critical thinking of the workplace

Work Life is Atlassian’s flagship publication dedicated to unleashing the potential of every team through real-life advice, inspiring stories, and thoughtful perspectives from leaders around the world.

Kelli María Korducki

Contributing Writer

Dominic Price

Work Futurist

Dr. Mahreen Khan

Senior Quantitative Researcher, People Insights

Kat Boogaard

Principal Writer

critical thinking of the workplace

How to build critical thinking skills for better decision-making

It’s simple in theory, but tougher in practice – here are five tips to get you started.

Get stories like this in your inbox

Have you heard the riddle about two coins that equal thirty cents, but one of them is not a nickel? What about the one where a surgeon says they can’t operate on their own son?

Those brain teasers tap into your critical thinking skills. But your ability to think critically isn’t just helpful for solving those random puzzles – it plays a big role in your career. 

An impressive 81% of employers say critical thinking carries a lot of weight when they’re evaluating job candidates. It ranks as the top competency companies consider when hiring recent graduates (even ahead of communication ). Plus, once you’re hired, several studies show that critical thinking skills are highly correlated with better job performance.

So what exactly are critical thinking skills? And even more importantly, how do you build and improve them? 

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is the ability to evaluate facts and information, remain objective, and make a sound decision about how to move forward.

Does that sound like how you approach every decision or problem? Not so fast. Critical thinking seems simple in theory but is much tougher in practice, which helps explain why 65% of employers say their organization has a need for more critical thinking. 

In reality, critical thinking doesn’t come naturally to a lot of us. In order to do it well, you need to:

  • Remain open-minded and inquisitive, rather than relying on assumptions or jumping to conclusions
  • Ask questions and dig deep, rather than accepting information at face value
  • Keep your own biases and perceptions in check to stay as objective as possible
  • Rely on your emotional intelligence to fill in the blanks and gain a more well-rounded understanding of a situation

So, critical thinking isn’t just being intelligent or analytical. In many ways, it requires you to step outside of yourself, let go of your own preconceived notions, and approach a problem or situation with curiosity and fairness.

It’s a challenge, but it’s well worth it. Critical thinking skills will help you connect ideas, make reasonable decisions, and solve complex problems.

7 critical thinking skills to help you dig deeper

Critical thinking is often labeled as a skill itself (you’ll see it bulleted as a desired trait in a variety of job descriptions). But it’s better to think of critical thinking less as a distinct skill and more as a collection or category of skills. 

To think critically, you’ll need to tap into a bunch of your other soft skills. Here are seven of the most important. 

Open-mindedness

It’s important to kick off the critical thinking process with the idea that anything is possible. The more you’re able to set aside your own suspicions, beliefs, and agenda, the better prepared you are to approach the situation with the level of inquisitiveness you need. 

That means not closing yourself off to any possibilities and allowing yourself the space to pull on every thread – yes, even the ones that seem totally implausible.

As Christopher Dwyer, Ph.D. writes in a piece for Psychology Today , “Even if an idea appears foolish, sometimes its consideration can lead to an intelligent, critically considered conclusion.” He goes on to compare the critical thinking process to brainstorming . Sometimes the “bad” ideas are what lay the foundation for the good ones. 

Open-mindedness is challenging because it requires more effort and mental bandwidth than sticking with your own perceptions. Approaching problems or situations with true impartiality often means:

  • Practicing self-regulation : Giving yourself a pause between when you feel something and when you actually react or take action.
  • Challenging your own biases: Acknowledging your biases and seeking feedback are two powerful ways to get a broader understanding. 

Critical thinking example

In a team meeting, your boss mentioned that your company newsletter signups have been decreasing and she wants to figure out why.

At first, you feel offended and defensive – it feels like she’s blaming you for the dip in subscribers. You recognize and rationalize that emotion before thinking about potential causes. You have a hunch about what’s happening, but you will explore all possibilities and contributions from your team members.

Observation

Observation is, of course, your ability to notice and process the details all around you (even the subtle or seemingly inconsequential ones). Critical thinking demands that you’re flexible and willing to go beyond surface-level information, and solid observation skills help you do that.

Your observations help you pick up on clues from a variety of sources and experiences, all of which help you draw a final conclusion. After all, sometimes it’s the most minuscule realization that leads you to the strongest conclusion.

Over the next week or so, you keep a close eye on your company’s website and newsletter analytics to see if numbers are in fact declining or if your boss’s concerns were just a fluke. 

Critical thinking hinges on objectivity. And, to be objective, you need to base your judgments on the facts – which you collect through research. You’ll lean on your research skills to gather as much information as possible that’s relevant to your problem or situation. 

Keep in mind that this isn’t just about the quantity of information – quality matters too. You want to find data and details from a variety of trusted sources to drill past the surface and build a deeper understanding of what’s happening. 

You dig into your email and website analytics to identify trends in bounce rates, time on page, conversions, and more. You also review recent newsletters and email promotions to understand what customers have received, look through current customer feedback, and connect with your customer support team to learn what they’re hearing in their conversations with customers.

The critical thinking process is sort of like a treasure hunt – you’ll find some nuggets that are fundamental for your final conclusion and some that might be interesting but aren’t pertinent to the problem at hand.

That’s why you need analytical skills. They’re what help you separate the wheat from the chaff, prioritize information, identify trends or themes, and draw conclusions based on the most relevant and influential facts. 

It’s easy to confuse analytical thinking with critical thinking itself, and it’s true there is a lot of overlap between the two. But analytical thinking is just a piece of critical thinking. It focuses strictly on the facts and data, while critical thinking incorporates other factors like emotions, opinions, and experiences. 

As you analyze your research, you notice that one specific webpage has contributed to a significant decline in newsletter signups. While all of the other sources have stayed fairly steady with regard to conversions, that one has sharply decreased.

You decide to move on from your other hypotheses about newsletter quality and dig deeper into the analytics. 

One of the traps of critical thinking is that it’s easy to feel like you’re never done. There’s always more information you could collect and more rabbit holes you could fall down.

But at some point, you need to accept that you’ve done your due diligence and make a decision about how to move forward. That’s where inference comes in. It’s your ability to look at the evidence and facts available to you and draw an informed conclusion based on those. 

When you’re so focused on staying objective and pursuing all possibilities, inference can feel like the antithesis of critical thinking. But ultimately, it’s your inference skills that allow you to move out of the thinking process and onto the action steps. 

You dig deeper into the analytics for the page that hasn’t been converting and notice that the sharp drop-off happened around the same time you switched email providers.

After looking more into the backend, you realize that the signup form on that page isn’t correctly connected to your newsletter platform. It seems like anybody who has signed up on that page hasn’t been fed to your email list. 

Communication

3 ways to improve your communication skills at work

3 ways to improve your communication skills at work

If and when you identify a solution or answer, you can’t keep it close to the vest. You’ll need to use your communication skills to share your findings with the relevant stakeholders – like your boss, team members, or anybody who needs to be involved in the next steps.

Your analysis skills will come in handy here too, as they’ll help you determine what information other people need to know so you can avoid bogging them down with unnecessary details. 

In your next team meeting, you pull up the analytics and show your team the sharp drop-off as well as the missing connection between that page and your email platform. You ask the web team to reinstall and double-check that connection and you also ask a member of the marketing team to draft an apology email to the subscribers who were missed. 

Problem-solving

Critical thinking and problem-solving are two more terms that are frequently confused. After all, when you think critically, you’re often doing so with the objective of solving a problem.

The best way to understand how problem-solving and critical thinking differ is to think of problem-solving as much more narrow. You’re focused on finding a solution.

In contrast, you can use critical thinking for a variety of use cases beyond solving a problem – like answering questions or identifying opportunities for improvement. Even so, within the critical thinking process, you’ll flex your problem-solving skills when it comes time to take action. 

Once the fix is implemented, you monitor the analytics to see if subscribers continue to increase. If not (or if they increase at a slower rate than you anticipated), you’ll roll out some other tests like changing the CTA language or the placement of the subscribe form on the page.

5 ways to improve your critical thinking skills

Beyond the buzzwords: Why interpersonal skills matter at work

Beyond the buzzwords: Why interpersonal skills matter at work

Think critically about critical thinking and you’ll quickly realize that it’s not as instinctive as you’d like it to be. Fortunately, your critical thinking skills are learned competencies and not inherent gifts – and that means you can improve them. Here’s how:

  • Practice active listening: Active listening helps you process and understand what other people share. That’s crucial as you aim to be open-minded and inquisitive.
  • Ask open-ended questions: If your critical thinking process involves collecting feedback and opinions from others, ask open-ended questions (meaning, questions that can’t be answered with “yes” or “no”). Doing so will give you more valuable information and also prevent your own biases from influencing people’s input.
  • Scrutinize your sources: Figuring out what to trust and prioritize is crucial for critical thinking. Boosting your media literacy and asking more questions will help you be more discerning about what to factor in. It’s hard to strike a balance between skepticism and open-mindedness, but approaching information with questions (rather than unquestioning trust) will help you draw better conclusions. 
  • Play a game: Remember those riddles we mentioned at the beginning? As trivial as they might seem, games and exercises like those can help you boost your critical thinking skills. There are plenty of critical thinking exercises you can do individually or as a team . 
  • Give yourself time: Research shows that rushed decisions are often regrettable ones. That’s likely because critical thinking takes time – you can’t do it under the wire. So, for big decisions or hairy problems, give yourself enough time and breathing room to work through the process. It’s hard enough to think critically without a countdown ticking in your brain. 

Critical thinking really is critical

The ability to think critically is important, but it doesn’t come naturally to most of us. It’s just easier to stick with biases, assumptions, and surface-level information. 

But that route often leads you to rash judgments, shaky conclusions, and disappointing decisions. So here’s a conclusion we can draw without any more noodling: Even if it is more demanding on your mental resources, critical thinking is well worth the effort.

Advice, stories, and expertise about work life today.

  • Open training
  • Team training

What is Critical Thinking and Why is it Valuable in the Workplace?

  • Articles and Resources
  • > Personal Effectiveness and Preparing for Change
  • > What is Critical Thinking and Why is it Valuable in the Workplace?

There are times at work when you simply have to “do.” A tight deadline, a demanding project outline, or a highly particular superior might mean that it makes sense to complete a task without too much mental tinkering. But work like this can be unsustainable and worse — it won’t leverage your ability to think critically.

There is value in thinking critically in every aspect of your life. From making decisions in your personal life, to interrogating the media you consume, to assessing your work with a critical eye, applying critical thinking is an essential skill everyone should be trying to hone.

At your workplace, critical thinking can distinguish you as a leader, and a valuable mind to bounce ideas off. It can help improve the quality of your work, and the perception those higher up the chain have of you.

Here’s what you need to know about critical thinking in the workplace:

What Exactly is “Critical Thinking”?

  In a nutshell, critical thinking is the ability to think reasonably, detaching yourself from personal bias, emotional responses, and subjective opinions. It involves using the data at hand to make a reasoned choice without falling prey to the temptations of doing things simply because they’ve always been done a certain way.

Critical thinking takes time. It might be quicker simply to take instruction at face value, or rely on the traditions of your team. But without analyzing the reasons behind decisions and tasks, it becomes extremely easy to adopt bad habits. This might be time-wasting meetings, inefficient uses of effort, or poor interactions with team members. Taking the time to ask “why” you’re doing something is the first step to thinking critically.

Sometimes, data is available which allows you to make reasoned decisions based on absolute facts. If you can show that a new best practice can objectively improve current processes with hard data, you’ve used the very basics of critical thinking. That said, actual numbers aren’t always available when making a decision. Real critical thinking involves taking a careful look at situations and making a decision based on what is known, not what is felt.

Why Is Critical Thinking Important in the Workplace?

The short answer to the above question is this: critical thinkers make the best decisions, most often. And in the workplace, where choices about how to complete tasks, communicate information, relate with coworkers, and develop strategy are so common, critical thinkers are extremely valuable.

A savvy hiring manager will make this part of the recruitment process. It’s pretty easy to gauge how someone is inclined to solve a problem — ask them how they would deal with a specific situation, and give them the opportunity to use their critical thinking skills, versus deferring to an emotional, or prescribed reaction. Employing people who can think and act reasonably will pay enormous dividends down the road.

Using your critical thinking skills in the workplace will define you as a problem solver. This is not only useful career-wise (although having upper-level people at your company think highly of you is undoubtedly a benefit) it also establishes you as a leader among your fellow team members. Demonstrating your ability to solve problems and accomplish goals effectively will help instill confidence in you with all your coworkers.

How to Use Critical Thinking in the Workplace

The first step to actually using critical thinking is approaching every situation with an open mind. You need to be receptive to all information available, not just the kind that satisfies your preconceived notions or personal biases. This can be easier said than done, of course — lessons learned and beliefs held are often done so with a reason. But when it comes to critical thinking, it’s important to analyze each situation independently.

Once you’ve analyzed a situation with an open mind, you need to consider how to communicate it properly. It’s all very well and good to approach situations with objective logic, but it doesn’t do you any favours to sound like  Mr. Spock  when you’re conveying your conclusions. Be tactful, patient and humble when you are explaining how and why you’ve come to decisions. Use data if available to support your findings, but understand that not everyone is able to remove emotion from situations.

critical thinking of the workplace

The final, and perhaps least obvious, application with critical thinking is creativity. Often, getting creative means pushing boundaries and reshaping convention. This means taking a risk — one that can often be worth the reward. Using a critical thinking approach when getting creative can help you mitigate the risk, and better determine what value your creativity can bring. It will help you and your team try new things and reinvent current processes while hopefully not rocking the boat too much.

Learn More About Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a valuable skill for all aspects of your life. It benefits problem solving, creativity, and teamwork. And it translates particularly well to the workplace, where it can distinguish you as a valuable employee and leader.

Taking the extra time to examine things objectively, make decisions based on logic, and communicate it tactfully will help you, those you work with, and your work goals prosper. To learn more about how to do that, have a look at our  Critical Thinking and Problem Solving for Effective Decision-Making   workshop and register today!

Let us help you create your training solution

Hello we'd love to hear from you.

Complete the form below or reach us at: [email protected] , or 613-234-2020

Contact details

To help you.

  • I wish to subscribe to PMC Training content.

Welcome to our new website!

We appreciate your patience as we add the finishing touches. In the meantime, go and explore!

Cookie Usage Disclaimer: This website uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience. By continuing to use this site, you consent to our use of cookies. For more information, please review our Privacy Policy .

Cart

  • SUGGESTED TOPICS
  • The Magazine
  • Newsletters
  • Managing Yourself
  • Managing Teams
  • Work-life Balance
  • The Big Idea
  • Data & Visuals
  • Reading Lists
  • Case Selections
  • HBR Learning
  • Topic Feeds
  • Account Settings
  • Email Preferences

Share Podcast

HBR IdeaCast podcast series

Improve Your Critical Thinking at Work

Helen Lee Bouygues, founder of the Reboot Foundation, believes that a lack of critical thinking is responsible for many business failures. She says organizational leaders often...

  • Apple Podcasts
  • Google Podcasts

Helen Lee Bouygues, founder of the Reboot Foundation, believes that a lack of critical thinking is responsible for many business failures. She says organizational leaders often rely too heavily on expertise and then jump to conclusions. Instead, leaders should deliberately approach each problem and devote time thinking through possible solutions. The good news, she says, is that critical thinking skills can developed and practiced over time. Bouygues is the author of the HBR.org article “ 3 Simple Habits to Improve Your Critical Thinking .”

Download this podcast

CURT NICKISCH: Welcome to the HBR IdeaCast from Harvard Business Review. I’m Curt Nickisch.

