , New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 38–53.
  • Kahane, Howard, 1971, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life , Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  • Kahneman, Daniel, 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow , New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  • Kahneman, Daniel, Olivier Sibony, & Cass R. Sunstein, 2021, Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment , New York: Little, Brown Spark.
  • Kenyon, Tim, and Guillaume Beaulac, 2014, “Critical Thinking Education and Debasing”, Informal Logic , 34(4): 341–363. [ Kenyon & Beaulac 2014 available online ]
  • Krathwohl, David R., Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bertram B. Masia, 1964, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook II: Affective Domain , New York: David McKay.
  • Kuhn, Deanna, 1991, The Skills of Argument , New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511571350
  • –––, 2019, “Critical Thinking as Discourse”, Human Development, 62 (3): 146–164. doi:10.1159/000500171
  • Lipman, Matthew, 1987, “Critical Thinking–What Can It Be?”, Analytic Teaching , 8(1): 5–12. [ Lipman 1987 available online ]
  • –––, 2003, Thinking in Education , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition.
  • Loftus, Elizabeth F., 2017, “Eavesdropping on Memory”, Annual Review of Psychology , 68: 1–18. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044138
  • Makaiau, Amber Strong, 2021, “The Good Thinker’s Tool Kit: How to Engage Critical Thinking and Reasoning in Secondary Education”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 168–187. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_011
  • Martin, Jane Roland, 1992, “Critical Thinking for a Humane World”, in Stephen P. Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking , New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 163–180.
  • Mayhew, Katherine Camp, and Anna Camp Edwards, 1936, The Dewey School: The Laboratory School of the University of Chicago, 1896–1903 , New York: Appleton-Century. [ Mayhew & Edwards 1936 available online ]
  • McPeck, John E., 1981, Critical Thinking and Education , New York: St. Martin’s Press.
  • Moore, Brooke Noel and Richard Parker, 2020, Critical Thinking , New York: McGraw-Hill, 13th edition.
  • Nickerson, Raymond S., 1998, “Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises”, Review of General Psychology , 2(2): 175–220. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
  • Nieto, Ana Maria, and Jorge Valenzuela, 2012, “A Study of the Internal Structure of Critical Thinking Dispositions”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 27(1): 31–38. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20122713
  • Norris, Stephen P., 1985, “Controlling for Background Beliefs When Developing Multiple-choice Critical Thinking Tests”, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice , 7(3): 5–11. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1988.tb00437.x
  • Norris, Stephen P. and Robert H. Ennis, 1989, Evaluating Critical Thinking (The Practitioners’ Guide to Teaching Thinking Series), Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
  • Norris, Stephen P. and Ruth Elizabeth King, 1983, Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
  • –––, 1984, The Design of a Critical Thinking Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland. ERIC Document ED260083.
  • –––, 1985, Test on Appraising Observations: Manual , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
  • –––, 1990a, Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2nd edition.
  • –––, 1990b, Test on Appraising Observations: Manual , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2nd edition.
  • OCR [Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations], 2011, AS/A Level GCE: Critical Thinking – H052, H452 , Cambridge: OCR. Past papers available at https://pastpapers.co/ocr/?dir=A-Level/Critical-Thinking-H052-H452; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • Ontario Ministry of Education, 2013, The Ontario Curriculum Grades 9 to 12: Social Sciences and Humanities . Available at http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/ssciences9to122013.pdf ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • Passmore, John Arthur, 1980, The Philosophy of Teaching , London: Duckworth.
  • Paul, Richard W., 1981, “Teaching Critical Thinking in the ‘Strong’ Sense: A Focus on Self-Deception, World Views, and a Dialectical Mode of Analysis”, Informal Logic , 4(2): 2–7. [ Paul 1981 available online ]
  • –––, 1984, “Critical Thinking: Fundamental to Education for a Free Society”, Educational Leadership , 42(1): 4–14.
  • –––, 1985, “McPeck’s Mistakes”, Informal Logic , 7(1): 35–43. [ Paul 1985 available online ]
  • Paul, Richard W. and Linda Elder, 2006, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools , Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, 4th edition.
  • Payette, Patricia, and Edna Ross, 2016, “Making a Campus-Wide Commitment to Critical Thinking: Insights and Promising Practices Utilizing the Paul-Elder Approach at the University of Louisville”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 31(1): 98–110. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20163118
  • Possin, Kevin, 2008, “A Field Guide to Critical-Thinking Assessment”, Teaching Philosophy , 31(3): 201–228. doi:10.5840/teachphil200831324
  • –––, 2013a, “Some Problems with the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA) Test”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 28(3): 4–12. doi:10.5840/inquiryct201328313
  • –––, 2013b, “A Serious Flaw in the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) Test”, Informal Logic , 33(3): 390–405. [ Possin 2013b available online ]
  • –––, 2013c, “A Fatal Flaw in the Collegiate Learning Assessment Test”, Assessment Update , 25 (1): 8–12.
  • –––, 2014, “Critique of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Test: The More You Know, the Lower Your Score”, Informal Logic , 34(4): 393–416. [ Possin 2014 available online ]
  • –––, 2020, “CAT Scan: A Critical Review of the Critical-Thinking Assessment Test”, Informal Logic , 40 (3): 489–508. [Available online at https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/6243]
  • Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Rear, David, 2019, “One Size Fits All? The Limitations of Standardised Assessment in Critical Thinking”, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education , 44(5): 664–675. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1526255
  • Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1762, Émile , Amsterdam: Jean Néaulme.
  • Scheffler, Israel, 1960, The Language of Education , Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
  • Scriven, Michael, and Richard W. Paul, 1987, Defining Critical Thinking , Draft statement written for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction. Available at http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
  • Sheffield, Clarence Burton Jr., 2018, “Promoting Critical Thinking in Higher Education: My Experiences as the Inaugural Eugene H. Fram Chair in Applied Critical Thinking at Rochester Institute of Technology”, Topoi , 37(1): 155–163. doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9392-1
  • Siegel, Harvey, 1985, “McPeck, Informal Logic and the Nature of Critical Thinking”, in David Nyberg (ed.), Philosophy of Education 1985: Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society , Normal, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, pp. 61–72.
  • –––, 1988, Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking, and Education , New York: Routledge.
  • –––, 1999, “What (Good) Are Thinking Dispositions?”, Educational Theory , 49(2): 207–221. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1999.00207.x
  • Simon, Herbert A., 1956, “Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment”, Psychological Review , 63(2): 129–138. doi: 10.1037/h0042769
  • Simpson, Elizabeth, 1966–67, “The Classification of Educational Objectives: Psychomotor Domain”, Illinois Teacher of Home Economics , 10(4): 110–144, ERIC document ED0103613. [ Simpson 1966–67 available online ]
  • Skolverket, 2018, Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class and School-age Educare , Stockholm: Skolverket, revised 2018. Available at https://www.skolverket.se/download/18.31c292d516e7445866a218f/1576654682907/pdf3984.pdf; last accessed 2022 07 15.
  • Smith, B. Othanel, 1953, “The Improvement of Critical Thinking”, Progressive Education , 30(5): 129–134.
  • Smith, Eugene Randolph, Ralph Winfred Tyler, and the Evaluation Staff, 1942, Appraising and Recording Student Progress , Volume III of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers.
  • Splitter, Laurance J., 1987, “Educational Reform through Philosophy for Children”, Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children , 7(2): 32–39. doi:10.5840/thinking1987729
  • Stanovich Keith E., and Paula J. Stanovich, 2010, “A Framework for Critical Thinking, Rational Thinking, and Intelligence”, in David D. Preiss and Robert J. Sternberg (eds), Innovations in Educational Psychology: Perspectives on Learning, Teaching and Human Development , New York: Springer Publishing, pp 195–237.
  • Stanovich Keith E., Richard F. West, and Maggie E. Toplak, 2011, “Intelligence and Rationality”, in Robert J. Sternberg and Scott Barry Kaufman (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3rd edition, pp. 784–826. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511977244.040
  • Tankersley, Karen, 2005, Literacy Strategies for Grades 4–12: Reinforcing the Threads of Reading , Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Thayer-Bacon, Barbara J., 1992, “Is Modern Critical Thinking Theory Sexist?”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 10(1): 3–7. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews199210123
  • –––, 1993, “Caring and Its Relationship to Critical Thinking”, Educational Theory , 43(3): 323–340. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1993.00323.x
  • –––, 1995a, “Constructive Thinking: Personal Voice”, Journal of Thought , 30(1): 55–70.
  • –––, 1995b, “Doubting and Believing: Both are Important for Critical Thinking”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 15(2): 59–66. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews199515226
  • –––, 2000, Transforming Critical Thinking: Thinking Constructively , New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Toulmin, Stephen Edelston, 1958, The Uses of Argument , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Turri, John, Mark Alfano, and John Greco, 2017, “Virtue Epistemology”, in Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition). URL = < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/epistemology-virtue/ >
  • Vincent-Lancrin, Stéphan, Carlos González-Sancho, Mathias Bouckaert, Federico de Luca, Meritxell Fernández-Barrerra, Gwénaël Jacotin, Joaquin Urgel, and Quentin Vidal, 2019, Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking: What It Means in School. Educational Research and Innovation , Paris: OECD Publishing.
  • Warren, Karen J. 1988. “Critical Thinking and Feminism”, Informal Logic , 10(1): 31–44. [ Warren 1988 available online ]
  • Watson, Goodwin, and Edward M. Glaser, 1980a, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Form A , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
  • –––, 1980b, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal: Forms A and B; Manual , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation,
  • –––, 1994, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Form B , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
  • Weinstein, Mark, 1990, “Towards a Research Agenda for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking”, Informal Logic , 12(3): 121–143. [ Weinstein 1990 available online ]
  • –––, 2013, Logic, Truth and Inquiry , London: College Publications.
  • Willingham, Daniel T., 2019, “How to Teach Critical Thinking”, Education: Future Frontiers , 1: 1–17. [Available online at https://prod65.education.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/main-education/teaching-and-learning/education-for-a-changing-world/media/documents/How-to-teach-critical-thinking-Willingham.pdf.]
  • Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus, 1996, Virtues of the Mind: An Inquiry into the Nature of Virtue and the Ethical Foundations of Knowledge , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139174763
How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.
  • Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking (AILACT)
  • Critical Thinking Across the European Higher Education Curricula (CRITHINKEDU)
  • Critical Thinking Definition, Instruction, and Assessment: A Rigorous Approach
  • Critical Thinking Research (RAIL)
  • Foundation for Critical Thinking
  • Insight Assessment
  • Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21)
  • The Critical Thinking Consortium
  • The Nature of Critical Thinking: An Outline of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities , by Robert H. Ennis

