7 Guidelines for Critical Thinking

1
7 Guidelines for Critical Thinking
2
Our focus today

• Research shows that experts can solve problems
  that novices cannot handle because experts have
  an edge in knowledge and have more experience in
  their area of expertise (from Halpern, 1996)
• Today we will start becoming experts
• Knowledge we will learn 7 principles
• Experience we will apply those principles

3
Guideline 1

• Critical thinkers are flexible they can
  tolerate ambiguity and uncertainty
• Open-minded
• Avoiding black-and-white analysis
• Enjoy mysteries and complexities
• Willing to test their ideas and assumptions

4
Guideline 2

• Critical thinkers identify inherent biases and
  assumptions
• Identify biases and assumptions in others
• Confront our own biases and predispositions

5
Guideline 3

• Critical thinkers maintain an air of
  skepticism
• Willingness to self-correct
• Maintain a skeptical attitude especially about
  ideas with which we agree

6
Guideline 4

• Critical thinkers separate fact from opinions
• Evidence, Evidence, Evidence
• Remain emotionally detached
• Base conclusions on facts from variety of
  settings and individuals

7
Guideline 5

• Critical thinkers dont oversimplify
• Think divergently
• Imagine and explore alternative explanations

8
Guideline 6

• Critical thinkers use logical inference
  processes
• Total omniscience (knowing everything infinitely)
  is impossible, so everyone makes inferences based
  upon the limited information available.
• Inferences must be logical and well-thought out

9
Guideline 7

• Critical thinkers examine available evidence
  before drawing conclusions
• If we examine only one source, we may fall prey
  to a particular set of biases
• If we examine several sources, we can identify
  convergent evidence

10
Ongoing dynamic process
11
Applying the 7 Guidelines

• On Being Sane in Insane Places
• David Rosenhans 1973 study described in the
  Preface of the Ruscio book

12
On Being Sane in Insane Places

• Purpose of study
• - Could mental health professionals tell the
  sane from the insane
• How was it conducted?
• - 8 mentally healthy individuals admitted to
  hospitals for complaints of distressing auditory
  hallucinations.
• - Once admitted, all acted normally to
  determine whether the staff would discover their
  sanity and release them
• What were results?
• - Released after average of 19 days, with most
  given revised diagnosis of schizophrenia in
  remission

13
On Being Sane in Insane Places

• Possible flaws?
• Confirmation bias selectively recorded
  information to support their hypothesis
• Ignored relevant empirical data
• Made simplistic overgeneralizations
• Used faulty logic when arguing that the diagnoses
  were invalid because schizophrenia is the
  appropriate diagnosis for the type of symptoms
  reported by the subjects
• Some assertions based upon insufficient evidence
• Presented no comparative data