You know the story. Maybe it’s even a nightmare of yours. One day, the company is flying high. No reason to change anything. Customers and contracts will always be there.

And then one day – the money stops flowing in, and the business is suddenly in real trouble.

Our guest today knows this all too well. She has been an interim CEO, CFO, or COO at more than one dozen companies. Sometimes they needed her because they were mismanaged. Some failed to stay in front of changing technologies. In a few cases, members of the senior team were simply negligent. But in her experience, all these organizational problems shared one root cause: A lack of critical thinking.

Our guest is Helen Lee Bouygues. She’s the founder of the Reboot Foundation. Based in Paris, the nonprofit helps parents, teachers and employers think more critically about their problems. She’s also the author of the HBR.org article “ 3 Simple Habits to Improve Your Critical Thinking .” Helen, thanks for being here.

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: Thank you for having me Curt.

CURT NICKISCH: Helen, you worked in transitional periods for a bunch of big companies. And, you say that many people’s business problems really come down to simple errors in critical thinking. That just sounds a little surprising to me and I wanted to hear why you say that.

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: Yeah, I think at first glance people believe that critical thinking is something that we do every day and it comes very natural. But in reality, critical thinking is not only extremely important for success in life, but it’s also something that needs to be learned and practiced.

Critical thinking skills are very much predictive of making positive financial decisions, even more so than raw intelligence, but people kind of forget what that actually means in terms of tools and practices that they need to exercise in order to make the right decisions, or at least the better decisions.

Based on my 20 years of different turnaround and transformation experience, I have noticed that very often when things go sideways or create problems and companies find themselves in a situation of a need for turnaround, it’s typically been because I would argue that the leadership perhaps lacked some elements of critical thinking.

CURT NICKISCH: Why do you think we lack critical thinking skills, or why do you think we think we’re better at it than we actually are?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: That’s a great question Curt and actually we did a survey at the Reboot Foundation about a year ago, where we asked people questions of everything from ranging from how often do they practice critical thinking to how important they think critical thinking is, and how often they teach their children critical thinking?

I think one of the reasons why it’s more difficult in today’s day and age is that we live in a world of incessant distraction and technology is often to blame as well. We live in a period when we have a question, we want that instant gratification getting the information, just typing the question on Google, having the answer quickly and so, we don’t actually have as much time to stop and think.

And part of the necessity of critical thinking is having that ability to take a step back and actually think about your own thinking. And yet, it’s actually becoming more and more critical because as businesses evolve and there’s more urgency to make decisions, that’s exactly when we need to do more critical thinking than perhaps we used to, because of evolving technology and rapidly changing competitive environments in business.

CURT NICKISCH: You say that getting better at critical thinking is something we can learn and cultivate?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: Yes. The opposite of critical thinking could be selective thinking. And naturally selective thinking is something that you can actually do relatively quickly because it’s just a reinforcement of your own opinion. People in business can get better at critical thinking if they just do three things. One, question assumptions. Two, reason through logic. And three, diversify thought.

CURT NICKISCH: How do you actually do that?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: So, the taking a break, and that doesn’t mean doing meditation or yoga, but actually taking the time. It could be going for a run, or a walk around the block. That alone creates that opportunity for an individual to take the time to stop and think. So, that’s one dimension I think that people need to put in their normal practice.

The second element that you wouldn’t necessarily think about in terms of an attribute necessary for critical thinking is management of emotions. So, the number of times that you can imagine, especially in a boardroom for a company that’s going through a difficulty, heated discussions, insults across the room. In that type of environment, it’s very difficult to engage in rational thinking.

As much emotions are important, when it comes to true important decisions, we need to put aside the feelings and emotions that go awry in a meeting setting. In addition to that, I think the other element of what we need to make sure that we conduct is making sure that we have other points of views.

CURT NICKISCH: When you talk about looking at things from opposing viewpoints, sometimes that’s helpful when you have somebody who plays that role, or when you have a diverse team that you can share ideas with and explore. I don’t know that all of us are as good of just thinking from other perspectives when we’re kind of just in our own thoughts.

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: Yeah, but it’s again, that’s why I think I started off this conversation Curt, in saying that critical thinking is something that you actually need to practice and you need to learn. Because indeed, it’s natural and it’s very human to stay in your own personal bubble because it’s comfortable.

But you can actually do this from a small scale to a larger scale, and what I mean by that specifically is if you’re starting small, if you work in for example, in accounting. Go have lunch with people in marketing in your organization.

I have a good friend, Mathilde Thomas, she’s actually the founder of Caudalie which is a very successful line of skincare products made from grapes. Mathilde grew up spending her time in her family vineyards, so her family originally was in the wine business. And the idea of the skincare product came about because one day a friend of the family, this physician, came to visit the vineyard and he was looking at the vat of grape skins that were about to be discarded and he said, well that’s a pot of treasure, so why are you just discarding that away? And that’s effectively how the business of Caudalie actually began.

So, that’s a positive story where people who are not necessarily in the same field can get together and actually come up with innovation or here it wasn’t even intended to be an innovation. It just was an idea that sprung from two people from different walks of life getting together and coming up with the business idea. So, that’s a positive example in terms of diversity.

CURT NICKISCH: Where have you seen this failure in some of the companies that you worked with? Where have you seen the inability to diversify thought and opinions and host costly that can be?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: I think in terms of negative, I’ve seen a specific example for a pharmaceutical company where the founder brought in a CFO who actually had very little experience in accounting. He had experience in mergers and acquisitions, in elements of financing, but not pure accounting.

But his true qualification of becoming the CFO was the fact that he was a very, very good friend of the CEO’s and you see that example over and over again, including in boards. The number of times you see the board of a company being surrounded, the CEO being surrounded by his or her friends, which is why often I think from time to time, you have companies, publicly listed companies where sometimes the board may not see certain indications.

Be it the case of a Steinhoff or an Enron, which is an extreme case of fraud, but even in terms of general decisions, strategic decisions, that if you have a board composed of just a group of friends of the CEO’s, you don’t have diversity of thought in that type of environment.

CURT NICKISCH: So, we’ve talked some about questioning assumptions and the power of diversifying thought. But another point you make is that people need to get better about reasoning through logic. And I think this is going to surprise people too because logical is just such a household word. We think that we think logically, so why is logic a deficit and kind of a prerequisite for the critical thinking you think we need to see more of in management?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: So, one of the stories that I like to bring up is a specific company that I encountered a couple of years ago. It’s one of the world’s largest producers of aluminum tubes and they have clients ranging from L’Oréal to Proctor and Gamble, all over the world.

And the CEO of this company was blindsided by his own fervor and probably unreasonable optimism about the outlook for the revenue profile of this company. In reality, the company was in relatively dire financial straits, but again he was blinded with his hope that his clients would never leave because the switching costs of his clients would be too high, or that at least was his hypothesis.

And for some business leaders I think some optimism is obviously a good thing. There wouldn’t be Ubers or EBays if we didn’t have entrepreneurs who have that charisma and exuberance. But what I often find in companies is CEOss with something I call simply WTF. Now Curt, that’s not what you think that we commonly use in text messages, but it’s for me it’s “wishful thinking forever’.

And I think that blinded optimism can often mask the capability and the ability to reason through logic and actually re-question your approach and saying, “well, can my customers decide to change vendors? Is the competitive environment actually shifting? Are there low-cost companies that could actually take over my business even if that hurdle rate is high?”

So, it’s again coming back to being able to ask the right questions and looking at your business and saying, “is there a different way of doing things?” And that’s when you avoid the pitfalls of actually reasoning through logic.

And it comes back to the argument of having different views from your original views and your original sentiments. And obviously in order to do that, we need to really pay close attention to our own chain of logic.

CURT NICKISCH: Which I like by the way, wishful thinking forever. I’m going to read text messages that way now. Probably make them a little more optimistic. Yeah.

A lot of companies pay consultants to do this kind of critical thinking for them and they come in with tools and concept mapping, and all of the sorts of things that maybe they’re a little more deliberate about and also, removed from the emotion of working in the culture of a company. Do you see consultants as essentially paid critical thinkers?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: I think many consultants are good at critical thinking. I don’t believe that the industry of management consulting is a sector that is there to enforce critical thinking for companies. And let me explain why I believe that. A lot of, in a lot of situations CEOs seek validation and look for evidence that supports their preconceived notions. And consultants are often trained to agree with their client’s theories.

So, I would almost counter argue and say, for CEOs to effectively use consultants, they almost need to be very precise and be very upfront in their scope of work with the consultants, demand and ask that the consulting firm give a different point of view, or an opposing point of view than the original thesis of a leader.

Now that is sometimes hard to do. It goes back to the original part of our discussion. It’s less comfortable for leaders and in a lot of situations why CEO’s are hiring consultants are to justify and explain with more detail to their boards of why they’re doing certain strategic activities. So, that’s where we have to be careful about relying on consultants as quote, “a mechanism to do better critical thinking in business”.

CURT NICKISCH: Have you actually seen companies turn around when they change the way they approach problems and instituted critical thinking across the organization in a more deliberate way?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: Yes. I worked with a telecom company in Africa, not so long ago. And they had probably the lowest customer satisfaction rate across the board, amongst the different countries in Africa. And the CEO was somebody who was a very open minded, wanted to challenge – now you could argue Curt, they were on the low, they couldn’t get lower in terms of customer satisfaction, so they only had room to go up.

But if you put that aside, what he instituted was to have a sub group of his team to go visit another South African country that had very high customer satisfaction rates. So, it was, I would call creating an environment for its employees to have a bit of a diversity of thought, but also to actually be exposed to give the capacity for its employees to question the assumptions about what they were doing wrong.

So, very good CEOs not only are capable of trying to conduct metacognition for him or herself, meaning questioning his or her own way of thinking, but he’ll challenge his team and help them to challenge their own way of thinking by showing different examples of for example, success stories in the same type of work where in a case of this telecom company in Africa, where they could see and visit customer services centers in other African countries where they had high customer satisfaction rate.

So, it’s giving the exposure to its team to seek out diversity of thought, but also promoting that, and encouraging that its employees think differently than being focused on their own silos of work and being, trying to be efficient in their own capacity, in their existing dimension.

CURT NICKISCH: Yeah. So, if that was a good critical thinker, as a CEO, what do most leaders do in that situation? What does the “uncritical thinker” do?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: The uncritical thinker would be to try to gain more efficiency out of its existing employees and continue to do more of the same thing. But probably putting in more KPI’s. That’s a popular thing that leaders do. And try to put more pressure in the system so that companies are more productive. Rather than thinking out of the box and trying to say, should we be doing something differently than the way we’re doing it today?

CURT NICKISCH: And for individuals? Because whether or not you have a CEO who’s good at this, you can still affect your own team and you can still affect your own work with your own critical thinking. What should they do to get better at critical thinking?

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: Be curious. Ask the questions. “ What if” questions are great. It’s important to constantly challenge yourself saying, what if I did something differently than the way I’m doing it now? What if I approached my client differently than the way I’m doing it now? What if I changed the processes? Would there be improvement? That’s the type of individual who can improve by actually questioning the assumptions of what he or she is doing on a daily basis.

And then the second element again, is trying to be very factual and be rigid about gathering facts and proof and accumulating data in order to truly justify why you’re doing what you’re doing. It’s going back to paying close attention to the chain of your own logic.

And then the third is expanding your horizon by interacting with people that are not in your existing silo. So, I go back to the example, very simple example, go have lunch, go have a drink with somebody that’s not in your same department, but go reach out to somebody who’s in a totally different building, or even different division within your group.

CURT NICKISCH: Helen, thanks for coming on the show and talking about thinking through how to be a better critical thinker.

HELEN LEE BOUYGUES: Thank you so much. It was a real pleasure to be on your show.

CURT NICKISCH: That’s Helen Lee Bouygues. She’s the founder of the Paris-based Reboot Foundation and the author of the HBR.org article “ 3 Simple Habits to Improve Your Critical Thinking .”

This episode was produced by Mary Dooe. We get technical help from Rob Eckhardt. Adam Buchholz is our audio product manager.

Thanks for listening to the HBR IdeaCast . I’m Curt Nickisch.

  • Subscribe On:

Latest in this series

This article is about decision making and problem solving.

  • Managing yourself
  • Strategy formulation

Partner Center

  • Collaboration |
  • How to build your critical thinking ski ...

How to build your critical thinking skills in 7 steps (with examples)

Julia Martins contributor headshot

Critical thinking is, well, critical. By building these skills, you improve your ability to analyze information and come to the best decision possible. In this article, we cover the basics of critical thinking, as well as the seven steps you can use to implement the full critical thinking process. 

Critical thinking comes from asking the right questions to come to the best conclusion possible. Strong critical thinkers analyze information from a variety of viewpoints in order to identify the best course of action.

Don’t worry if you don’t think you have strong critical thinking abilities. In this article, we’ll help you build a foundation for critical thinking so you can absorb, analyze, and make informed decisions. 

What is critical thinking? 

Critical thinking is the ability to collect and analyze information to come to a conclusion. Being able to think critically is important in virtually every industry and applicable across a wide range of positions. That’s because critical thinking isn’t subject-specific—rather, it’s your ability to parse through information, data, statistics, and other details in order to identify a satisfactory solution. 

Decision-making tools for agile businesses

In this ebook, learn how to equip employees to make better decisions—so your business can pivot, adapt, and tackle challenges more effectively than your competition.

Make good choices, fast: How decision-making processes can help businesses stay agile ebook banner image

Top 8 critical thinking skills

Like most soft skills, critical thinking isn’t something you can take a class to learn. Rather, this skill consists of a variety of interpersonal and analytical skills. Developing critical thinking is more about learning to embrace open-mindedness and bringing analytical thinking to your problem framing process. 

In no particular order, the eight most important critical thinking skills are:

Analytical thinking: Part of critical thinking is evaluating data from multiple sources in order to come to the best conclusions. Analytical thinking allows people to reject bias and strive to gather and consume information to come to the best conclusion. 

Open-mindedness: This critical thinking skill helps you analyze and process information to come to an unbiased conclusion. Part of the critical thinking process is letting your personal biases go and coming to a conclusion based on all of the information. 

Problem solving : Because critical thinking emphasizes coming to the best conclusion based on all of the available information, it’s a key part of problem solving. When used correctly, critical thinking helps you solve any problem—from a workplace challenge to difficulties in everyday life. 

Self-regulation: Self-regulation refers to the ability to regulate your thoughts and set aside any personal biases to come to the best conclusion. In order to be an effective critical thinker, you need to question the information you have and the decisions you favor—only then can you come to the best conclusion. 

Observation: Observation skills help critical thinkers look for things beyond face value. To be a critical thinker you need to embrace multiple points of view, and you can use observation skills to identify potential problems.

Interpretation: Not all data is made equal—and critical thinkers know this. In addition to gathering information, it’s important to evaluate which information is important and relevant to your situation. That way, you can draw the best conclusions from the data you’ve collected. 

Evaluation: When you attempt to answer a hard question, there is rarely an obvious answer. Even though critical thinking emphasizes putting your biases aside, you need to be able to confidently make a decision based on the data you have available. 

Communication: Once a decision has been made, you also need to share this decision with other stakeholders. Effective workplace communication includes presenting evidence and supporting your conclusion—especially if there are a variety of different possible solutions. 

7 steps to critical thinking

Critical thinking is a skill that you can build by following these seven steps. The seven steps to critical thinking help you ensure you’re approaching a problem from the right angle, considering every alternative, and coming to an unbiased conclusion.

 First things first: When to use the 7 step critical thinking process

There’s a lot that goes into the full critical thinking process, and not every decision needs to be this thought out. Sometimes, it’s enough to put aside bias and approach a process logically. In other, more complex cases, the best way to identify the ideal outcome is to go through the entire critical thinking process. 