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

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

  • Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

  • Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

APS

  • Teaching Tips

On Critical Thinking

Several years ago some teaching colleagues were talking about the real value of teaching psychology students to think critically. After some heated discussion, the last word was had by a colleague from North Carolina. “The real value of being a good critical thinker in psychology is so you won’t be a jerk,” he said with a smile. That observation remains one of my favorites in justifying why teaching critical thinking skills should be an important goal in psychology. However, I believe it captures only a fraction of the real value of teaching students to think critically about behavior.

What I s Critical Thinking?

Although there is little agreement about what it means to think critically in psychology, I like the following broad definition: The propensity and skills to engage in activity with reflec tive skepticism focused on deciding what to believe or do

Students often arrive at their first introductory course with what they believe is a thorough grasp of how life works. After all, they have been alive for at least 18 years, have witnessed their fair shares of crisis, joy, and tragedy, and have successfully navigated their way in to your classroom.

These students have had a lot of time to develop their own personal theories about how the world works and most are quite satisfied with the results. They often pride themselves on how good they are with people as well as how astute they are in understanding and explaining the motives of others. And they think they know what psychology is. Many are surprised- and sometimes disappointed- to discover that psychology is a science, and the rigor of psychological research is a shock. The breadth and depth of psychology feel daunting. Regardless of their sophistication in the discipline, students often are armed with a single strategy to survive the experience: Memorize the book and hope it works out on the exam. In many cases, this strategy will serve them well. Unfortunately, student exposure to critical thinking skill development may be more accidental than planful on the part of most teachers. Collaboration in my department and with other colleagues over the years has persuaded me that we need to approach critical thinking skills in a purposeful, systematic, and developmental manner from the introductory course through the capstone experience, propose that we need to teach critical thinking skills in three domains of psychology: practical (the “jerk avoidance” function), theoretical (developing scientific explanations for behavior), and methodological (testing scientific ideas). I will explore each of these areas and then offer some general suggestions about how psychology teachers can improve their purposeful pursuit of critical thinking objectives.

Practical Domain

Practical critical thinking is often expressed as a long-term, implicit goal of teachers of psychology, even though they may not spend much academic time teaching how to transfer critical thinking skills to make students wise consumers, more careful judges of character, or more cautious interpreters of behavior. Accurate appraisal of behavior is essential, yet few teachers invest time in helping students understand how vulnerable their own interpretations are to error.

Encourage practice in accurate description and interpretation of behavior by presenting students with ambiguous behavior samples. Ask them to distinguish what they observe (What is the behavior?) from the inferences they draw from the behavior (What is the meaning of the behavior?). I have found that cartoons, such as Simon Bond’s Uns p eakable Acts, can be a good resource for refining observation skills. Students quickly recognize that crisp behavioral descriptions are typically consistent from observer to observer, but inferences vary wildly. They recognize that their interpretations are highly personal and sometimes biased by their own values and preferences. As a result of experiencing such strong individual differences in interpretation, students may learn to be appropriately less confident of their immediate conclusions, more tolerant of ambiguity, and more likely to propose alternative explanations. As they acquire a good understanding of scientific procedures, effective control techniques, and legitimate forms of evidence, they may be less likely to fall victim to the multitude of off-base claims about behavior that confront us all. (How many Elvis sightings can be valid in one year?)

Theoretical Domain

Theoretical critical thinking involves helping the student develop an appreciation for scientific explanations of behavior. This means learning not just the content of psychology but how and why psychology is organized into concepts, principles, laws, and theories. Developing theoretical skills begins in the introductory course where the primary critical thinking objective is understanding and applying concepts appropriately. For example, when you introduce students to the principles of reinforcement, you can ask them to find examples of the principles in the news or to make up stories that illustrate the principles.

Mid-level courses in the major require more sophistication, moving students beyond application of concepts and principles to learning and applying theories. For instance, you can provide a rich case study in abnormal psychology and ask students to make sense of the case from different perspectives, emphasizing theoretical flexibility or accurate use of existing and accepted frameworks in psychology to explain patterns of behavior. In advanced courses we can justifiably ask students to evaluate theory, selecting the most useful or rejecting the least helpful. For example, students can contrast different models to explain drug addiction in physiological psychology. By examining the strengths and weaknesses of existing frameworks, they can select which theories serve best as they learn to justify their criticisms based on evidence and reason.

Capstone, honors, and graduate courses go beyond theory evaluation to encourage students to create theory. Students select a complex question about behavior (for example, identifying mechanisms that underlie autism or language acquisition) and develop their own theory-based explanations for the behavior. This challenge requires them to synthesize and integrate existing theory as well as devise new insights into the behavior.

Methodological Domain

Most departments offer many opportunities for students to develop their methodological critical thinking abilities by applying different research methods in psychology. Beginning students must first learn what the scientific method entails. The next step is to apply their understanding of scientific method by identifying design elements in existing research. For example, any detailed description of an experimental design can help students practice distinguishing the independent from the dependent variable and identifying how researchers controlled for alternative explanations. The next methodological critical thinking goals include evaluating the quality of existing research design and challenging the conclusions of research findings. Students may need to feel empowered by the teacher to overcome the reverence they sometimes demonstrate for anything in print, including their textbooks. Asking students to do a critical analysis on a fairly sophisticated design may simply be too big a leap for them to make. They are likely to fare better if given examples of bad design so they can build their critical abilities and confidence in order to tackle more sophisticated designs. (Examples of bad design can be found in The Critical Thinking Companion for Introductory Psychology or they can be easily constructed with a little time and imagination). Students will develop and execute their own research designs in their capstone methodology courses. Asking students to conduct their own independent research, whether a comprehensive survey on parental attitudes, a naturalistic study of museum patrons’ behavior, or a well-designed experiment on paired associate learning, prompts students to integrate their critical thinking skills and gives them practice with conventional writing forms in psychology. In evaluating their work I have found it helpful to ask students to identify the strengths and weaknesses of their own work- as an additional opportunity to think critically-before giving them my feedback.

