The Role and Sources of Individual Differences in Critical-Analytic Thinking: a Capsule Overview

Abstract

Critical-analytic thinking is typically conceived as a meta-construct that arises at the junction of a problem state (i.e., a situation that requires analysis that challenges previous assumptions) and an individual (i.e., an entity with the capacity to exercise critical-analytic thinking). With regard to the latter, there is a substantial body of research focusing on developmental and educational prerequisites for critical-analytic thinking. A less studied aspect of critical-analytic thinking pertains to individual differences, particularly in the set of foundational or componential cognitive skills that embody this construct. The bottom line here is whether, all else being equal (i.e., the same situation and the same developmental/ educational stage), there is variation in whether, when, and how people think critically/ analytically. We argue that there is unequivocal evidence for both the existence and importance of individual differences in critical-analytic thinking. This review focuses on theoretical and empirical evidence, identifying the cognitive processes that serve as the sources of these individual differences and capturing these processes' differential contributions to both the critical and analytic components of this construct.Keywords Critical analytic thinking . Neurocognitive mechanisms . Fluid reasoning . Executive function . Genetic factors . Environmental factors For better or for worse, people differ. The number of dimensions on which they differ is endless; one such dimension is the way they think. Here we are interested in surveying both the presentation and sources of individual differences in critical-analytic thinking. Whereas Educ Psychol Rev (2014) what critical-analytic thinking is, the construct is ill-defined and this has been a source of constant debate. Although the debate has swung from a notion of the skills and capacities necessary for critical-analytic thinking to one of disposition toward truth-seeking (Burbules and Berk 1999), the former provides for analysis and the measurement a set of requisite cognitive processes to unpack, with respect to variability in performance in situations and on tasks requiring critical-analytic thinking. As critical-analytic thinking occurs so naturally for some, yet so painfully arduous for others, it is likely that this type of thinking embeds a "vast variety of cognitive skills" (Lipman 1988) that must be orchestrated together, both developmentally as a capacity, and concurrently, as an act. Thus, both the skills and the way they are combined generate a source of individual differences. The intent of this review is to provide an understanding of how variations in several core neurocognitive systems, stemming from genetic and environmental sources, lead to differences in the capacity for and competency in critical-analytic thinking.Critical-analytic thinking involves the ability to overcome one's own biases by decontextualizing an argument (the critical component) and evaluating it rationally (the analytic component), rather than lo...

Beyond the bilingual advantage: The potential role of genes and environment on the development of cognitive control

“…Specifically, the authors posit that the control-oriented mechanisms needed to handle more than one language may require the release of extra dopamine in brain areas involved in control. There is also evidence that control-oriented mechanisms are heritable (Bolger et al, 2014). Finally, the potential importance of dopamine in language learning has also been pointed out in a seminal review by Wong, Morgan-Short, Ettlinger, and Zheng (2012).…”

Translation, adaptation, and validation of the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment to Portugal: Effect of disciplinary area and academic level on critical thinking

“…For instance, Heijltjes, Van Gog, and Paas (2014) found that learning CT skills is potentiated by the combination of explicit CT instruction and practice. On the other hand, disciplinary differences could be due to individual characteristics that impact when time comes to enroll in a particular course from a certain disciplinary area (Badcock et al, 2010), seeing that neurocognitive systems, in interaction with life experiences, are responsible for individual differences in CT (Bolger, Mackey, Wang, & Grigorenko, 2014). Also, it is necessary to account for the impact of educational background, as suggested by Evens, Verburgh, and Elen (2013), who found that Secondary Education impacts the choice of disciplinary area, which relates to students' CT performance.…”

Intellectual performance and educational attainment of Mexican adolescents in poverty

“…Intelligence has been defined as several interrelated intellectual abilities, organized as independent systems consisting of general abilities ( g factor), and specific abilities, such as “crystallized” knowledge ( Bolger, Mackey, Wang, & Grigorenko, 2014 ). Intelligence is no longer viewed as strictly genetically determined, but as determined by genetic as well as by environmental factors ( Bolger et al, 2014 ; Subotnik et al, 2011 ; Tucker-Drop & Harden, 2012 ).…”

“…Intelligence has been defined as several interrelated intellectual abilities, organized as independent systems consisting of general abilities ( g factor), and specific abilities, such as “crystallized” knowledge ( Bolger, Mackey, Wang, & Grigorenko, 2014 ). Intelligence is no longer viewed as strictly genetically determined, but as determined by genetic as well as by environmental factors ( Bolger et al, 2014 ; Subotnik et al, 2011 ; Tucker-Drop & Harden, 2012 ). That is, the interaction between genetic, brain, and evironmental factors creates the diversity of cognitive functions that are regarded as human intelligence: Genetic factors establish the basis for the neurocognitive systems and the interaction between genetic and environmental factors determines the individual variation in intelligence ( Bolger et al, 2014 ).…”