The seven-step critical thinking process is useful for complex decisions in areas you are less familiar with. Alternatively, the seven critical thinking steps can help you look at a problem you’re familiar with from a different angle, without any bias. 

If you need to make a less complex decision, consider another problem solving strategy instead. Decision matrices are a great way to identify the best option between different choices. Check out our article on 7 steps to creating a decision matrix .

1. Identify the problem

Before you put those critical thinking skills to work, you first need to identify the problem you’re solving. This step includes taking a look at the problem from a few different perspectives and asking questions like: 

What’s happening? 

Why is this happening? 

What assumptions am I making? 

At first glance, how do I think we can solve this problem? 

A big part of developing your critical thinking skills is learning how to come to unbiased conclusions. In order to do that, you first need to acknowledge the biases that you currently have. Does someone on your team think they know the answer? Are you making assumptions that aren’t necessarily true? Identifying these details helps you later on in the process. 

2. Research

At this point, you likely have a general idea of the problem—but in order to come up with the best solution, you need to dig deeper. 

During the research process, collect information relating to the problem, including data, statistics, historical project information, team input, and more. Make sure you gather information from a variety of sources, especially if those sources go against your personal ideas about what the problem is or how to solve it.

Gathering varied information is essential for your ability to apply the critical thinking process. If you don’t get enough information, your ability to make a final decision will be skewed. Remember that critical thinking is about helping you identify the objective best conclusion. You aren’t going with your gut—you’re doing research to find the best option

3. Determine data relevance

Just as it’s important to gather a variety of information, it is also important to determine how relevant the different information sources are. After all, just because there is data doesn’t mean it’s relevant. 

Once you’ve gathered all of the information, sift through the noise and identify what information is relevant and what information isn’t. Synthesizing all of this information and establishing significance helps you weigh different data sources and come to the best conclusion later on in the critical thinking process. 

To determine data relevance, ask yourself:

How reliable is this information? 

How significant is this information? 

Is this information outdated? Is it specialized in a specific field? 

4. Ask questions

One of the most useful parts of the critical thinking process is coming to a decision without bias. In order to do so, you need to take a step back from the process and challenge the assumptions you’re making. 

We all have bias—and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Unconscious biases (also known as cognitive biases) often serve as mental shortcuts to simplify problem solving and aid decision making. But even when biases aren’t inherently bad, you must be aware of your biases in order to put them aside when necessary. 

Before coming to a solution, ask yourself:

Am I making any assumptions about this information? 

Are there additional variables I haven’t considered? 

Have I evaluated the information from every perspective? 

Are there any viewpoints I missed? 

5. Identify the best solution

Finally, you’re ready to come to a conclusion. To identify the best solution, draw connections between causes and effects. Use the facts you’ve gathered to evaluate the most objective conclusion. 

Keep in mind that there may be more than one solution. Often, the problems you’re facing are complex and intricate. The critical thinking process doesn’t necessarily lead to a cut-and-dry solution—instead, the process helps you understand the different variables at play so you can make an informed decision. 

6. Present your solution

Communication is a key skill for critical thinkers. It isn’t enough to think for yourself—you also need to share your conclusion with other project stakeholders. If there are multiple solutions, present them all. There may be a case where you implement one solution, then test to see if it works before implementing another solution. 

7. Analyze your decision

The seven-step critical thinking process yields a result—and you then need to put that solution into place. After you’ve implemented your decision, evaluate whether or not it was effective. Did it solve the initial problem? What lessons—whether positive or negative—can you learn from this experience to improve your critical thinking for next time? 

Depending on how your team shares information, consider documenting lessons learned in a central source of truth. That way, team members that are making similar or related decisions in the future can understand why you made the decision you made and what the outcome was. 

Example of critical thinking in the workplace

Imagine you work in user experience design (UX). Your team is focused on pricing and packaging and ensuring customers have a clear understanding of the different services your company offers. Here’s how to apply the critical thinking process in the workplace in seven steps: 

Start by identifying the problem

Your current pricing page isn’t performing as well as you want. You’ve heard from customers that your services aren’t clear, and that the page doesn’t answer the questions they have. This page is really important for your company, since it’s where your customers sign up for your service. You and your team have a few theories about why your current page isn’t performing well, but you decide to apply the critical thinking process to ensure you come to the best decision for the page. 

Gather information about how the problem started

Part of identifying the problem includes understanding how the problem started. The pricing and packaging page is important—so when your team initially designed the page, they certainly put a lot of thought into it. Before you begin researching how to improve the page, ask yourself: 

Why did you design the pricing page the way you did? 

Which stakeholders need to be involved in the decision making process? 

Where are users getting stuck on the page?

Are any features currently working?

Then, you research

In addition to understanding the history of the pricing and packaging page, it’s important to understand what works well. Part of this research means taking a look at what your competitor’s pricing pages look like. 

Ask yourself: 

How have our competitors set up their pricing pages?

Are there any pricing page best practices? 

How does color, positioning, and animation impact navigation? 

Are there any standard page layouts customers expect to see? 

Organize and analyze information

You’ve gathered all of the information you need—now you need to organize and analyze it. What trends, if any, are you noticing? Is there any particularly relevant or important information that you have to consider? 

Ask open-ended questions to reduce bias

In the case of critical thinking, it’s important to address and set bias aside as much as possible. Ask yourself: 

Is there anything I’m missing? 

Have I connected with the right stakeholders? 

Are there any other viewpoints I should consider? 

Determine the best solution for your team

You now have all of the information you need to design the best pricing page. Depending on the complexity of the design, you may want to design a few options to present to a small group of customers or A/B test on the live website.

Present your solution to stakeholders

Critical thinking can help you in every element of your life, but in the workplace, you must also involve key project stakeholders . Stakeholders help you determine next steps, like whether you’ll A/B test the page first. Depending on the complexity of the issue, consider hosting a meeting or sharing a status report to get everyone on the same page. 

Analyze the results

No process is complete without evaluating the results. Once the new page has been live for some time, evaluate whether it did better than the previous page. What worked? What didn’t? This also helps you make better critical decisions later on.

Critically successful 

Critical thinking takes time to build, but with effort and patience you can apply an unbiased, analytical mind to any situation. Critical thinking makes up one of many soft skills that makes you an effective team member, manager, and worker. If you’re looking to hone your skills further, read our article on the 25 project management skills you need to succeed . 

  • Find a company

The power of critical thinking at work

Oct 07, 2020

The power of critical thinking at work

Psychologue du travail, coach et consultante RH

Should critical thinking come into play at work? While we may agree on the value of using our finely tuned critical sense in private life, does it have a place in the world of work? Given the divide between employers and their staff, is it really wise to expect to be able to debate ideas in the workplace? And, by the way, what exactly is critical thinking? Let’s break it down.

Understanding critical thinking

While the word “critical” often has negative connotations—your mind goes directly to all those derogatory remarks that people make about each other—it actually comes from the Greek kritikē (κριτική), which mostly means the art of discernment . Your brain produces thoughts every day without you having to order them to come up with them. They are a rich synthesis of your knowledge , experience and beliefs. Now is the time to use your faculty for critical thinking by taking a step back from these thoughts. Critical thinking, which is part of a complex cognitive process, is a voluntary, conscious, and focused approach that you can use to get out of your subjectivity and lean more towards objectivity. This demanding approach can also extend to the thoughts and ideas that surround you in broader ways.

Everyone has a natural tendency to be a critical thinker. However, to be truly effective, critical thinking needs to be based on facts and evidence. It’s about seeking out the different aspects of an issue and scrutinizing them through the filter of reason, far removed from feeling and emotion .

Why it’s important to be a critical thinker

We are not sheep.

Critical thinking can benefit everyone. We can avoid errors in reasoning and can become aware of the influence of people and emotions on ways of thinking, without getting fooled. A bit of critical thinking helps in particular with:

  • Fighting unfounded rumors, fake news and mistaken beliefs. It allows us to check the accuracy of the information shared on social networks , but also from our relatives, and friends, for example.
  • Forming an opinion and fighting against conformism, manipulation, and indoctrination. You can take the time to form your own opinion on different subjects, and then take part in the debate.
  • Not falling into the trap of subjectivity. Critical thinking lets you take a step back from the preconceived ideas and reactions dictated by your senses and emotions, which sometimes can make us irrational.
  • Coming up with ideas, being creative, and making changes . Critical thinking allows us to question certain preconceived notions and ways of thinking that could be changed or improved.

Critical thinking within organizations

As you may have gathered, critical thinking also has its place within companies: to make progress, organizations need objectivity and rationality. Critical thinking is at the heart of development, innovation, and transformation. It’s not always easy, however, to express an opinion or to even question what exists within a company. Hierarchy can inhibit staff members from using critical thinking while discussing their managers’ or employers’ ideas and decisions. However, critical thinking remains essential to guide decisions at all levels.

This is particularly valued in positions that involve strategy, leadership and management : knowing how to question yourself, to get some perspective, but also to think critically, is essential whenever there are major decisions to be made. Being able to take a step back from your own ideas or those of your team, or to change your point of view, is especially important when you reach a level in the business where no one dares to challenge you anymore. Good critical thinking also seems to be applicable in positions that include problem-solving and continuous improvement issues, in other words, in a lot of jobs and sectors.

Developing your critical thinking

A mind that is made up—or one that is open.

Far from being inherent, critical thinking is developed in childhood and continues through the formative years. This is quite paradoxical. On the one hand, the education you get in your youth aims to provide content, through learning and knowledge. On the other hand, a true education must allow you to build this thinking machine on your own so as not to reduce education to mere formatting.

Knowledge and methods

On one hand, there is knowledge; on the other hand, there are tools that allow us to think. So, if critical thinking requires a real method to function, it must be based on solid theoretical skills and knowledge in the practiced field. (If you haven’t mastered a science, it’s difficult to give an opinion on research work in that field).

At the heart of the method, there is doubt which acts as a safeguard against any rushed thoughts and beliefs. Allowing yourself to doubt is a self-corrective practice that keeps you from falling into any traps. In his remarks on happiness , French philosopher Émile-Auguste Chartier, who wrote under the pseudonym of Alain, reminds us that doubt is essential to reasoning in an impartial manner. “The principle of true courage is doubt. The idea of shaking up a thought that we trusted is a brave idea. Every inventor has questioned what no one else doubted. That was the true blasphemy.”

To use critical thinking in your individual or collective decision-making, here a few useful steps:

  • Formalise the problem and state it verbally or in writing. For example, let’s say your team is dissatisfied with the software they’re using. Is everyone complaining just for the sake of it, or does the tool really not meet the specifications? What are your requirements for this tool? What is its purpose? What service does it have to provide? Why does the existing software no longer seem to satisfy its users?
  • Gather information to examine the different aspects of the issue. In this example, what other existing software would provide a similar service? What are the advantages and disadvantages of these? But also, what would another one cost, in terms of the time and energy needed to invest in making a change, and its impact on the team and clients?
  • Verify the accuracy of the sources of information . Think about the possible reasons and fears the teams may have around changing tools that could affect the decision. Marketing spiel from the sales representatives could also distract you from noticing defects in the tools and lead you to make the wrong choice. At this stage, you have to try to distinguish objective facts from subjective interpretations.
  • Compare viewpoints by interacting with other involved parties . For example, why not talk to other users of the proposed new software, or hold a team meeting about the issue to gather everyone’s opinions?
  • Analyse the arguments for each of the options and the consequences they might have on the decisions to be made. Finally, you could make a spreadsheet listing the options and then count the “pros” and “cons”. This way you can prioritize the solutions before making a decision.

The more you practice critical thinking, the more it will become ingrained. It is important to pay attention to any potential pitfalls in your thinking. Your brain sometimes leads you to take shortcuts; this is called “cognitive bias”. These biases act as optical illusions on your thinking, causing you to make errors in reasoning. Knowing them is one way to give yourself the chance to avoid them. You probably already know about some of them, such as confirmation bias, anchoring bias, the Dunning-Kruger effect , and many other biases that you can learn to recognize.

Enhance your critical thinking skills for job interviews

You tell yourself that a job interview is when you most want to fit into the mold of the employer’s expectations. You may think it is not the time to give off negative vibes by exercising critical thinking. Wrong. On the contrary, this is a rather sought-after quality, and you would be well advised to embrace it.

Demonstrate perspective on your experience Showing that you can put your experience into perspective is a good way to prove your critical thinking skills to a recruiter. Describing the facts as objectively as possible , based on the different factors and their consequences, without getting emotional or critical is a good way to show that you are able to see what was good and what was not so good, without resorting to either blaming your former employer or to self-flagellation. This will show that you will take future experiences calmly.

Give your vision of the job Sharing your vision of the job, the sector, or the industry during the interview can be just as interesting as showing your critical thinking skills. This is another way to reassure your interviewer by showing them that you are not short-sighted . When a business sets out to recruit someone new, sometimes they are looking for a breath of fresh air, a new element to revitalize the team. You don’t recruit someone if it’s just to keep doing what you’ve been doing. So all your ideas are welcome.

Vary the points of view When you bring up a subject, show that you’re able to put yourself in other people’s shoes. For example, let them know that you understand the point of view of a client, a service provider, or a superior in the management of a project. It’s a way to prove that you can take a step back and take the opinions of others into account so that decisions are then collective, benefitting as many people as possible.

Dare to doubt Finally, another way to show your critical mind is to just admit doubt and lack of knowledge . If you are asked a tricky question, don’t hesitate to say that you don’t know. To show doubt is to acknowledge that you don’t have the right information to answer it, or that your thinking about the subject is not fully formed. An attitude of intellectual honesty will work in your favor.

Ultimately, isn’t it your duty, rather than simply your right, to use your capacity for critical thinking? When faced with the pitfalls of thinking, boldly stating that the proposed solution is not necessarily the only good option is a demanding but constructive approach. By thinking critically, you discipline and improve your thinking little by little, making this soft skill your best ally for all strategic decisions in both your personal and professional life.

Translated by Kalin Linsberg

Photo: Welcome to the Jungle

Follow Welcome to the Jungle on Facebook , LinkedIn , and Instagram , and subscribe to our newsletter to get our latest articles every day!

More inspiration: Health & wellbeing

critical thinking of the workplace

Dans une carrière, mieux vaut avoir des regrets que des remords !

Avoir des regrets est humain, voici comment les exploiter pour mieux les vivre au quotidien.

Sep 21, 2023

critical thinking of the workplace

Stresslaxation: when trying to relax stresses you out more…

While stress has been declared Public Enemy Number 1, some health experts suggest our obsession with relaxation is making it worse.

Aug 31, 2022

critical thinking of the workplace

Outside the box: neurodiversity and the changing workplace

How is our current working culture adapted to neurodiverse workers? And what impact did Covid-19 have on neurodiversity in the office?

Apr 06, 2022

critical thinking of the workplace

What if your career has become your whole identity?

Who are these workers whose identities are completely entangled with their careers? And what happens when things no longer go as planned?

Oct 27, 2021

critical thinking of the workplace

The (subtle) art of not caring at work

It's not exactly 'not caring' but rather, drawing the line. Here is how these three happy and successful professionals put their foot down at work.

Sep 22, 2021

The newsletter that does the job

Want to keep up with the latest articles? Twice a week you can receive stories, jobs, and tips in your inbox.

critical thinking of the workplace

Looking for your next job opportunity?

Over 200,000 people have found a job with Welcome to the Jungle.

University of Pennsylvania

  • Appointments

Career Fairs

  • Resume Reviews

Penn Career Services

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Impact of Critical Thinking on Your Career

☑ problem-solving mastery.