Additional Suggestions

Adopting explicit critical thinking objectives, regardless of the domain of critical thinking, may entail some strategy changes on the part of the teacher.

• Introduce psychology as an ope n-end ed, growing enterprise . Students often think that their entry into the discipline represents an end-point where everything good and true has already been discovered. That conclusion encourages passivity rather than criticality. Point out that research is psychology’ s way of growing and developing. Each new discovery in psychology represents a potentially elegant act of critical thinking. A lot of room for discovery remains. New ideas will be developed and old conceptions discarded.

• Require student performance that goes beyond memorization . Group work, essays, debates, themes, letters to famous psychologists, journals, current event examples- all of these and more can be used as a means of developing the higher skills involved in critical thinking in psychology. Find faulty cause-effect conclusions in the tabloids (e.g., “Eating broccoli increases your IQ!”) and have students design studies to confirm or discredit the headline’s claims. Ask students to identify what kinds of evidence would warrant belief in commercial claims. Although it is difficult, even well designed objective test items can capture critical thinking skills so that students are challenged beyond mere repetition and recall.

• Clarify your expectations about performance with explicit, public criteria. Devising clear performance criteria for psychology projects will enhance student success. Students often complain that they don’t understand “what you want” when you assign work. Performance criteria specify the standards that you will use to evaluate their work. For example, perfonnance criteria for the observation exercise described earlier might include the following: The student describes behavior accurately; offers i nference that is reasonable for the context; and identifies personal factors that might influence infer ence. Perfonnance criteria facilitate giving detailed feedback easily and can also promote student self-assessment.

• Label good examples of critical thinking when these occur spontaneously. Students may not recognize when they are thinking critically. When you identify examples of good thinking or exploit examples that could be improved, it enhances students’ ability to understand. One of my students made this vivid for me when she commented on the good connection she had made between a course concept and an insight from her literature class, “That is what you mean by critical thinking?” There after I have been careful to label a good critical thinking insight.

• Endorse a questioning attitude. Students often assume that if they have questions about their reading, then they are somehow being dishonorable, rude, or stupid. Having  discussions early in the course about the role of good questions in enhancing the quality of the subject and expanding the sharpness of the mind may set a more critical stage on which students can play. Model critical thinking from some insights you have had about behavior or from some research you have conducted in the past. Congratulate students who offer good examples of the principles under study. Thank students who ask concept-related questions and describe why you think their questions are good. Leave time and space for more. Your own excitement about critical thinking can be a great incentive for students to seek that excitement.

• Brace yourself . When you include more opportunity for student critical thinking in class, there is much more opportunity for the class to go astray. Stepping away from the podium and engaging the students to perform what they know necessitates some loss of control, or at least some enhanced risk. However, the advantage is that no class will ever feel completely predictable, and this can be a source of stimulation for students and the professor as well.

' src=

As far back as I can remember over 50 yrs. ago. I have been talking psychology to friends, or helping them to solve problems. I never thought about psy. back then, but now I realize I really love helping people. How can I become a critical thinker without condemning people?

' src=

using a case study explain use of critical thinking in counseling process.

' src=

Do you have any current readings with Critical Thinking Skills in Psychology, besides John Russcio’s work?

APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines .

Please login with your APS account to comment.

About the Author

Jane Halonen received her PhD from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee in 1980. She is Professor of Psychology at Alverno College in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where she has served as Chair of Psychology and Dean of the Behavior Sciences Department. Halonen is past president of the Council for Teachers of Undergraduate Psychology. A fellow of APA's Division 2 (Teaching), she has been active on the Committee of Undergraduate Education, helped design the 1991 APA Conference on Undergraduate Educational Quality, and currently serves as a committee member to develop standards for the teaching of high school psychology.

critical thinking exploring psychology

Student Notebook: Five Tips for Working with Teaching Assistants in Online Classes

Sarah C. Turner suggests it’s best to follow the golden rule: Treat your TA’s time as you would your own.

Teaching Current Directions in Psychological Science

Aimed at integrating cutting-edge psychological science into the classroom, Teaching Current Directions in Psychological Science offers advice and how-to guidance about teaching a particular area of research or topic in psychological science that has been

European Psychology Learning and Teaching Conference

The School of Education of the Paris Lodron University of Salzburg is hosting the next European Psychology Learning and Teaching (EUROPLAT) Conference on September 18–20, 2017 in Salzburg, Austria. The main theme of the conference

Privacy Overview

logo (1)

Diane F. Halpern, Ph.D.

Dean of social science at the minvera schools at keck graduate insitute, emerita mcelwee family professor of psychology at claremont mckenna college, emerita, critical thinking in psychology.

Critical Thinking in Psychology

Link to purchase:

https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/psychology/psychology-general-interest/critical-thinking-psychology-2nd-edition?format=PB

FORMAT: Paperback

ISBN: 9781108739528

Good scientific research depends on critical thinking at least as much as factual knowledge; psychology is no exception to this rule. And yet, despite the importance of critical thinking, psychology students are rarely taught how to think critically about the theories, methods, and concepts they must use. This book shows students and researchers how to think critically about key topics such as experimental research, statistical inference, case studies, logical fallacies, and ethical judgments.

Exploring how critical thinking can be used in psychology, this book shows students and researchers how to think critically about key topics such as experimental research, statistical inference, case studies, logical fallacies, and ethical judgments.

Link to Purchase on Amazon.com Publisher Information

critical thinking exploring psychology

  • Kindle Store
  • Kindle eBooks

Promotions apply when you purchase

These promotions will be applied to this item:

Some promotions may be combined; others are not eligible to be combined with other offers. For details, please see the Terms & Conditions associated with these promotions.