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

☑ Refined Decision-Making

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

☑ Enhanced Teamwork Dynamics

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

☑ Communication Prowess

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

☑ Adaptability and Resilience

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

☑ Fostering Innovation

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

☑ Confidence Amplification

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

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

✅ developing curiosity and inquisitiveness:.

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

✅ Practice Reflection and Self-Awareness:

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

✅ Strengthening Analytical Skills:

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

✅ Engaging in Active Listening and Observation:

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

✅ Encouraging Intellectual Humility and Open-Mindedness:

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

✅ Practicing Problem-Solving and Decision-Making:

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

✅ Continuous Learning and Exposure to Varied Content:

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

✅ Engage in Constructive Disagreement and Debate:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why Critical Thinking Matters in Your Business

Table of contents.

critical thinking of the workplace

Many professionals hope to pursue careers they’re passionate about so they can find joy and meaning in their work. Caring deeply about your work is vital for engagement and productivity, but balancing emotions with critical thinking is essential in the workplace. 

When employees engage in critical thinking, they use an independent, reflective thought process to evaluate issues and solve problems based on knowledge and objective evidence. 

Critical thinking skills can guide your organization toward success, but to truly maximize the problem-solving benefits of critical thinking, it’s crucial to teach this skill to your entire team. We’ll explore critical thinking skills and how to teach them in the workplace to help your business improve its decision-making and problem-solving. 

What is critical thinking?

Jen Lawrence, co-author of Engage the Fox: A Business Fable About Thinking Critically and Motivating Your Team , defines critical thinking as “the ability to solve problems effectively by systematically gathering information about an issue, generating further ideas involving a variety of perspectives, evaluating the information using logic, and making sure everyone involved is on board.”

This is a complex definition for a challenging concept. Though critical thinking might seem as straightforward as stepping back and using a formal thinking process instead of reacting instinctively to conflicts or problems, it is actually a much more challenging task.

Critical thinking’s ultimate goal is ensuring you have the best answer to a problem with maximum buy-in from all parties involved – an outcome that will ultimately save your business time, money and stress.

Why is critical thinking essential in the workplace?

A World Economic Forum report revealed that critical thinking is one of the most in-demand career skills employers seek when trying to attract and retain the best employees – and employers believe critical thinking skills will become even more necessary in the coming years. 

Critical thinking in the workplace guarantees objective and efficient problem-solving, ultimately reducing costly errors and ensuring that your organization’s resources are used wisely. Team members employing critical thinking can connect ideas, spot errors and inconsistencies, and make the best decisions most often. 

Employees with critical thinking are also more likely to accomplish the following:

  • Analyzing information
  • Thinking outside the box
  • Coming up with creative solutions to sudden problems
  • Devising thought-through, systematic plans
  • Requiring less supervision

Critical thinkers are sure about the reasoning behind their decisions, allowing them to communicate with employees clearly. This level of communication enhances employee engagement .

What are critical thinking skills?

Critical thinking is a soft skill that comprises multiple interpersonal and analytical abilities and attributes. Here are some essential critical thinking skills that can support workforce success.

  • Observation: Employees with critical thinking can easily sense and identify an existing problem – and even predict potential issues – based on their experience and sharp perception. They’re willing to embrace multiple points of view and look at the big picture. 
  • Analytical thinking: Analytical thinkers collect data from multiple sources, reject bias, and ask thoughtful questions. When approaching a problem, they gather and double-check facts, assess independent research, and sift through information to determine what’s accurate and what can help resolve the problem. 
  • Open-mindedness: Employees who demonstrate critical thinking are open-minded – not afraid to consider opinions and information that differ from their beliefs and assumptions. They listen to colleagues; they can let go of personal biases and recognize that a problem’s solution can come from unexpected sources. 
  • Problem-solving attitude: Critical thinkers possess a positive attitude toward problem-solving and look for optimal solutions to issues they’ve identified and analyzed. They are usually proactive and willing to offer suggestions based on all the information they receive. [Related article: How to Develop a Positive Attitude in the Workplace ]
  • Communication: When managers make a decision, they must share it with the rest of the team and other stakeholders. Critical thinkers demonstrate excellent communication skills and can provide supporting arguments and evidence that substantiate the decision to ensure the entire team is on the same page. 

What are the benefits of critical thinking in the workplace?

Many workplaces operate at a frantic tempo that reinforces hasty thinking and rushed business decisions, resulting in costly mistakes and blunders. When employees are trained in critical thinking, they learn to slow the pace and gather crucial information before making decisions. 

Along with reducing costly errors, critical thinking in the workplace brings the following benefits: 

  • Critical thinking improves communication. When employees think more clearly and aren’t swayed by emotion, they communicate better. “If you can think more clearly and better articulate your positions, you can better engage in discussions and make a much more meaningful contribution in your job,” said David Welton, managing partner at Grove Critical Thinking.
  • Critical thinking boosts emotional intelligence. It might seem counterintuitive to associate analytical rationality with emotional intelligence . However, team members who possess critical thinking skills are less prone to rash, emotion-driven decisions. Instead, they take time to analyze the situation and make the most informed decision while being mindful and respectful of the emotional and ethical implications. 
  • Critical thinking encourages creativity. Critical thinkers are open to new ideas and perspectives and accumulate a significant amount of information when facing decisions. Because of this, they’re more likely to come up with creative solutions . They are also curious and don’t shy away from asking open-ended questions. 
  • Critical thinking saves time and money. By encouraging critical thinking in the workplace, you minimize the need for supervision, catch potential problems early, promote independence and initiative, and free managers to focus on other duties. All this helps your company save valuable time and resources. 

Critical thinking skills are essential for dealing with difficult customers because they help your team make informed decisions while managing stressful situations.

How do you teach critical thinking in the workplace?

Experts agree that critical thinking is a teachable skill. Both Lawrence and Welton recommend exploring critical thinking training programs and methods to improve your workplace’s critical thinking proficiency. Here’s a breakdown of how to teach critical thinking in the workplace: 

  • Identify problem areas. Executives and managers should assess workplace areas most lacking in critical thinking. If mistakes are consistently made, determine whether the issue is a lack of critical thinking or an inherent issue with a team or process. After identifying areas that lack critical thinking, research the type of training best suited to your organization. 
  • Start small. Employees newly embracing critical thinking might have trouble tackling large issues immediately. Instead, present them with smaller challenges. “Start practicing critical thinking as a skill with smaller problems as examples, and then work your way up to larger problems,” Lawrence said.
  • Act preemptively. Teaching and implementing critical thinking training and methodology takes time and patience. Lawrence emphasized that critical thinking skills are best acquired during a time of calm. It might feel urgent to seek critical thinking during a crisis, but critical thinking is a challenging skill to learn amid panic and stress. Critical thinking training is best done preemptively so that when a crisis hits, employees will be prepared and critical thinking will come naturally.
  • Allow sufficient time. From a managerial perspective, giving employees extra time on projects or problems might feel stressful in the middle of deadlines and executive pressures. But if you want those working for you to engage in critical thinking processes, it’s imperative to give them ample time. Allowing employees sufficient time to work through their critical thinking process can save the company time and money in the long run.

How do you identify successful critical thinking?

Successful critical thinking happens during a crisis, not after.

Lawrence provided an example involving restaurants and waitstaff: If a customer has a bad experience at a restaurant, a server using critical thinking skills will be more likely to figure out a solution to save the interaction, such as offering a free appetizer or discount. “This can save the hard-earned customer relationship you spent a lot of marketing dollars to create,” Lawrence said. This concept is applicable across many business and organizational structures. 

You should also be aware of signs of a lack of critical thinking. Lawrence pointed out that companies that change strategy rapidly, moving from one thing to the next, are likely not engaging in critical thinking. This is also the case at companies that seem to have good ideas but have trouble executing them.

As with many issues in business, company leadership determines how the rest of the organization acts. If leaders have excellent ideas but don’t follow critical thinking processes, their team will not buy into those ideas, and the company will suffer. This is why critical thinking skills often accompany positive communication skills.

“Critical thinking doesn’t just help you arrive at the best answer, but at a solution most people embrace,” Lawrence said. Modeling critical thinking at the top will help the skill trickle down to the rest of the organization, no matter your company’s type or size.

To get your employees thinking critically, conduct employee surveys with well-designed questions to help them identify issues and solutions.

Critical thinking is the key to your business success

When critical thinking is actively implemented in an organization, mistakes are minimized, and operations run more seamlessly. 

With training, time and patience, critical thinking can become a second-nature skill for employees at all levels of experience and seniority. The money, time and conflict you’ll save in the long run are worth the extra effort of implementing critical thinking in your workplace.

Rebecka Green contributed to the writing and reporting in this article. Source interviews were conducted for a previous version of this article.

thumbnail

Building Better Businesses

Insights on business strategy and culture, right to your inbox. Part of the business.com network.

  • Online Degree Explore Bachelor’s & Master’s degrees
  • MasterTrack™ Earn credit towards a Master’s degree
  • University Certificates Advance your career with graduate-level learning
  • Top Courses
  • Join for Free

University of California, Davis

Critical Thinking Skills for the Professional

This course is part of Professional Skills for the Workplace Specialization

Taught in English

Some content may not be translated

Diane Davidson

Instructor: Diane Davidson

Financial aid available

32,050 already enrolled

Coursera Plus

(750 reviews)

Recommended experience

Beginner level

At least 1-2 years of experience.

What you'll learn

Apply critical thinking skills to complex problems.

Apply a model for solving problems and pose questions to further understanding of specific problems.

Skills you'll gain

  • Critical Thinking
  • Decision-Making
  • Problem Solving
  • Brainstorming

Details to know

critical thinking of the workplace

Add to your LinkedIn profile

See how employees at top companies are mastering in-demand skills

Placeholder

Build your subject-matter expertise

  • Learn new concepts from industry experts
  • Gain a foundational understanding of a subject or tool
  • Develop job-relevant skills with hands-on projects
  • Earn a shareable career certificate

Placeholder

Earn a career certificate

Add this credential to your LinkedIn profile, resume, or CV

Share it on social media and in your performance review

Placeholder

There are 3 modules in this course

Have you ever tried to find a solution to a problem only to realize you’ve been focusing on the wrong problem from the very beginning? Or you’ve proposed a solution only to have it shut down by your boss or coworkers? How stressful and defeating is that? With massive changes in our world that seem to create the most difficult of circumstances, both personally and professionally, your skills as a critical thinker and problem solver need to be further developed now more than ever.

By the end of this course you will have learned and memorized a practical model to solve problems on your own and with others. These 7 critical steps will ensure that you have looked at a problem from every angle and considered multiple solutions. In fact, this dynamic and holistic approach will help you solve problems once and for all!

Getting Started and Introduction to Problem Solving

In this module, you will be able to apply a model for solving any problem, large or small, in a creative and collaborative way. You will also be able to identify all aspects of a problem and examine role in the problem. You will be able to reframe a goal oriented question.

What's included

5 videos 2 readings 2 quizzes 3 discussion prompts

5 videos • Total 27 minutes

  • Introduction to Problem Solving • 4 minutes • Preview module
  • Why So Many Problems? • 6 minutes
  • Kinetic Memorization • 3 minutes
  • Identify the Problem • 6 minutes
  • Reframe • 6 minutes

2 readings • Total 70 minutes

  • A Note From UC Davis • 10 minutes
  • Recommended Readings • 60 minutes

2 quizzes • Total 30 minutes

  • Identifying Problems Quiz • 15 minutes
  • Problem Solving Steps Quiz • 15 minutes

3 discussion prompts • Total 50 minutes

  • Learning Goals • 10 minutes
  • Identifying the Problem • 30 minutes
  • Reframe Your Problem • 10 minutes

Brainstorming and Analyzing Options

In this module, you will be able to brainstorm solutions to your possible problem. You will choose 3 possible options and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each option. You will be able to generate more effective solutions.

5 videos 2 readings 1 quiz 2 discussion prompts

5 videos • Total 21 minutes

  • Module Introduction • 4 minutes • Preview module
  • Individual vs. Group Brainstorming • 4 minutes
  • Brainstorming Guidelines • 4 minutes
  • Choose 3 • 3 minutes
  • Advantages and Disadvantages • 5 minutes

2 readings • Total 100 minutes

  • Brainstorm Using Jamboard • 10 minutes
  • Recommended Readings • 90 minutes
  • Module 2 Quiz • 0 minutes

2 discussion prompts • Total 45 minutes

  • Brainstorm Possible Solutions to Your Problem • 15 minutes
  • Choose 3 and Analyze the Advantages & Disadvantages • 30 minutes

Recommending and Engaging Feedback

In this module, you will be able to explore your own triggers and how they may show up in our reactions. You'll be able to identify potential responses that could trigger negative reactions. You will be able to prepare and make a recommendation to your problem. You will also be able to engage in feedback.

6 videos 1 reading 1 quiz 1 discussion prompt

6 videos • Total 19 minutes

  • Introduction to Prepare and Recommend • 1 minute • Preview module
  • Prepare and Recommend Example • 2 minutes
  • Applying Your Recommendation • 3 minutes
  • Be and Avoid • 5 minutes
  • Engage Feedback • 3 minutes
  • Course Summary and Wrap-up • 3 minutes

1 reading • Total 60 minutes

1 quiz • total 30 minutes.

  • Module 3 Quiz • 30 minutes

1 discussion prompt • Total 15 minutes

  • Analyze Your Triggers • 15 minutes

Instructor ratings

We asked all learners to give feedback on our instructors based on the quality of their teaching style.

critical thinking of the workplace

UC Davis, one of the nation’s top-ranked research universities, is a global leader in agriculture, veterinary medicine, sustainability, environmental and biological sciences, and technology. With four colleges and six professional schools, UC Davis and its students and alumni are known for their academic excellence, meaningful public service and profound international impact.

Recommended if you're interested in Business Essentials

critical thinking of the workplace

University of California, Davis

The Growth Mindset

critical thinking of the workplace

Adaptability and Resiliency

critical thinking of the workplace

Professional Skills for the Workplace

Specialization

critical thinking of the workplace

Tecnológico de Monterrey

Leadership and Critical Thinking

Why people choose coursera for their career.

critical thinking of the workplace

Learner reviews

Showing 3 of 750

750 reviews

Reviewed on Sep 2, 2021

After the course, i have a working model to solve any problem, large and small. I believe that i can use the problem-solving skills in all aspects of my work and life. Many thanks!

Reviewed on Aug 26, 2022

very effective for problem solving skill for deeper expalnaintion with analytical problms quiz and very clear teching.

Reviewed on Oct 1, 2023

It is great course to learn and improve your critical thinking and taking decision based on procedure and principles laind down .

New to Business Essentials? Start here.

Placeholder

Open new doors with Coursera Plus

Unlimited access to 7,000+ world-class courses, hands-on projects, and job-ready certificate programs - all included in your subscription

Advance your career with an online degree

Earn a degree from world-class universities - 100% online

Join over 3,400 global companies that choose Coursera for Business

Upskill your employees to excel in the digital economy

Frequently asked questions

When will i have access to the lectures and assignments.

Access to lectures and assignments depends on your type of enrollment. If you take a course in audit mode, you will be able to see most course materials for free. To access graded assignments and to earn a Certificate, you will need to purchase the Certificate experience, during or after your audit. If you don't see the audit option:

The course may not offer an audit option. You can try a Free Trial instead, or apply for Financial Aid.

The course may offer 'Full Course, No Certificate' instead. This option lets you see all course materials, submit required assessments, and get a final grade. This also means that you will not be able to purchase a Certificate experience.

What will I get if I subscribe to this Specialization?