Buy for others

Buying and sending ebooks to others.

  • Select quantity
  • Buy and send eBooks
  • Recipients can read on any device

These ebooks can only be redeemed by recipients in the US. Redemption links and eBooks cannot be resold.

critical thinking exploring psychology

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

QR code to download the Kindle App

Image Unavailable

Critically exploring psychology: critical thinking as a tool for psychology

  • To view this video download Flash Player

Follow the author

The Open University

Critically exploring psychology: critical thinking as a tool for psychology Kindle Edition

This ebook introduces you to critical thinking as a tool for psychology. As you read this ebook you will learn what critical thinking is, and why it is important to use in the study of psychology. In particular, it will help you to think about how to use it when doing independent research.

After reading this ebook, you should be able to: recognise that there are differing perspectives in psychology; understand how psychologists think about the design of their research and the methods used; appreciate where and how to find out more about how to critically explore as a psychologist; and understand the importance of critical thinking in psychology and research.

  • Print length 38 pages
  • Language English
  • Sticky notes On Kindle Scribe
  • Publisher The Open University
  • Publication date May 31, 2023
  • File size 6581 KB
  • Page Flip Enabled
  • Word Wise Enabled
  • Enhanced typesetting Enabled
  • See all details

Popular titles by this author

Geometry

Product details

  • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0C6FHPWNG
  • Publisher ‏ : ‎ The Open University (May 31, 2023)
  • Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 31, 2023
  • Language ‏ : ‎ English
  • File size ‏ : ‎ 6581 KB
  • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
  • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
  • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
  • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
  • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
  • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
  • Print length ‏ : ‎ 38 pages
  • #1,476,137 in Kindle eBooks

About the author

critical thinking exploring psychology

The Open University

The Open University is a global leader in higher education, and has pioneered distance learning for over 50 years, delivering exceptional teaching and outstanding support to students across the UK and the world.

Open University eBooks showcase academic expertise across a broad spectrum of topics, offering higher education as accessible, bite-sized learning in an easy-to-read format.

Many of our eBooks are adapted parts of Open University modules, covering a wide range of subjects, from Greek history to renewable energy, and everything in between!

Customer reviews

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

No customer reviews

  • Amazon Newsletter
  • About Amazon
  • Accessibility
  • Sustainability
  • Press Center
  • Investor Relations
  • Amazon Devices
  • Amazon Science
  • Start Selling with Amazon
  • Sell apps on Amazon
  • Supply to Amazon
  • Protect & Build Your Brand
  • Become an Affiliate
  • Become a Delivery Driver
  • Start a Package Delivery Business
  • Advertise Your Products
  • Self-Publish with Us
  • Host an Amazon Hub
  • › See More Ways to Make Money
  • Amazon Visa
  • Amazon Store Card
  • Amazon Secured Card
  • Amazon Business Card
  • Shop with Points
  • Credit Card Marketplace
  • Reload Your Balance
  • Amazon Currency Converter
  • Your Account
  • Your Orders
  • Shipping Rates & Policies
  • Amazon Prime
  • Returns & Replacements
  • Manage Your Content and Devices
  • Recalls and Product Safety Alerts
  • Conditions of Use
  • Privacy Notice
  • Your Ads Privacy Choices

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

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

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

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

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

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

Critical thinking skills help you to:

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

Table of contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

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

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

Academic examples

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

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

Nonacademic examples

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

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

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

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

When encountering information, ask:

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

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

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

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

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

 Plagiarism

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

Scribbr Citation Checker New

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

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

critical thinking exploring psychology

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

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

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

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

Ask questions such as:

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

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

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

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

Being information literate means that you:

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Eoghan Ryan

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

Christopher Dwyer Ph.D.

The Relationship Between Critical Thinking and Critical Theory

Comparing approaches..

Posted February 15, 2024 | Reviewed by Gary Drevitch

  • Critical theory is a way of identifying, critiquing, and challenging social dynamics and power structures.
  • Modern critical theory seems to skip a lot of steps associated with logic and mechanisms of good thinking.
  • Human beings think in hierarchically structured fashion, and they develop social groups in a similar manner.

I recently asked a fellow academic, in conversation, how they try to integrate critical thinking into their classroom, and they replied that they don’t have "much time for that kind of thing." I quickly realised that they didn’t know what I was talking about and likely confused it for something else. This shouldn’t have been entirely surprising to me, given research by Lloyd and Bahr (2010) indicates that, unfortunately, many educators are not au fait with what critical thinking actually is. Following further conversation, I came to understand what this academic was referring to: critical theory. This was neither the first time I’ve encountered such confusion of terms, nor was it the first time I heard criticism of the field.

What Critical Theory Is

I recognise that the phrasing "critical lens" one often hears in educational contexts might be a bit ambiguous and could be perceived in various ways. Critical thinking is many things, but one thing it is not is critical theory. Critical theory is an arts and humanities approach to identifying, critiquing, and challenging social dynamics and power structures within society (e.g., see Tyson 2023, Marcuse, 1968). Simply, it’s a critique of society; hence, the name—though some in the field would argue this and uphold the belief that it’s an association with our beloved critical thinking. I would argue that such people would fit in well with the aforementioned cohort of people who don’t really understand what critical thinking is.