When you enroll in the course, you get access to all of the courses in the Specialization, and you earn a certificate when you complete the work. Your electronic Certificate will be added to your Accomplishments page - from there, you can print your Certificate or add it to your LinkedIn profile. If you only want to read and view the course content, you can audit the course for free.

What is the refund policy?

If you subscribed, you get a 7-day free trial during which you can cancel at no penalty. After that, we don’t give refunds, but you can cancel your subscription at any time. See our full refund policy Opens in a new tab .

Is financial aid available?

Yes. In select learning programs, you can apply for financial aid or a scholarship if you can’t afford the enrollment fee. If fin aid or scholarship is available for your learning program selection, you’ll find a link to apply on the description page.

More questions

What Are the Benefits of Critical Thinking in the Workplace?

  • Small Business
  • Business & Workplace Regulations
  • Workplace Safety
  • ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Pinterest" aria-label="Share on Pinterest">
  • ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Reddit" aria-label="Share on Reddit">
  • ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Flipboard" aria-label="Share on Flipboard">

How Is a LLC Run?

Participatory management styles, analysis of organizational management & leadership practices.

  • How to Open Disk Utility on a Mac
  • Analytical Tools for Developing a Strategic Plan

Critical thinking is the act of analyzing a subject or a situation and forming a judgment based on that analysis. Nearly everybody uses some form of critical thinking in day-to-day life, which often includes critical thinking at work. Most jobs, even seemingly nominal jobs, involve at least some critical thinking. However, the type of critical thinking an individual does at work can vary greatly according to the industry and their role in the company.

According to Business News Daily , critical thinking is the process of solving problems through rational means and evidence-based knowledge. There are a lot of benefits to critical thinking at work. Overall, a team that employs critical thinking when challenges arise is a team that solves problems, finds solutions, and works together cohesively.

Benefits of Critical Thinking

An employee's ability to think critically doesn't benefit only the employer; it benefits the employee as well. Critical thinking is a lifetime skill that an individual can use in every area of life, including interpersonal relationships, financial planning, personal goal-setting and career decisions.

For employers, the benefits of employees' critical thinking include:

  • Finding multiple solutions to problems
  • Effective communication between teams and individual employees
  • Developing unique perspectives on situations and challenges at work

Critical Thinking in Business Management

It's important for every member of an organization to think critically, but perhaps the most critical area for this skill lies in business management. A manager is tasked not only with ensuring each member of the team performs their tasks correctly but also with making the big decisions that can have far-reaching repercussions, both positive and negative.

Specific applications of critical thinking in business management include:

  • Anticipating problems and preventing them before they arise
  • Finding ways to cut expenses
  • Planning and implementing business strategies
  • Delegating tasks to qualified team members
  • Effectively interviewing job applicants and selecting those who are the best fit for the company

Benefits of critical thinking in business management include:

  • Building a well-qualified team with low turnover
  • Having a solution plan for each potential challenge
  • Streamlined, efficient work processes
  • Effective communication between the manager and team members

Critical Thinking in Business Examples

Critical thinking is a soft skill. According to Rider University , soft skills are the workplace skills that cannot be quantified but are nonetheless a key component of workplace success. Indeed categorizes soft skills as including creativity, empathy and open-mindedness. In contrast, hard skills include specific skills, such as knowing programming languages, knowing how to manage a database, and speaking multiple languages.

Critical thinking in business in general is similar to critical thinking in business management. The primary difference is that it deals more with operating a business than with managing teams. A few examples include:

  • Predicting how much demand there will be for a product or service based on industry data and trends
  • Gauging how well a new business will likely perform based on the demographics of its proposed location
  • Planning efficient ways to use company budgets

Exercises for Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a skill that can be taught and strengthened. Like most other skills, it should be exercised regularly to ensure employees do not become complacent and they have the tools to handle modern challenges that arise at work.

Exercises for critical thinking used by companies across the U.S. and the world include:

  • Working through a challenge backward
  • Explaining a process as if speaking to a six-year-old
  • Expressing ideas through multiple mediums

Each of these exercises for critical thinking forces the participants to approach a challenge in a way they might not have approached it before. By doing this, they are forced to look at the challenge differently and find a creative way to solve it.

  • Business News Daily: Why Critical Thinking Matters in Your Business
  • Indeed: Soft Skills: Definitions and Examples
  • Rider University: Why Is Critical Thinking Important in Business?
  • American Scientific Affiliation: Critical Thinking Skills in Education and Life

Lindsay Kramer has been a small business owner since 2014. She's no stranger to the wild ride that running a business can be, but that doesn't mean she's done learning...every day, it's something different when you're in the driver's seat. Now, she's focusing her writing on helping other small business owners and people planning to become small business owners navigate this crazy thing we call entrepreneurship.

Related Articles

Positive consequences of emotions in the workplace, how to connect a mac to a server using sftp, 5 abilities a person needs to run a business, what is 'systems thinking' in business, what is the difference between team building & teamwork, about conflict management, behaviorist concepts for employees, what is a staffing assistant, the difference between managerial functions & managerial skills, most popular.

  • 1 Positive Consequences of Emotions in the Workplace
  • 2 How to Connect a Mac to a Server Using SFTP
  • 3 5 Abilities a Person Needs to Run a Business
  • 4 What Is 'Systems Thinking' in Business?

critical thinking of the workplace

How to promote critical thinking in the workplace

critical thinking of the workplace

What is critical thinking?

  • I have a tendency to think before I act
  • I use solid information to inform my decisions
  • I don’t base decisions on feelings
  • I am happy to change methods
  • I find it easy to explain the reasoning behind my decisions

How do we use critical thinking in the workplace?

team brainstorming with post its

  • Ensuring you always have your eye on the end goal
  • Talking to other people and collecting relevant information
  • Using information and facts to inform your actions
  • Making sure your own preconceptions don’t influence a situation
  • Building solutions that are individual to each situation
  • Anticipating both the long and the short-term consequences of decisions

Why is workplace critical thinking so significant?

  • Poor decision making
  • Unhappy colleagues
  • A lack of necessary action
  • Dysfunctional systems
  • Financial losses
  • Wasted time and effort

How can I develop my critical thinking skills?

online learning concept

  • Get into the habit of asking important but basic questions such as, ‘What do we already know about this situation?’ or ‘What is our main goal here?’
  • Gain a solid understanding of your own preconceptions. Learn how to override them
  • Do plenty of research but don’t forget to think for yourself as well
  • Talk to your employer about a whole organisation approach
  • Consider a career move into job roles that often require expert critical thinking. There are many of these but IT business analyst , project analyst and supervisor are popular cross-industry examples.
  • Investigate training opportunities. For example, Upskilled’s BSB50215 - Diploma of Business can help you develop a competitive edge and includes a unit on applying advanced critical thinking to work processes.

Do you want to land the career of your dreams?

Do you want to land the career of your dreams?

Take the first step towards securing your dream career with our free eBook. Find out more today!

Study tips straight to your inbox!

More like this.

  • Study online Here's How to Establish Your Personal Brand in 2024 February 09, 2024
  • Study online Make a Difference: Here are the Top 8 Jobs to Pursue in Community Services February 01, 2024
  • Study online Beat the Rush: Why You Should Upskill Before the New Year December 20, 2023
  • Study online Upskilled - An Official Microsoft Learning Partner November 22, 2023

What's next?

We're here to help. Talk to an Upskilled Education Consultant about which course is best suited to you.

Enquire now

Start your next course with Upskilled. Enter your details in the form below.

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 of the workplace

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 5, 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.

Back Home

  • Search Search Search …
  • Search Search …

Critical Thinking Exercises for Employees: Boosting Workplace Problem-Solving Skills

Critical Thinking Exercises for Employees

In today’s fast-paced work environment, critical thinking skills are essential for success. By engaging in critical thinking exercises, employees can refine their ability to evaluate information, solve complex problems, and communicate effectively. These skills not only contribute to individual success but also promote a more innovative and productive work environment.

Critical thinking also plays a crucial role in leadership and management, as well as fostering effective teamwork. Managers who possess strong critical thinking skills are better equipped to guide their teams in problem-solving and decision-making processes. By incorporating critical thinking exercises into employee training, organizations can cultivate a culture that values innovation, creativity, and adaptability.

Key Takeaways

  • Critical thinking exercises help employees develop problem-solving and communication skills.
  • Strong critical thinking is essential for effective leadership, management, and teamwork.
  • Fostering critical thinking in the workplace leads to a more innovative and productive environment.

Understanding Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a vital skill for employees in the business world, as it enables individuals to analyze complex situations, identify biases, and make informed decisions through creative problem-solving methods. This cognitive process encourages a deeper understanding of problems and promotes the ability to approach them from multiple perspectives.

Developing critical thinking skills involves being aware of one’s own biases and working towards eliminating them. Bias can significantly impact how we approach problems and may result in making distorted decisions. By recognizing and addressing these biases, employees can harness their critical thinking abilities to make impartial and robust decisions in the business landscape.

One essential component of critical thinking is the ability to analyze information. This involves breaking down a problem into its constituent parts, understanding their relationships, and evaluating the significance of each element. Through thorough analysis, employees can gain a comprehensive view of the situation and consider various aspects before making well-informed decisions.

In the context of problem-solving, critical thinking encourages employees to explore new perspectives and think beyond conventional solutions. By adopting a creative approach, individuals can generate novel ideas and innovations, which can lead to improved business results and overall growth.

In conclusion, it is crucial for employees to develop and hone their critical thinking skills, as they enable individuals to navigate complex business environments effectively. By addressing biases, conducting robust analysis, and adopting creative problem-solving strategies, employees can make well-informed decisions that contribute to the success and longevity of the organization.

The Importance of Critical Thinking in the Workplace

Critical thinking is an essential skill for employees to possess in the modern workplace. It involves the ability to carefully and systematically analyze information, consider multiple perspectives, and make well-informed decisions. By enhancing decision-making abilities, critical thinking can lead to improved workplace performance and increased job satisfaction.

In the workplace , critical thinking allows for a more thorough evaluation of issues, helping to identify potential problems or opportunities. This is particularly important in today’s fast-paced, competitive environment, where companies need to stay ahead of industry trends and anticipate the needs of their customers. Employees who possess strong critical thinking skills can help their team effectively navigate the challenges that arise in any industry.

Furthermore, critical thinking plays a significant role in evaluating evidence and determining the credibility of information sources. Employees who can scrutinize data, identify patterns, and draw inferences can make more informed decisions and contribute to their team’s success. As a result, employers often seek to hire individuals with strong critical thinking abilities.

In a team setting, critical thinking helps facilitate productive discussions and collaboration. Members of a team who can effectively analyze situations, question assumptions, and remain open-minded to the opinions of others contribute positively to the decision-making process. This ensures that a diverse range of perspectives is considered, leading to better outcomes for the company.

Ultimately, developing critical thinking skills in employees is not just beneficial for the individual worker and their direct colleagues, but it also impacts the overall success of the organization. By fostering an environment that encourages the growth of critical thinking skills, employers can not only increase productivity but also create a more positive and engaged work culture.

Developing Critical Thinking Skills

Mindful observation.

Mindful observation is a valuable exercise for enhancing critical thinking skills. Encourage employees to take a step back and observe their surroundings, paying close attention to details that may have previously gone unnoticed. This practice helps employees develop the ability to analyze situations more thoroughly and interpret information more effectively.

Active Listening

Active listening is essential for effective communication and leadership. Encourage employees to practice active listening by giving their full attention to the speaker, avoiding interrupting, and providing constructive feedback. Active listening promotes the development of critical thinking skills by fostering open-mindedness, empathy, and understanding in the workplace.

Asking Questions

Asking questions is a key component of critical thinking, as it encourages employees to inquire deeper into subjects and analyze all aspects of an issue. Employers can foster a work environment that supports curiosity by encouraging team members to ask both open-ended and closed-ended questions and offering guidance when needed.

Assessing Evidence and Drawing Conclusions

Teaching employees how to evaluate evidence and draw informed conclusions is crucial for the development of critical thinking skills. Use thinking exercises that involve employees analyzing and evaluating various sources of information, ultimately forming an inference that leads to an informed decision. Pairing employees with a mentor is helpful for providing guidance and support throughout the process.

Recognizing and Managing Biases

Biases can greatly impact critical thinking and decision-making. Encourage employees to recognize their own biases and learn how to manage them effectively. Employees can benefit from understanding the impact of these biases on their thought process and how to minimize their influence to make objective, well-reasoned conclusions.

By incorporating these exercises and strategies into the workplace, employees can develop critical thinking skills that strengthen their overall performance, communication, and leadership abilities.

Critical Thinking and Communication

Critical thinking and communication go hand in hand in the workplace. Developing both skills can enhance employees’ ability to solve problems, make decisions, and work effectively in teams. By engaging in critical thinking exercises that involve clear communication and open discussion, employees can improve their cognitive abilities and interpersonal skills.

One exercise to improve critical thinking and communication is explaining a problem to someone else. This allows employees to fully understand a situation and consider all possible options for resolution. Encouraging employees to articulate their thought processes and rationale can lead to improved cognitive skills .

Another useful technique is group discussions, which can stimulate critical thinking and promote clear communication. By engaging in conversations where various perspectives are considered, employees can develop the ability to analyze information objectively and reevaluate their initial assumptions. Fostering open-mindedness and empathy for others’ viewpoints can also build strong communication skills in the workplace .

In addition to exercises, employees should continuously practice self-awareness. Becoming more conscious of their thought processes, values, ethics, and beliefs will enhance their critical thinking abilities . Developing self-awareness also encourages employees to reflect on their communication styles and identify areas that need improvement.

Implementing these critical thinking and communication exercises in the workplace can lead to more efficient problem-solving, enhanced team dynamics, and improved performance across the organization. By fostering a culture of open discussion and clear communication, employers can empower their teams to make well-informed decisions and excel in their respective roles.

Applying Critical Thinking to Problem Solving

Effective problem solving requires employees to utilize critical thinking skills. By carefully analyzing information, asking questions, and determining the best course of action, employees will be more likely to arrive at creative and innovative solutions to challenges.

A key aspect of critical thinking in problem solving is to question assumptions. Employees should be encouraged to identify any preconceived notions or biases that may be influencing their thought processes. This will help them approach the problem with a more open and objective perspective.

Another essential component is seeking alternative viewpoints, even if it means playing the devil’s advocate. By considering different perspectives and exploring various possibilities, employees will be better equipped to discover innovative solutions that might not have been immediately apparent.

Critical thinking also involves evaluating the effectiveness of potential solutions. Employees should be encouraged to analyze the pros and cons of each option, as well as consider any potential long-term impacts. This process can help identify the most viable and successful solutions for a given problem.

In order to foster a culture of critical thinking within the workplace, managers can provide support by encouraging employees to ask questions, challenge assumptions, and explore alternative perspectives. Additionally, providing opportunities for learning and growth can help employees further develop their critical thinking skills, ultimately leading to more effective problem solving and increased innovation.

In summary, critical thinking is essential for effective problem-solving at work. By questioning assumptions, exploring various perspectives, and evaluating potential solutions, employees can confidently recommend creative and innovative approaches to overcoming challenges. This will not only lead to better outcomes for the organization, but also foster a culture of continuous improvement and growth.

Critical Thinking in Leadership and Management

Developing critical thinking skills in leadership and management positions is crucial for making informed decisions, driving company growth, and ensuring employee satisfaction. By enhancing their cognitive abilities, leaders and managers become better at decision-making, hiring processes, and overall performance.

In the realm of leadership, critical thinking helps leaders to understand the logical relationships between ideas and recognize the importance of an argument. This enables them to identify mistakes in reasoning and make well-informed choices, thus driving superior organizational outcomes as mentioned here .

Certainly, nurturing critical thinking in management is essential for improving cognition . This includes decision-making skills, the ability to identify potential pitfalls, and dealing with complex situations. By integrating critical thinking into management practices, companies can boost employee engagement, improve workplace morale, and ultimately succeed in a competitive business landscape.

Incorporating critical thinking exercises into hiring processes allows employers to better assess candidates’ abilities objectively. By focusing on problem-solving and communication skills during the interview process, managers can identify high-potential talent who demonstrate strong critical thinking competencies.

Investing time in building and improving critical thinking skills not only benefits individuals but also the overall success of an organization. By supporting employees in developing their cognitive abilities, leaders and managers both play a crucial role in promoting a culture of critical thinking that will lead to better decision-making and stronger company performance.

In conclusion, fostering critical thinking in leadership and management enables better decision-making, more effective hiring processes, and improved organizational performance. Strong cognitive abilities empower leaders and managers to approach complex situations with confidence and clarity, driving overall growth and success.

Critical Thinking in Team Building

Incorporating critical thinking exercises within team building activities is essential for fostering creativity, collaboration, and problem-solving amongst employees. By engaging team members in activities that require them to consider multiple perspectives and work together to reach a conclusion, companies can significantly improve their team’s performance.

One effective critical thinking activity for team building is Debate It Out . In this exercise, teams are assigned a controversial topic and asked to come to a consensus. Participants must research and present opposing viewpoints, encouraging the consideration of multiple perspectives. This debate process encourages employees to challenge preconceived notions, question assumptions, and ultimately strengthen their critical thinking skills.

Another beneficial exercise involves conducting Reverse-engineering Google activities. In this scenario, participants work together to reverse-engineer a successful past project or campaign. This collaborative approach allows team members to learn from each other’s experiences, assumptions, and mistakes while analyzing the factors that contributed to the project’s success.

Brainstorming is another critical thinking team building activity that can generate diverse ideas and encourage innovation. By setting specific goals or challenges, team members collaborate to provide multiple solutions to a given problem. Encourage employees to think beyond the obvious answers, providing a safe space for innovative and unusual ideas.

In summary, promoting critical thinking within team building exercises is essential for strengthening collaboration, problem-solving, and decision-making skills. Implementing activities such as debates, reverse-engineering Google tasks, and brainstorming can foster robust critical thinking skills amongst team members and ultimately lead to improved team performance.

Evaluating Potential Job Candidates for Critical Thinking Skills

Screening for critical thinking.

When evaluating potential job candidates, it’s important to assess their critical thinking skills as part of the hiring process. These skills are essential for both hard and soft skills, making them valuable across various roles and industries.

A vital step to measure critical thinking is through the initial screening process. To do this effectively, recruiters can utilize pre-employment tests that focus on evaluating candidates’ analytical skills, problem-solving abilities, and decision-making skills. These assessments can be administered online for a more efficient process while narrowing down the applicant pool.

In addition, it’s helpful to include open-ended questions on job application forms, which require a demonstration of critical thinking. For instance, candidates can be asked to provide examples of situations where they needed to use critical thinking skills to resolve a problem.

Assessing Analytical Skills during Interviews

During the interview stage, hiring managers have the opportunity to further evaluate a candidate’s critical thinking abilities. Incorporating critical-thinking interview questions can reveal valuable insights into their thought processes and how they approach problem-solving.

Asking situational and behavioral questions can provide excellent insight into a candidate’s analytical capabilities. Employers may ask questions that require candidates to analyze specific scenarios, or they may inquire about past experiences where candidates employed their critical thinking skills.

Using case studies or real-life scenarios during interviews is also an effective method for assessing critical thinking abilities. Presenting candidates with a complex problem or task can help gauge their skills in problem-solving, decision-making, and evaluation.

It’s essential to have a structured approach when evaluating candidates’ analytical skills, as it enables hiring managers to compare their abilities objectively. This will ultimately help them make informed decisions when selecting the best-suited candidate for the job.

By effectively screening and assessing job candidates’ critical thinking skills, companies can confidently hire employees with the necessary abilities to contribute successfully to their organization’s goals and vision.

The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Critical Thinking

Emotional Intelligence (EI) plays a significant part in facilitating critical thinking skills for employees. EI is defined as the ability to understand and manage one’s emotions , as well as recognizing and influencing the emotions of others. In the context of critical thinking, high emotional intelligence allows individuals to be more reflective and open to different perspectives.

A key aspect of emotional intelligence in critical thinking is self-awareness. When employees are aware of their own emotions and biases, they can step back and reflect on their thoughts and decisions objectively. By doing so, they are better able to analyze and evaluate various media and sources of information, leading to more informed decisions.

Emotional intelligence also helps employees consider the ethical implications of their decisions. With a heightened understanding of emotions, individuals are more likely to empathize with others and take their perspectives into account. This ability enables them to navigate complex ethical dilemmas and make fair judgments that adhere to the organization’s values.

Moreover, employees with high emotional intelligence can easily adapt to different perspectives and opinions. They demonstrate a willingness to engage in meaningful dialogues with co-workers and are receptive to feedback. This collaborative spirit nurtures a culture of learning and continuous improvement, fostering an environment in which critical thinking can thrive.

In summary, emotional intelligence plays a crucial role in enhancing critical thinking skills among employees. By being aware of their emotions and biases, reflecting on decisions objectively, considering ethics, and embracing diverse perspectives, individuals with high emotional intelligence contribute enormously to creating a productive and innovative workplace.

Fostering an Innovative Work Environment through Critical Thinking

Promoting open discussions.

One way to encourage innovation in the workplace is by promoting open discussions. These encourage employees to share their ideas and contribute to the collaborative push for creative solutions. When a culture of open communication is established, employees feel valued and are more likely to take risks, making it easier for them to come up with innovative solutions. Conducting regular brainstorming sessions and encouraging the exchange of opinions during meetings can further enhance the creative thinking process.

Encouragement of Reflective Practice

Another essential aspect of fostering an innovative work environment is the encouragement of reflective practice. Reflection allows employees to learn from their experiences and identify areas for improvement. By consistently implementing reflective practices, employees can develop a better understanding of their thought processes, leading to more confident and knowledgeable decision-making. This can be done through regular self-assessments, group discussions, or by providing constructive feedback from managers and peers.

By focusing on open discussions and reflective practices, businesses can effectively nurture a culture of critical thinking and creativity, leading to more innovative solutions and long-term success in the ever-changing business landscape.

Enhancing critical thinking skills in the workplace is an essential step towards cultivating a culture of effective decision-making and problem-solving. By engaging in various training exercises, employees can strengthen their ability to analyze situations, interpret data, and make informed choices.

Introducing critical thinking exercises into an organization demonstrates the company’s commitment to fostering employee growth and harnessing their full potential. Such exercises are not only beneficial in honing analytical and problem-solving skills, but also in improving communication, collaboration, and adaptability among team members.

Incorporating critical thinking training into existing programs can lead to a more efficient and productive workplace. Employees with strong critical thinking skills are better prepared to face challenges, remain flexible and adaptive to changes in the market, and contribute positively to an organization’s overall success. By prioritizing critical thinking development, businesses can invest in their employees and, in turn, reap the benefits of a well-equipped workforce.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are effective group exercises to improve critical thinking.

There are various group exercises that can help improve critical thinking skills among employees. One example is the Socratic questioning technique in which a facilitator poses a series of questions designed to uncover assumptions and stimulate critical thinking. Another effective activity is the “Case Study Analysis,” where employees are tasked with analyzing real-life business scenarios to identify challenges, gather data, and make informed decisions.

How can team building games enhance critical thinking skills?

Team building games can be an engaging way to enhance critical thinking skills. These games often require collaboration, problem-solving, and decision-making under pressure, which can help participants sharpen their analytical abilities. Incorporating team-building exercises that promote critical thinking into regular team meetings or training sessions can create an environment of intellectual growth and mutual support.

What are some fun activities to develop critical thinking in adults?

Fun activities for adults aimed at developing critical thinking skills might include puzzles, escape room games, and debate clubs. These activities encourage individuals to challenge their assumptions, think outside the box, and use logical reasoning, ultimately improving their cognition and problem-solving abilities .

How can a workbook aid in critical thinking development?

A workbook designed for critical thinking development typically contains structured exercises, real-world examples, and reflective activities. These materials guide individuals through a step-by-step process of improving their critical thinking skills by encouraging self-awareness, fostering curiosity, and promoting constructive feedback. Using a workbook can provide an organized and personalized approach to enhancing critical thinking abilities.

What are the top 5 skills essential for critical thinking?

The top 5 skills essential for critical thinking include:

  • Analytical thinking: The ability to break complex problems into smaller, manageable components.
  • Evaluation: Assessing information and making judgments based on evidence and reasoning.
  • Problem-solving: Identifying challenges and proposing effective solutions.
  • Creativity: Generating innovative ideas, insights, and approaches.
  • Communication: Articulating thoughts clearly and persuasively to convey complex ideas to others.

How can virtual activities benefit employees’ critical thinking?

Virtual activities can be an effective way to enhance critical thinking skills for remote or hybrid teams. Online tools and platforms can facilitate group discussions, brainstorming sessions, and collaborative problem-solving exercises, allowing employees to engage with diverse perspectives and develop their critical thinking skills. Employing virtual critical thinking activities can create an inclusive environment, encouraging employees to learn from each other, and adapt to changing circumstances.

You may also like

Creativity and Associative Thinking Techniques

Unleashing Your Creativity: Associative Thinking Techniques Explained

Creativity is a valuable asset in today’s world, and many people strive to unleash their creative potential. Associative thinking is a technique […]

Critical Reading Strategies

Critical Reading Strategies

Critical thinking is all about deeply analyzing and considering every aspect of any given information. Applying critical thinking to reading can go […]

Divergent vs Convergent Thinking

Embrace Divergent thinking and Convergent thinking

Convergent and divergent thinking may sound like they have a lot of similarities, but the reality is, that they are opposite sides […]

critical thinking riddles

5 Critical Thinking Riddles

Critical thinking is a valuable life skill that helps solve problems at school, in the workplace or in everyday living. Riddles can […]

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

More From Forbes

Don’t be duped—know these 8 logical fallacies to boost your critical thinking.

  • Share to Facebook
  • Share to Twitter
  • Share to Linkedin

Having a solid foundation in logic can enable you to make decisions more carefully, to pause and ... [+] think through issues.

How often do you make assumptions?

Have a strong position that you can’t exactly back with facts?

Hear someone else’s strong position that sounds like nonsense?

Welcome to the world of logical fallacies.

They’re all around us, daily, monthly, hourly in our conversations with others. Leaders must be aware of these to be more effective. And politicians are the worst offenders—they love love love logical fallacies.

Logical fallacies are quite similar to cognitive biases which can be defined as the systematic departure from rational thinking . Logical fallacies compromise our ability to think critically and have sound logic to back up our position. They’re flaws in our logic.

How We Fool Ourselves And Others

Without solid logic we cannot create a persuasive argument. And having a solid foundation in logic can enable one to make decisions more carefully, to pause and think through issues. So why are logical fallacies—the departure from logic and facts to back up one’s argument—so prevalent today?

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

1. People can be lazy

2. It’s a quick seemingly effective strategy when under pressure and you need a ‘sleight of mouth’ like a magician’s sleight of hand

Once you know the most common logical fallacies, you’ll start to notice them constantly. Both in your, and others’, communication.

Before we dive into them, let’s see what’s happening in your brain when logical fallacies are used. If you don’t have an appropriate response or feel wobbly in your position, it’s likely your dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex is attempting to control your behavior so you come across as more credible. But that’s likely not going to work, since your amygdala is perceiving threat and thus attacking instead of simply dealing with the issue at hand. Your survival instinct will always win when your brain perceives threat!

The 8 Most Common Logical Fallacies

Which of these do you see most often in others? In yourself?

1. Ad hominim – attacking the person (not the issue) in order to divert attention to another topic and not deal with the original one.

a. Example: “You can’t have an opinion on climate change since you don’t recycle.”

b. Solution: bring the speaker back to the topic at hand

2. Red herring – distracting or misleading someone to prolong an argument or change the topic

a. Example: “Would you pick up the dry cleaning on the way home?” Reply: “You never take the trash out!”

3. Strawman – exaggerate a claim/topic to knock it down (see our blog on why people lie —you’ll find some helpful info there)

a. Example: “We need to figure out how to afford to best do business in California”. Reply: “Why are you telling us to shut down California operations?”

b. Solution: Ask yourself: Can two things be true at once? Do I know enough about the issue to even voice my opinion? Can I acknowledge that this is a complex multi-faceted topic?

4. Slippery slope – a claim that follows a progression and ultimately leads to disaster.

a. Example: “If we let animals into our store, then everyone will bring them and they’ll pee and poop all over the place and break the merchandise and scare the other shoppers away and we’ll go out of biz and have to file bankruptcy and move to the slums.”

b. Solution: There may be some logic here, and yes, there could be a domino effect, but one step does not always lead to another and ultimate disaster. Let’s consider all the possibilities and options.

5. False dilemma – a person claims there are only 2 options, ignoring all other options.

a. Example: – “If we don’t order dinner via Door Dash we’ll have to eat whatever is in the pantry and that’ll be awful.”

b. Solution: There are a TON of food sources besides Door Dash. Recognize that other options exist.

6. Hasty generalization – someone jumps to a conclusion or generalizes without thinking through or doing the research.

a. Example: “People who point their finger are rude.”

b. Solution: Really? ALL people who point are rude? Slow down, pause, think it through

7. Appeal to authority – exaggerate a person’s authority or expertise, and generally become close-minded.

a. Example: “My doctor said that if you want to be healthy you must stop drinking coffee.”

b. Solution: Consider more sources! Question authority!

8. Begging the question – a statement is made as fact without evidence that the claim is true

a. Example: “Acai is good for you because it’s a dark berry.”

b. Solution: Why are dark berries good for you? Where’s the evidence for this claim? Ask for the factual back up for the claim.

Notice when you and others use these logical fallacies. You’ll find that they’ll result in you no longer being offended when someone uses ad hominim against you, and you’ll also find that you’ll likely say “but why/that’s not the question I asked/where’s the proof” and other phrases to help others pause and assess their own logical fallacies.

Let’s all become more logical and stronger critical thinkers!

Christine Comaford

  • Editorial Standards
  • Reprints & Permissions

For general inquiries, Admissions, and Registrar's Office:

Financial Aid Office

International Students

Sign In Options

Begin or continue your application

Enter your student portal

Having Trouble? Visit our help page.

Frequently Asked Questions

  • How many credits can I transfer?
  • How much is tuition?
  • How do I apply?
  • How do I request a transcript online?
  • How do I submit the TEAS test results?
  • What is OneTranscript and how does it work?
  • Is my employer an Excelsior University Partner?

Why Cybersecurity Needs More Women

by Excelsior Staff | March 5th, 2024

two female cybersecurity experts looking at computer

In the rapidly evolving digital world, cybersecurity has become a critical concern for individuals and organizations alike. Even so, there’s a noticeable gap in this field: the underrepresentation of women. Female cybersecurity experts not only bring essential skills to the table but also offer invaluable perspectives that are currently underutilized.  

Cybersecurity is about more than just protecting data; it’s about safeguarding our digital way of life. Women in college or those contemplating college education may want to seriously consider cybersecurity as a career path. This industry offers a unique blend of challenges and opportunities that can be particularly appealing to women looking for a dynamic and impactful career. Below, we explore why cybersecurity needs more women and how their inclusion can revolutionize the field.  