The critical theory approach developed out of post-World War II German social climates as a means of exploring how Germany and, indeed, Europe got to where they were at that point in time. This is reasonable; indeed, psychology was interested in these implications as well (e.g., consider the work of Milgram and Asch). Critical theory grew from there into other socially aware applications. Despite methodological concerns, there is some good work done through critical theory. However, there is also considerable poor research done in this area. I would argue that the core reason for this is that the approach is often founded in bias . That is, unfortunately, a lot of modern critical theory starts with the proposition that some dynamic is "bad." Now, I’m not saying that many of the dynamics often under investigation aren’t bad, but starting research on the basis of a biased perspective doesn’t sound like a particularly promising rationale. Where’s the critical thinking? Where’s the evaluation? If you truly care about the topic, apply critical thinking from an unbiased perspective. Modern critical theory seems to skip a lot of steps associated with logic and the mechanisms of good thinking.

The purpose of this brief discussion on critical theory is two-fold. First, it’s argued that there has been "considerable" growth in the field in recent years (e.g., critical theory student numbers, growing presence in popular society, and growing inclusion in educational curricula), which is concerning given the rationale above, and, second, consistent with my observation in the introduction, its name is unfortunately similar to "critical thinking" and, thus, the two are often confused for one another. Please, don’t make this mistake.

Power Structures

Similar to the aforementioned negative social dynamics, I’m not saying that power structures don’t exist either. Look at families: Parents hold "power" over their children. Look at jobs: Employees are under the power of their managers, who are under the power of other managers, and so on. Indeed, depending on what country you live in, your government has varying levels of power over those it governs (e.g., with respect to law and policy-making). Some will argue that it’s the people who should be governing themselves: voting in law- and policy-makers as representatives, which is reasonable to me, but not all governments are like this— that’s politics for you (e.g., largely belief-led) , so what can you do? "Think critically about it" would be a reasonable response in the context of this page, and that is notably distinct from engaging in critical theory.

The point is that such "structures" are naturally occurring. Human beings think in hierarchically structured fashion (e.g., through schema construction, classification, categorisation) and they develop social groups in a similar manner. That’s not to say that we should accept such structures in all situations, but no amount of academia is likely to change human nature; believe me, we’ve been trying to get people to think critically for a long time. Another important consideration for recognising this commonality is our expectance of these structures. Unfortunately, because we expect to see them everywhere, we wind up creating many of them, through our interpretations, when they might not even exist.

So, if you are approaching your research from the perspective that because something (e.g., some group) experiences, for example, a less-than-desirable event or condition, it’s very easy—without the application of critical thinking—that such negative outcomes should be attributed to some other group, in a sort of causal relationship. The problem is, as opposed to this being a conclusion ( a leads to b ), it is often the starting point of research, which then biases the methodology and its outcomes. For example, in an effort not to single out any particular group, let’s say I’m studying some topic from a Zuggist perspective (I made-up the word/group "Zug"). Considering the fact that I side with Zuggists—I might even be a Zug myself—the chances of me reporting something that is biased in favour of Zugs is more likely than not. To me, that’s not good research.

Again, I’m not saying that all research from a critical theory approach is like this, but, unfortunately, a noticeable amount of it is. Sure, every field has its barriers and "crises" from time to time: Psychology has been battling a replicability crisis in recent years. However, at least psychology (for the most part) recognises the importance of replicability and other research mechanisms associated with good methodology. I have concerns about that with respect to critical theory.

All in all, critical theory doesn’t mean much to me, but, for now, like my fellow academic said in the introduction, "I don’t have much time for that kind of thing." So, why bother talking about it here? This page is focused on critical thinking and good decision-making . These are the outcomes in which I and readers of this blog are interested, alongside learning more about how we can enhance them. It’s difficult enough conceptualising and describing critical thinking without having something similarly named adding further confusion. I’m not putting blame on anyone for the manner in which they coined the term "critical theory"; however, I think it important that people from all walks of life know the differences between them, because those differences are many and important.

Lloyd, M., & Bahr, N. (2010). Thinking critically about critical thinking in higher education. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 4, 2, 1–16.

Marcuse, Herbert. "Philosophy and Critical Theory," in Negations: Essays in Critical Theory , with translations from the German by Jeremy J. Shapiro (Boston: Beacon Press, 1968), pp. 134–158.

Tyson, L. (2023). Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide . Taylor & Francis.

Christopher Dwyer Ph.D.

Christopher Dwyer, Ph.D., is a lecturer at the Technological University of the Shannon in Athlone, Ireland.

  • Find a Therapist
  • Find a Treatment Center
  • Find a Support Group
  • International
  • New Zealand
  • South Africa
  • Switzerland
  • Asperger's
  • Bipolar Disorder
  • Chronic Pain
  • Eating Disorders
  • Passive Aggression
  • Personality
  • Goal Setting
  • Positive Psychology
  • Stopping Smoking
  • Low Sexual Desire
  • Relationships
  • Child Development
  • Therapy Center NEW
  • Diagnosis Dictionary
  • Types of Therapy

January 2024 magazine cover

Overcome burnout, your burdens, and that endless to-do list.

  • Coronavirus Disease 2019
  • Affective Forecasting
  • Neuroscience

2024 Spring Bulb Show

Botanic Garden

Saturday, March 2, 2024 10 a.m. - Sunday, March 17, 2024 4 p.m.

bulb show

It’s that time of year again! That time when Lyman Conservatory provides a preview of spring colors and scents. With over 9,000 bulbs brought to flower, you won’t want to miss this year’s Spring Bulb Show. The show will once again feature a student-commissioned art installation. Building on the success of last year’s inaugural commission, five students were selected this year through an open call. 

The 2024 show runs from Saturday, March 2 through Sunday, March 17. The plant house will be open for extended hours for the show: 

  • 9 a.m.–10 a.m. daily, members only hours
  • 10 a.m.–4 p.m., Sunday–Thursday
  • 10 a.m.–8 p.m., Fridays & Saturdays

Please note that during the show w e pause our guided tour options to accommodate the crowds. If you do plan to visit as a group of 10 or more during the show, we ask that you let us know through our online scheduler . 