The Current Underrepresentation of Women in Cybersecurity

Despite the growing importance of cybersecurity, women remain significantly underrepresented in this field. This gap is not just a matter of numbers but reflects a deeper issue within the cybersecurity industry. The lack of female representation can be attributed to various factors, including societal stereotypes, lack of role models, and perceived barriers to entry.

However, the cybersecurity community is increasingly recognizing the need for more diversity and is taking steps to encourage more women to enter this field. Although women held only about 25% of cybersecurity jobs worldwide as of 2022, by 2025, they’re projected to make up about 30% of these roles .

Why Women Should Work in Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity represents a frontier where women can make a profound impact. In an industry that thrives on diverse perspectives and innovative thinking, the inclusion of women is not just beneficial but necessary. Their involvement in cybersecurity is crucial to driving the industry forward and ensuring a well-rounded approach to identifying digital threats and finding solutions. Let’s explore the multifaceted reasons why women’s participation in this field is so critical.

Women Offer Diverse Problem-Solving Skills

Women bring unique perspectives to the workplace that can be essential to developing innovative cybersecurity strategies. Their approaches to problem-solving can lead to more creative and effective solutions vital to combating ever-evolving cyber threats.

They’ll Bridge the Skills Gap

By encouraging more women to enter this field, we can begin to close the skills gap while enhancing the quality of cybersecurity talent.

Women Enhance Team Dynamics

Diverse teams, including those with gender diversity, have been shown to perform better. Women in cybersecurity contribute to a more dynamic team environment, leading to more effective collaboration and outcomes.

They Make Ethical Decisions

Women often bring a strong sense of ethics and social responsibility to their roles. In cybersecurity, this can translate into more conscientious decision-making, considering the broader implications of cybersecurity initiatives.

Women Foster Innovation

The inclusion of women in cybersecurity fosters innovation. Diverse teams are more likely to consider a wider range of approaches and come up with more groundbreaking solutions.

They’ll Be Role Models for Future Generations

By establishing themselves in cybersecurity, women serve as role models, inspiring young girls and future generations to explore careers in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields, especially cybersecurity.

Women Can Empower Themselves Economically

A career in cybersecurity offers women more than merely a job; it’s also a path to economic empowerment. With high demand and competitive salaries, a cybersecurity career provides a solid foundation for financial independence and growth.

They’ll Address the Gender Imbalance

Participation in cybersecurity helps address the gender imbalance in the tech industry, paving the way for a more equitable and inclusive workforce.

In summary, the involvement of women in cybersecurity is not just a matter of filling seats; it’s about leveraging women’s distinctive skills, perspectives, and values to enhance the field. Their participation is key to driving innovation, ensuring balanced decision-making, and building a resilient digital defense against cyber threats.

Obstacles Faced by Women in Cybersecurity

Despite the clear need for more female representation, women in cybersecurity may encounter several obstacles. These challenges range from gender bias and lack of mentorship to unequal growth opportunities and pay disparity. In addition, cultural and social expectations can sometimes act as barriers, making it difficult for women to thrive in this field. Overcoming these obstacles requires individual resilience as well as systemic changes within the industry to create a more welcoming and supportive environment for women.

Success Stories of Women Who Work in Cybersecurity

The cybersecurity industry, though challenging, is replete with inspiring success stories of women who have not only excelled in their careers but also broken barriers and set new standards. These trailblazing women have paved the way for future generations of female cybersecurity professionals, serving as powerful role models and illustrating the immense potential for women to succeed and lead in this field.

Pioneering Leaders

Notable among these pioneers is Marissa Mayer, who—before her tenure as the CEO of Yahoo—was instrumental in developing Google’s search technologies. Her focus on security aspects during her leadership at Yahoo highlighted the importance of cybersecurity at the highest levels of corporate governance.

Innovators in the Field

Another luminary is Window Snyder, whose work on Apple’s security team and her role as chief security officer at Fastly have been instrumental in advancing the field. Her contributions have been vital in shaping how large corporations approach and implement cybersecurity measures.

Government and Policy Influencers

On the policy side, figures like Melissa Hathaway stand out. She played a crucial role in developing cybersecurity policy during the Obama administration. She laid the groundwork for many cybersecurity policies and practices in place today.

Academia and Research Experts

In the realm of academia, Rebecca Bace, a renowned cybersecurity expert, made considerable contributions through her research and as an educator. Her work in understanding and mitigating cyber threats has influenced both the academic and practical aspects of cybersecurity.

Corporate Successes

In the corporate sector, Ann Johnson, corporate vice president of security, compliance, and identity business development at Microsoft, has been a key figure. Her leadership and insights have been pivotal in driving forward Microsoft’s cybersecurity initiatives.

Grassroots and Community Advocacy Leaders

Grassroots leaders like author and entrepreneur Jane Frankland have been instrumental in advocating for women in cybersecurity. Her efforts in mentoring and supporting women in the field have helped create a more inclusive and supportive community.

These women, among others, serve as examples that gender doesn’t have to be a barrier to success in the cybersecurity industry. Their achievements and leadership serve as a beacon that could encourage more women to enter the field and strive for excellence. Their stories extend beyond simple tales of personal success and are catalysts for change, inspiring women worldwide to consider careers in cybersecurity and break new ground in this dynamic field.

Education Needed to Enter the Cybersecurity Field

A career in cybersecurity often begins with the right education. Prospective cybersecurity professionals should consider programs that offer comprehensive training in information security, network defense, and ethical hacking. Degrees in computer science, information technology, or specialized cybersecurity programs are excellent starting points. Additionally, certifications such as Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) or Certified Ethical Hacker (CEH) can enhance your skills and employability in this sector.

Is Cybersecurity a Good Career for Women?

Cybersecurity can be an exceptional career for women. The field offers numerous opportunities for growth and intellectual challenge, as well as the chance to make a significant impact in protecting digital assets. Women in cybersecurity can enjoy rewarding careers, with the added benefit of contributing to a more diverse and resilient cybersecurity workforce. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics , employment in computer and information technology occupations is projected to grow faster than the average for all occupations from 2022 to 2032. So, the demand for skilled cybersecurity professionals, including women, is bound to increase.

Take the Next Step with Excelsior University

As we look at the vibrant landscape of cybersecurity, it’s evident that this field not only needs more women but also offers them a platform to excel and drive change. From overcoming challenges to celebrating success stories, women play a crucial role in shaping the future of cybersecurity.

If you’re motivated to be a part of this transformative journey, Excelsior University is here to help you get started. We invite you to explore our cybersecurity programs and discover how you could contribute to this exciting and essential field. Contact Excelsior University today and take your first step toward a rewarding career in cybersecurity, where you have the chance to break barriers and build a more secure digital world.

Featured Articles

William Klee, IT Project Manager at Constellation Energy (Calvert Cliffs) and Excelsior Graduate

A Walk to Remember

Bill is an IT project manager at Constellation Energy, a position he obtained after earning his bachelor’s degree from Excelsior University (then Excelsior College).

critical thinking of the workplace

Taking the Road Less Traveled: New White Sox Manager Reflects on Journey to Head Coaching Position

The Chicago White Sox have welcomed Pedro Grifol as the 42nd manager in franchise history. Grifol, a native of Miami, Fla., is also a former professional baseball player and an Excelsior University graduate.

Stephanie Yackel, Nursing Faculty

Q&A with Stephanie Yackel

Stephanie Yackel oversees Excelsior’s bachelor’s and master’s nursing programs. We asked Yackel about her career, her work in curriculum development, and what she thinks students will get out of the bachelor’s and master’s in nursing programs.

Speak to a Counselor About Your Career Goals

Fill out the form to request a call from an admissions counselor and receive more information about our programs.

Start your degree with courses in Spanish.

Learn about our ¡Adelante! program

Which language do you prefer?

View our site in English or Spanish.

View Our ¡Adelante! Programs

Bilingual degree programs to help you reach your goals faster.

Accessibility at Excelsior

We believe in education for all.

  • Technical Help
  • Accessibility Statement

15 high-paying jobs for introverts

Woman sitting at kitchen table working on laptop, smiling

find career satisfaction on their own terms.

today's available professions cater to this personality style, especially now that hybrid and remote options have increased in popularity. 

 "[There is] a broader recognition of roles that can be performed outside the traditional office setting, which has opened up more opportunities for introverts," says Eva Chan, a career expert with Resume Genius. "The qualities often associated with introversion, such as deep focus, analytical prowess and creativity are beneficial and even considered essential for success in many high-paying roles." 

Americans share their 5 biggest financial regrets

in the right direction when it comes to their search , Resume Genius used information from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics to put together a list of 15 jobs that are likely to meet their financial needs, as well as their personality-related work preferences. 

Tech-related positions made up the majority of Resume Genius's list, though introverts also find success in areas of design, writing, research and product development — roles that require active listening, giving thoughtful input and creative and analytical skills, says Chan. 

"Individuals with introverted tendencies often excel in environments that require significant independent work, as well as in roles that demand complex problem-solving and critical thinking skills, such as data analysis and IT," Chan says. "The current job market presents an especially favorable environment for introverts." 

Finding a position that aligns with their personality increases an employee's chance at personal fulfillment and professional longevity, important factors to preventing the damaging effects of  job dissatisfaction and burnout. Fortunately, today's job market is ripe with opportunity, Chan says. 

From AI training to college prep: New benefits employees want

Check out Resume Genius's list of 15 ideal roles for  introverts, along with average annual salary, number of jobs as of 2022, projected job growth over the next decade and typical education requirements. 

Database architect

Software developer, information security analyst, data scientist, computer systems analyst, mechanical engineer, digital designer, technical writer, occupational health and safety specialist, accountant and auditor, market research analyst, film and video editor, graphic designer.

As the cost of child care hits record highs, more than half of U.S. employers are prioritizing benefits for parents.

A little boy is playing with colorful, wooden toys on the living room floor.

Jobs that support independent, quiet work and strong analysis or critical thinking skills are ideal for introverted employees.

Woman sitting at kitchen table working on laptop, smiling

From baby boomers to Generation Z, employees have different approaches when it comes to their long-term savings.

Man typing into a calculator while holding bills and stacking coins

Recognizing the unique needs of each age group can help HR leaders build the right benefits package and aid workplace culture.

Abhishek Shah

Workplace expert Justin Jones-Fosu shares resolution strategies for companies looking to foster healthy cultures.

Colleagues arguing.

Rego gives parents control over their kids' spending and makes learning about money fun.

Parent and child with hands together around a piggybank

Chess MASTER Unveils Game-Changing Strategies for Strategic Thinking and Winning in the Workplace | Danny Rensch Great Leadership With Jacob Morgan

Listen on Apple Podcasts Requires subscription and macOS 11.4 or higher

How can the strategic principles of chess be applied in a professional environment? By developing similar critical thinking skills, leaders will be prepared to address challenges with nuanced and anticipatory responses, strategizing five steps ahead in true chess fashion. Today I am joined by Danny Rensch, Chief Chess Officer of Chess.com and international chess master, as we explore how the game’s principles can be translated into effective business strategies. Listeners will gain tips on innovation, team building, and the importance of self-reflection, drawing parallels between mastering chess and excelling in leadership roles.   Start your day with the world’s top leaders by joining thousands of others at Great Leadership on Substack. Just enter your email: ⁠⁠https://greatleadership.substack.com/

  • More Episodes

Read our research on: Immigration & Migration | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Representative democracy remains a popular ideal, but people around the world are critical of how it’s working, many say their country would be better off if more women, people from poor backgrounds and young adults held elective office.

critical thinking of the workplace

This Pew Research Center analysis focuses on public opinion of democracy and political representation in 24 countries in North America, Europe, the Middle East, the Asia-Pacific region, sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. Satisfaction with democracy is examined in the context of long-term trend data. The report also explores views of nondemocratic systems of government. This is the first year since 2019 that the Global Attitudes Survey has included countries from Africa and Latin America due to the coronavirus outbreak .

For non-U.S. data, this report draws on nationally representative surveys of 27,285 adults conducted from Feb. 20 to May 22, 2023. All surveys were conducted over the phone with adults in Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Surveys were conducted face to face in Hungary, Poland, India, Indonesia, Israel, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Argentina, Brazil and Mexico. In Australia, we used a mixed-mode probability-based online panel.

In the United States, we surveyed 3,576 U.S. adults from March 20 to 26, 2023. Everyone who took part in this survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

In Israel, the survey was conducted from March 15 to April 24, 2023, before Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and the start of the Israel-Hamas war. 

Several countries have had national elections since this data was collected. Most recently, Indonesia held a general election in February 2024. Greece and Poland both held parliamentary elections, while Argentina, the Netherlands and Spain held general elections in 2023. In Nigeria, elections were held immediately before fieldwork began. 

Throughout the report, we analyze attitudes by respondents’ income and education. For income, we created lower, middle and higher income categories by splitting the respondents who provided this information into three roughly equal groups within each country.

To compare educational groups across countries, we standardize education levels based on the UN’s International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED).

  • In India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Brazil, the lower education category is below secondary education and the higher category is secondary or above.
  • The lower education category is secondary education or below and the higher category is postsecondary or above in Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, the UK, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Argentina and Mexico.
  • In the U.S., the lower education category is some college or below and the higher category is a college degree or more.

Here are the questions used for the report, along with responses, and the survey methodology .

The health of democracy has declined significantly in many nations over the past several years, but the concept of representative democracy continues to be popular among citizens across the globe.

Solid majorities in each of the 24 countries surveyed by Pew Research Center in 2023 describe representative democracy, or a democratic system where representatives elected by citizens decide what becomes law, as a somewhat or very good way to govern their country.

However, enthusiasm for this form of government has slipped in many nations since 2017. And the survey highlights significant criticisms of the way it’s working. Across the countries included in the study:

  • A median of 59% are dissatisfied with how their democracy is functioning.
  • 74% think elected officials don’t care what people like them think.
  • 42% say no political party in their country represents their views.

What is a median?

Throughout this report, median scores are used to help readers see overall patterns in the data. The median percentage is the middle number in a list of all percentages sorted from highest to lowest.

What – or who – would make representative democracy work better?

Bar chart showing that many people across 24 countries surveyed say policies in their country would improve if more women, people from poor backgrounds and young adults were in office

Many say policies in their country would improve if more elected officials were women, people from poor backgrounds and young adults.

Electing more women is especially popular among women, and voting more young people into office is particularly popular among those under age 40.

Views are more mixed on the impact of electing more businesspeople and labor union members.

Overall, there is less enthusiasm for having more elected officials who are religious, although the idea is relatively popular in several middle-income nations (Argentina, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria and South Africa, as defined by the World Bank ).

For this report, we surveyed 30,861 people in 24 countries from Feb. 20 to May 22, 2023. In addition to this overview, the report includes chapters on:

  • Attitudes toward different types of government systems
  • Views about political representation
  • Impact of electing more officials from different backgrounds
  • Satisfaction with democracy and ratings for specific leaders and parties

Read some of the report’s key findings below.

How do views of democracy stack up against nondemocratic approaches?

Even though most people believe representative democracy is a good way to govern, many are open to other forms of government as well.

Direct democracy – a system where citizens, rather than elected officials, vote directly on major issues – is also viewed favorably by majorities in nearly all countries polled.

In most countries, expert rule – in which experts, not elected officials, make key decisions – is also a popular alternative.

And there is notable support for more authoritarian models of government.

In 13 countries, a quarter or more of those surveyed think a system in which a strong leader can make decisions without interference from parliament or the courts is a good form of government. In four of the eight middle-income nations in the study, at least half of respondents express this view.