Bountiful Blooms

The Spring Bulb Show has been a tradition at Smith since 1901, when it originated along with the college’s first horticulture class. Take a look at some more recent displays of springtime splendor.

Daffodils and tulips

Tulips and daffodils offer a picturesque scene at the 2022 Bulb Show.

A display of daffodils

A display of daffodils at the 2017 Bulb Show.

A student in a mask near a display of flowers

A student helps prepare for the virtual Bulb Show during the pandemic, in 2021.

Tulips at the Bulb Show

Tulips of nearly every hue imaginable are regulars at the Spring Bulb Shows.

banu cropped

2024 Spring Bulb Show Opening Lecture

Don't miss this year's opening lecture, For the Love of Plants: Plant Worlds in the Shadows of Empire , with Dr. Banu Subramaniam. Drawing on recent interdisciplinary scholarship in feminist, postcolonial and indigenous studies, the lecture reflects on how gender, race, class, sexuality and nation shape the foundational language, terminology and theories of the modern plant sciences, and how botanical theories remain grounded in the violence of their colonial pasts. 

Friday, March 1 at 7:30 p.m., with a preview of the bulb show at Lyman to follow.

We know that parking can be a challenge during the show as there is no parking on College Lane, and our two visitor's spots are blocked off to serve as a drop off location. 

On-street parking can be found on Elm Street near central campus. Additionally, there are visitor spots in the  Smith College parking garage on West Street, metered parking on Green Street and a long-term municipal lot behind the Forbes Library on West Street. On weekends and after 5 p.m. on weekdays, permit-only campus lots open up for general parking.

Visit the  Smith College parking map for options. 

Original Exhibit in Church Gallery

Be sure to check out The Bell Jars: Lyman Conservatory and Sylvia Plath’s Botanical Imagination while visiting the bulb show. Using archival materials and Plath’s literary work as a guide, the exhibit invites visitors to inhabit Lyman as Plath once did. Cross-pollinating the humanities and natural sciences, it examines Plath’s botanical imagination and Lyman’s role in cultivating it.

Plath Poster

critical thinking exploring psychology

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

OpenLearn

My OpenLearn Profile

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

About this free course

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

Critically exploring psychology

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

1.2 Social psychology

Social psychologists are interested in the interaction between individual psychological processes and the broader contexts in which they unfold. This includes phenomena such as collective norms and values, relations between groups, conflict and cooperation, social attitudes, and political ideologies. Understanding how these broader social factors shape individual behaviours gives social psychology its character.

An aerial view of a gathering of adults all chatting amongst each other

At the centre of social psychological research is the interaction between the influence of wider social factors that shape how we understand the social world (i.e. group dynamics, situational pressures and so on), and the cognitive processes through which we perceive and organise information about the social world (i.e. emotions and motivations) that shape our reactions to others.

Previous

IMAGES

  1. 10 Essential Critical Thinking Skills (And How to Improve Them

    critical thinking exploring psychology

  2. Critical Thinking in Psychology : A Unified Skills Approach

    critical thinking exploring psychology

  3. Critical Thinking Skills

    critical thinking exploring psychology

  4. Critical Thinking in Psychology

    critical thinking exploring psychology

  5. 35 Psychology-Based Critical Thinking Strategies

    critical thinking exploring psychology

  6. Critical thinking in reading and writing

    critical thinking exploring psychology

VIDEO

  1. Critical thinking

  2. Divergent thinking: Exploring the world of neurodiversity (part 1)

  3. Critical thinking

  4. Critical thinking

  5. Learning Outcomes Of Critical Thinking

  6. #psychologyfacts psychology tips to think clearly 🤞

COMMENTS

  1. Exploring PSYCHOLOGY, tenth edition

    Chapter 1, Thinking Critically With Psychological Science, introduces students to psychology's research methods, emphasizing the fallacies of our everyday intuition and common sense and, thus, the need for psychological science. Critical thinking is introduced as a key term on page 3.

  2. Critically exploring psychology: 2.1 What is critical thinking

    Critical thinking involves making an assessment of something, and then providing a critique of that position and putting forward new positions. For example, flip flops may be comfortable for the first part of the hike, in hot weather. However, the top of the mountain is rocky so a more substantial trainer might be needed to get to the summit ...

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

    Other investigators advocate for critical thinking as a model of intelligence specifically designed for addressing real-world problems. Yes, intelligence (i.e., critical thinking) can be enhanced and used for solving a real-world problem such as COVID-19, which we use as an example of contemporary problems that need a new approach. Keywords ...

  4. Exploring Psychology, 12th Edition

    Facilitate understanding by teaching critical thinking, applying principles to students' lives, ... Exploring Psychology Twelfth Edition and its resources offer a perfect match for those interested in following the IPI guidelines from the American Psychological Association (2021), with full text coverage of relevant content, and abundant ...

  5. Critically exploring psychology

    As you work your way through the course you will learn what critical thinking is, and why it is important to use in the study of psychology. In particular, it will help you to think about how to use it when doing independent research. This OpenLearn course is an adapted extract from the Open University course D810 Critically exploring ...

  6. Why is critical thinking important for Psychology students?

    Critical thinking is objective and requires you to analyse and evaluate information to form a sound judgement. It is a cornerstone of evidence-based arguments and forming an evidence-based argument is essential in Psychology. That is why we, your tutors, as well as your future employers, want you to develop this skill effectively.

  7. Bridging critical thinking and transformative learning: The role of

    In recent decades, approaches to critical thinking have generally taken a practical turn, pivoting away from more abstract accounts - such as emphasizing the logical relations that hold between statements (Ennis, 1964) - and moving toward an emphasis on belief and action.According to the definition that Robert Ennis (2018) has been advocating for the last few decades, critical thinking is ...

  8. Critical Thinking About Psychology

    In Critical Thinking About Psychology: Hidden Assumptions and Plausible Alternatives contributors examine the unquestioned givens of psychology and suggest other ways of looking at them. Psychologists are taught early in their careers to use their research findings to examine common myths and debunk false beliefs. Yet, in spite of this emphasis on critical analysis, psychologists do not ...

  9. Critical Thinking

    Critical Thinking. Critical thinking is a widely accepted educational goal. Its definition is contested, but the competing definitions can be understood as differing conceptions of the same basic concept: careful thinking directed to a goal. Conceptions differ with respect to the scope of such thinking, the type of goal, the criteria and norms ...

  10. On Critical Thinking

    Theoretical critical thinking involves helping the student develop an appreciation for scientific explanations of behavior. This means learning not just the content of psychology but how and why psychology is organized into concepts, principles, laws, and theories. Developing theoretical skills begins in the introductory course where the ...

  11. Think Critically Before Thinking Critically

    The modern world requires critical thinking about a large variety of topics, ranging from biology (e.g., vaccines) to political science (e.g., constitutional procedures) to psychology (e.g ...

  12. Critically exploring psychology: 4 How do I put critical thinking into

    This free course introduces you to critical thinking as a tool for psychology. As you work your way through the course you will learn what critical thinking is, and why it is important to use in...

  13. Critical Thinking in Psychology

    FORMAT: Paperback. ISBN: 9781108739528. Good scientific research depends on critical thinking at least as much as factual knowledge; psychology is no exception to this rule. And yet, despite the importance of critical thinking, psychology students are rarely taught how to think critically about the theories, methods, and concepts they must use.

  14. PDF Thinking Critically With Psychological Science

    The Scientific Attitude and Critical Thinking *Instructor's Resources items related to objective 1-1 appear in the unit titled Thinking Critically With Psychological Science. u Lectures:Your Teaching Strategies and Critical Thinking†; Critical Thinking u Exercises: Exit Tickets; Critical Inquiry and Psychology†; A Psychic Reading

  15. Critically exploring psychology: critical thinking as a tool for

    After reading this ebook, you should be able to: recognise that there are differing perspectives in psychology; understand how psychologists think about the design of their research and the methods used; appreciate where and how to find out more about how to critically explore as a psychologist; and understand the importance of critical ...

  16. What Is Critical Thinking?

    Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment. To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources. Critical thinking skills help you to: Identify credible sources. Evaluate and respond to arguments.

  17. The Relationship Between Critical Thinking and Critical Theory

    Critical theory is an arts and humanities approach to identifying, critiquing, and challenging social dynamics and power structures within society (e.g., see Tyson 2023, Marcuse, 1968). Simply, it ...

  18. Critically exploring psychology: 2 Critical thinking in psychology

    2 Critical thinking in psychology. The central task for psychology is to try to explain human behaviour and experience; that is, to explain all the things that people do, think, feel and say. However, psychology is not restricted to human behaviour; it includes non-human animals in its field of study too. But human and non-human behaviour and ...

  19. Exploring psychology 10th edition chapter 1 Flashcards

    Terms in this set (43) thinking that does not blindly accept arguments and conclusions. Rather, it examines assumptions, appraises the sources, discerns hidden biases, evaluates evidence, and assessed conclusions. Early school of thought promoted by Wundt and Titchener; used introspection to reveal the structure of the human mind.

  20. Free Course: Critically exploring psychology from OpenLearn

    In particular, it will help you to think about how to use it when doing independent research.This OpenLearn course is an adapted extract from the Open University course D810 Critically exploring psychology 1 andD811 Critically exploring psychology 2.

  21. Exploring the Concept of Critical Thinking in Psychology

    Definition of Critical Thinking in PsychologyCritical thinking is the process of objectively analyzing information, evaluating evidence, and making informed decisions. In psychology, critical thinking involves the ability to identify and evaluate assumptions, arguments, and evidence presented in research. It is a vital skill for scientists who need to evaluate research studies and determine ...

  22. ScienceDirect

    ScienceDirect is a leading platform for peer-reviewed scientific research, covering a wide range of disciplines and topics. If you are looking for an article published in 2020 in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, you can use the advanced search function to filter by journal, year, and keyword. You can also browse related webpages to find more articles of interest.

  23. 2024 Spring Bulb Show

    Don't miss this year's opening lecture, For the Love of Plants: Plant Worlds in the Shadows of Empire, with Dr. Banu Subramaniam.Drawing on recent interdisciplinary scholarship in feminist, postcolonial and indigenous studies, the lecture reflects on how gender, race, class, sexuality and nation shape the foundational language, terminology and theories of the modern plant sciences, and how ...

  24. Critically exploring psychology: Introduction

    Introduction. This free course introduces you to critical thinking as a tool for psychology. As you work your way through the course you will learn what critical thinking is, and why it is important to use in the study of psychology. In particular, it will help you to think about how to use it when doing independent research.

  25. The PsyK- Life

    38 likes, 1 comments - thepsyklife on February 19, 2024: "PRACTITIONER COURSE IN CAREER COUNSELING! Ready to embark on a transformative journey in ca..."

  26. Critically exploring psychology: 1.2 Social psychology

    1.2 Social psychology. Social psychologists are interested in the interaction between individual psychological processes and the broader contexts in which they unfold. This includes phenomena such as collective norms and values, relations between groups, conflict and cooperation, social attitudes, and political ideologies.