Even military rule has its supporters, including about a third or more of the public in all eight middle-income countries. There is less support in high-income nations, although 17% say military rule could be a good system in Greece, Japan and the United Kingdom, and 15% hold this view in the United States.

Bar chart showing 24-country median percentage support for different types of government. While 7 in 10 or more say representative democracy and direct democracy are good ways to govern their country, just 26% favor rule by a strong leader and 15% support military rule.

Views on representative democracy

Line chart over time showing that in 11 of 22 countries surveyed, the share of the public describing representative democracy as a very good way to govern is down significantly since 2017.

Strong support for representative democracy has declined in many nations since we last asked the question in 2017.

The share of the public describing representative democracy as a very good way to govern is down significantly in 11 of the 22 countries where data from 2017 is available (trends are not available in Australia and the U.S.).

For instance, 54% of Swedes said representative democracy was a very good approach in 2017, while just 41% hold this view today.

In contrast, strong support for representative democracy has risen significantly in three nations (Brazil, Mexico and Poland).

Views on autocratic leadership

Line chart over time showing that in 8 of 22 nations, support for a government where a strong leader makes decisions without interference from courts or parliaments has increased since 2017

Support for a government where a strong leader can make decisions without interference from courts or parliaments has increased in eight of 22 nations since 2017.

It is up significantly in all three Latin American nations polled, as well as in Kenya, India, South Korea, Germany and Poland.

Support for a strong leader model is especially common among people with less education and those with lower incomes.

People on the ideological right are often more likely than those on the left to support rule by a strong leader.

Views on expert rule

Support for a system where experts, not elected officials, make key decisions is up significantly in most countries since 2017, and current views of this form of government may be tied at least in part to the COVID-19 pandemic . For example, in the U.S., 59% of those who believe public health officials have done a good job of responding to the coronavirus outbreak think expert rule is a good system, compared with just 35% among those who say public health officials have done a bad job of dealing with the pandemic.

Line chart over time showing that in most countries surveyed, support for a system where experts, not elected officials, make key decisions has risen significantly since 2017

Widespread belief that elected officials are out of touch

Bar chart showing that across 24 nations, a median of 74% say elected officials in their country don’t care what people like them think.

One factor driving people’s dissatisfaction with the way democracy is functioning is the belief that politicians are out of touch and disconnected from the lives of ordinary citizens.

In every country surveyed, people who feel politicians don’t care about people like them are less satisfied with democracy.

Across 24 nations, a median of 74% say elected officials in their country don’t care what people like them think.

At least half of those surveyed hold this view in all countries but one (Sweden). Opinions about elected officials are particularly negative in Argentina, Greece, Nigeria, Spain and the U.S., where at least eight-in-ten believe elected officials don’t care what people like them think.

Many don’t think political parties represent them

While a median of 54% across the 24 countries surveyed say there is at least one party that represents their views well, 42% say there is no party that represents their views.

Dot plot across surveyed countries comparing how many people on the political left, center and right say at least one party in their country represents their views well. Those who place themselves in the center of the ideological scale are especially likely to feel unrepresented.

Israelis, Nigerians and Swedes are the most likely to say at least one party represents their opinions – seven-in-ten or more express this view in each of these countries. 1 In contrast, about four-in-ten or fewer say this in Argentina, France, Italy and Spain. Americans are evenly divided on this question.

In 18 countries where we asked about ideology, people who place themselves in the center are especially likely to feel unrepresented. And in some countries, those on the right are particularly likely to say there is at least one party that represents their views.

The U.S. illustrates this pattern: 60% of American conservatives say there is a party that represents their opinions, compared with 52% of liberals and just 40% of moderates.

People rate their country’s leaders, parties and overall state of democracy poorly

Bar chart showing median satisfaction with democracy and views of political leaders and parties, as of spring 2023. The overall results provide a relatively grim picture of the political mood in many nations.

The survey asked respondents how well they feel democracy is working in their country, and it also asked them to rate major national leaders and parties. Opinions on these questions may have shifted since the survey was conducted in spring 2023, but the overall results provide a relatively grim picture of the political mood in many nations. (Refer to Appendix A for details about the specific leaders and parties we asked about.)

  • There are only seven countries where half or more are satisfied with the way democracy is working. 
  • Among the 24 national leaders included on the survey, just 10 are viewed favorably by half or more of the public.
  • Opposition leaders fare even worse – only six get favorable reviews.
  • Across the countries polled, we asked about 87 different political parties. Just 21 get a positive rating.
  • Opinions vary greatly across regions and countries, but to some extent, we see more positive views about leaders and parties in middle-income nations. 

How ideology relates to views of representation

Dot plot showing that across 18 countries, those on the political left are generally much more likely than those on the right to favor electing more labor union members, young adults, people from poor backgrounds and women. Those on the right are more likely to say policies would improve if more religious people and businesspeople held elective office.

This report highlights significant ideological differences on many questions, including preferences regarding the characteristics of people who serve as elected officials.

Those on the political left are generally much more likely than those on the right to favor electing more labor union members, young adults, people from poor backgrounds and women.

Meanwhile, those on the right are more likely to say policies would improve if more religious people and businesspeople held elective office.

Dot plot showing that in the U.S., Democrats and Democratic leaners are much more likely to say policies would improve if more women, young adults, people from poor backgrounds and labor union members held elected office. Republicans are more likely to endorse electing more religious people and businesspeople.

Ideological divisions on these topics are often especially sharp in the U.S. There are also very large partisan differences.

Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are much more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to favor having more women, young adults, people from poor backgrounds and labor union members in office.

Meanwhile, Republicans are more likely to endorse electing more religious people and businesspeople. 

In their own words: Ideas for improving democracy

The survey also included the following open-ended question: “What do you think would help improve the way democracy in this country is working?” Respondents describe a wide variety of ideas for making democracy work better, but a few common themes emerge:

Improving political leadership: Respondents want politicians who are more responsive to the public’s needs, more attentive to the public’s voice, less corrupt and more competent. Many would also like political leaders to be more representative of their country’s population in terms of gender, age, race and other factors.

Government reform: Many believe improving democracy will require significant political reform in their country. Views about what reform should look like vary considerably, but suggestions include changing electoral systems, shifting the balance of power between institutions, and placing limits on how long politicians and judges can serve. In several countries, people express a desire for more direct democracy.

Expecting more from citizens: Respondents also emphasize that citizens have an important role to play in making democracy work better. They argue that citizens need to be more informed, engaged, tolerant and respectful of one another.  

Improving the economy: Many people – and especially those in middle-income nations – emphasize the link between a healthy economy and a healthy democracy. Respondents mention creating jobs; curbing inflation; changing government spending priorities; and investing more in infrastructure, such as roads, hospitals, water, electricity and schools.

The full results of the open-ended question will be released in an upcoming Pew Research Center report. For a preview of some of the findings, read “Who likes authoritarianism, and how do they want to change their government?”

Additional reports and analyses

Pew Research Center regularly explores public attitudes toward democracy and related issues around the world. Check out some of our major publications on this topic from the past few years:

  • Majorities in most countries surveyed say social media is good for democracy  (February 2024)
  • Social Media Seen as Mostly Good for Democracy Across Many Nations, but U.S. is a Major Outlier (December 2022)
  • Global Public Opinion in an Era of Democratic Anxiety (December 2021)
  • Citizens in Advanced Economies Want Significant Changes to Their Political Systems (October 2021)
  • Democratic Rights Popular Globally but Commitment to Them Not Always Strong (February 2020)
  • European Public Opinion Three Decades After the Fall of Communism (October 2019)

The Center also regularly examines U.S. public opinion on topics related to democracy. Some of the most recent releases include:

  • Tuning Out: Americans on the Edge of Politics (January 2024)
  • Americans’ Dismal Views of the Nation’s Politics (September 2023)
  • Israel survey was conducted March 15-April 24, 2023, before Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7 and the start of the Israel-Hamas war. ↩

Sign up for our Global newsletter

Delivered twice a month

Report Materials

Table of contents, freedom, elections, voice: how people in australia and the uk define democracy, global public opinion in an era of democratic anxiety, most people in advanced economies think their own government respects personal freedoms, more people globally see racial, ethnic discrimination as a serious problem in the u.s. than in their own society, citizens in advanced economies want significant changes to their political systems, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

IMAGES

  1. How To Improve Critical Thinking Skills at Work in 6 Steps

    critical thinking of the workplace

  2. Critical Thinking Skills in the Workplace

    critical thinking of the workplace

  3. benefits of critical thinking at work

    critical thinking of the workplace

  4. Critical thinking in the workplace ppt

    critical thinking of the workplace

  5. 5 Creative and Critical Thinking Examples In Workplace

    critical thinking of the workplace

  6. Critical Thinking Skills: How To Develop Them In Employees

    critical thinking of the workplace

VIDEO

  1. Critical thinking

  2. Webinar

  3. Critical Thinking

  4. Critical thinking

  5. MGT10002 Critical Thinking in Management

COMMENTS

  1. Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It's Important

    Critical thinking is considered a soft skill, which means it's a skill inherent in a person's personality. That said, it is possible to develop this skill. Related: 5 Examples of Critical Thinking Skills Critical thinking in the workplace Here are some of the ways critical thinking is important to the workplace: Some professions require it

  2. Critical thinking skills: what they are and how to build them

    Ask questions and dig deep, rather than accepting information at face value. Keep your own biases and perceptions in check to stay as objective as possible. Rely on your emotional intelligence to fill in the blanks and gain a more well-rounded understanding of a situation. So, critical thinking isn't just being intelligent or analytical.

  3. A Short Guide to Building Your Team's Critical Thinking Skills

    Summary. Most employers lack an effective way to objectively assess critical thinking skills and most managers don't know how to provide specific instruction to team members in need of becoming ...

  4. What is Critical Thinking and Why is it Valuable in the Workplace

    Using your critical thinking skills in the workplace will define you as a problem solver. This is not only useful career-wise (although having upper-level people at your company think highly of you is undoubtedly a benefit) it also establishes you as a leader among your fellow team members. Demonstrating your ability to solve problems and ...

  5. Critical thinking skills: How to develop them in every employee

    Critical thinking in the workplace means sorting among useful and arbitrary details to come up with a big-picture perspective that leads to an impactful decision or solution to a problem. If you find yourself stuck in your career path, many times, it's due to a lack of critical thinking.

  6. How To Improve Critical Thinking Skills at Work in 6 Steps

    2. Understand your mental process. Identify and evaluate how you receive and process information. Understanding how you listen, then interpret, and finally react to information is vital to becoming more mentally efficient in the workplace. Being a critical thinker means you recognize your prejudices and how they influence solutions and decisions.

  7. What Are Critical Thinking Skills and Why Are They Important?

    According to the University of the People in California, having critical thinking skills is important because they are [ 1 ]: Universal. Crucial for the economy. Essential for improving language and presentation skills. Very helpful in promoting creativity. Important for self-reflection.

  8. Improve Your Critical Thinking at Work

    Instead, leaders should deliberately approach each problem and devote time thinking through possible solutions. The good news, she says, is that critical thinking skills can developed and ...

  9. Build Critical Thinking Skills in 7 Steps w/ Examples [2023] • Asana

    Example of critical thinking in the workplace. Imagine you work in user experience design (UX). Your team is focused on pricing and packaging and ensuring customers have a clear understanding of the different services your company offers. Here's how to apply the critical thinking process in the workplace in seven steps:

  10. How to be a critical thinker at work

    Critical thinking, which is part of a complex cognitive ...

  11. Critical Thinking: A Simple Guide and Why It's Important

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

  12. Why Critical Thinking Matters in Your Business

    Critical thinking in the workplace guarantees objective and efficient problem-solving, ultimately reducing costly errors and ensuring that your organization's resources are used wisely. Team ...

  13. Critical Thinking Skills for the Professional

    Critical Thinking Skills for the Professional. This course is part of Professional Skills for the Workplace Specialization. Taught in English. 20 languages available. Some content may not be translated. Instructor: Diane Davidson. Enroll for Free. Starts Mar 2. Financial aid available.

  14. What Are the Benefits of Critical Thinking in the Workplace?

    Critical thinking at work is one of the most important soft skills for any employee at any level in the organization to cultivate. Unlike hard skills, like knowing a specific language or software ...

  15. How to promote critical thinking in the workplace

    Why is workplace critical thinking so significant? Business decisions can be big or small. Whatever the size, failing to utilise critical thinking skills in the workplace can cause a number of problems. These include: Poor decision making; Unhappy colleagues; A lack of necessary action; Dysfunctional systems; Financial losses; Wasted time and ...

  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. What's the Importance of Critical Thinking in the Workplace?

    Employees use critical thinking to solve work challenges and develop strategies to perform their work functions better. As an employee, you can develop your critical thinking skills to progress in your career. In this article, we consider what critical thinking is, the importance of critical thinking in the workplace is and how to improve your ...

  18. How to Develop Critical Thinking Skills in Remote Work

    Learn six options to improve your critical thinking skills while working remotely, from seeking feedback to having fun. Boost your logic, creativity, and problem-solving abilities.

  19. The Role of Critical Thinking in the Workplace

    Six Steps. There are six steps to critical thinking. These are knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Knowledge comes from the research gathered while using critical thinking in the workplace. In order to understand a problem, workers must first find the sources. Next is comprehension, concertedly attempting ...

  20. Critical Thinking Skills in the Workplace

    Here are some of the things you can do develop critical thinking in the workplace: Evaluate. Look at the problem and name the situation. Focus on the situation and evaluate all the available data given. Critical thinking involves being able to look at all the angles of an issue and evaluate properly. Evaluation also means seeing the situation ...

  21. Critical Thinking Exercises for Employees: Boosting Workplace Problem

    The Importance of Critical Thinking in the Workplace. Critical thinking is an essential skill for employees to possess in the modern workplace. It involves the ability to carefully and systematically analyze information, consider multiple perspectives, and make well-informed decisions. By enhancing decision-making abilities, critical thinking ...

  22. 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 ...

  23. Don't Be Duped—Know These 8 Logical Fallacies To Boost Your Critical

    2. It's a quick seemingly effective strategy when under pressure and you need a 'sleight of mouth' like a magician's sleight of hand. Once you know the most common logical fallacies, you ...

  24. 6 Main Types of Critical Thinking Skills (With Examples)

    Applying critical thinking in work situations will improve your performance and the company's chances of succeeding. 1. Promoting a teamwork approach to problem-solving Any department within a company is a team and effective collaboration is important to its success. When developing a strategy, logically analyze all the team members' input ...

  25. Why Women Should Work in Cybersecurity

    Let's explore the multifaceted reasons why women's participation in this field is so critical. Women Offer Diverse Problem-Solving Skills. Women bring unique perspectives to the workplace that can be essential to developing innovative cybersecurity strategies.

  26. Best jobs for introverts

    "Individuals with introverted tendencies often excel in environments that require significant independent work, as well as in roles that demand complex problem-solving and critical thinking skills, such as data analysis and IT," Chan says. "The current job market presents an especially favorable environment for introverts."

  27. ‎Great Leadership With Jacob Morgan: Chess MASTER Unveils Game-Changing

    By developing similar critical thinking skills, leaders will be prepared to address challenges with nuanced and anticipatory responses, strategizing five steps ahead in true chess fashion. Today I am joined by Danny Rensch, Chief Chess Officer of Chess.com and international chess master, as we explore how the game's principles can be ...

  28. Representative Democracy Is Popular Globally but Criticized for How It

    Respondents describe a wide variety of ideas for making democracy work better, but a few common themes emerge: Improving political leadership: Respondents want politicians who are more responsive to the public's needs, more attentive to the public's voice, less corrupt and more competent. Many would also like political leaders to be more ...