The Construction of "Critical Thinking": Between How We Think and What We Believe

"Critical thinking" is widely regarded as important, but difficult to define. This article provides an historical perspective by describing how "critical thinking" emerged as an object of psychological study, how the forms it took were shaped by practical and social concerns, and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:History of psychology 2020-08, Vol.23 (3), p.232-251
1. Verfasser: Lamont, Peter
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 251
container_issue 3
container_start_page 232
container_title History of psychology
container_volume 23
creator Lamont, Peter
description "Critical thinking" is widely regarded as important, but difficult to define. This article provides an historical perspective by describing how "critical thinking" emerged as an object of psychological study, how the forms it took were shaped by practical and social concerns, and how these related to "critical thinking" as something that results in certain conclusions, rather than as a process of coming to conclusions. "Critical thinking" became a scientific object when psychologists attempted to measure it. The original measurement treated "critical thinking" as both an ability and an attitude. It measured logical abilities, and consistency and extremity of views, but it avoided making assumptions about the correctness of specific real-world beliefs. The correctness of such beliefs was, as problems with other related tests showed, open to dispute. Subsequent tests increasingly focused on logical abilities, and attempted to minimize further the relevance of what people believed about the real world, though they continued to depend on there being correct answers to test items, which privileged the outcome over the process. While "critical thinking" was primarily the domain of philosophers, there was renewed psychological interest in the topic in the 1980s, which increasingly presented "critical thinking" as incompatible with certain real-world ("unscientific") beliefs. Such a view more explicitly privileged the outcome over the process. It is argued that a more reflective approach, though it may be more difficult to measure, is essential if we wish to understand not only what critical thinking has been, but also what it is now.
doi_str_mv 10.1037/hop0000145
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2379018308</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2379055883</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a387t-2ecbc5aec459774c94f136c8f07a053fb9a7d34916657621da21a96d8872d0c03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0E1LwzAYB_AgipvTix9AyjwoSvVJ0zTJUYpvMPBSzyFLU9fZNTVpD_v2ZnQqmENe4Mf_CX-EzjHcYSDsfmU7CAun9ABNsSAihgzDYbiDIHFKMUzQiffrYHh4HKMJSbDAkMEUXRUrE-W29b0bdF_bNrJVNM9d3ddaNVGxqtvPuv2Yn6KjSjXenO3PGXp_eizyl3jx9vyaPyxiRTjr48TopabK6JQKxlIt0gqTTPMKmAJKqqVQrCSpwFlGWZbgUiVYiazknCUlaCAzdD3mds5-Dcb3clN7bZpGtcYOXiaECcCcAA_08h9d28G14XejopRzEtTNqLSz3jtTyc7VG-W2EoPc1Sf_6gv4Yh85LDem_KU_fQVwOwLVKdn5rVYuFNUYrwfnTNvvwsJ0ScKWkG9GX3aL</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2379055883</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Construction of "Critical Thinking": Between How We Think and What We Believe</title><source>APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Lamont, Peter</creator><contributor>Weidman, Nadine</contributor><creatorcontrib>Lamont, Peter ; Weidman, Nadine</creatorcontrib><description>"Critical thinking" is widely regarded as important, but difficult to define. This article provides an historical perspective by describing how "critical thinking" emerged as an object of psychological study, how the forms it took were shaped by practical and social concerns, and how these related to "critical thinking" as something that results in certain conclusions, rather than as a process of coming to conclusions. "Critical thinking" became a scientific object when psychologists attempted to measure it. The original measurement treated "critical thinking" as both an ability and an attitude. It measured logical abilities, and consistency and extremity of views, but it avoided making assumptions about the correctness of specific real-world beliefs. The correctness of such beliefs was, as problems with other related tests showed, open to dispute. Subsequent tests increasingly focused on logical abilities, and attempted to minimize further the relevance of what people believed about the real world, though they continued to depend on there being correct answers to test items, which privileged the outcome over the process. While "critical thinking" was primarily the domain of philosophers, there was renewed psychological interest in the topic in the 1980s, which increasingly presented "critical thinking" as incompatible with certain real-world ("unscientific") beliefs. Such a view more explicitly privileged the outcome over the process. It is argued that a more reflective approach, though it may be more difficult to measure, is essential if we wish to understand not only what critical thinking has been, but also what it is now.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1093-4510</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-0610</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/hop0000145</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32191060</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Attitude Measures ; Critical Thinking ; History of medicine and histology ; Human ; Measurement ; Philosophers ; Psychologists ; Reflectiveness ; Test Items ; Wishful Thinking</subject><ispartof>History of psychology, 2020-08, Vol.23 (3), p.232-251</ispartof><rights>2020 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2020, American Psychological Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a387t-2ecbc5aec459774c94f136c8f07a053fb9a7d34916657621da21a96d8872d0c03</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32191060$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Weidman, Nadine</contributor><creatorcontrib>Lamont, Peter</creatorcontrib><title>The Construction of "Critical Thinking": Between How We Think and What We Believe</title><title>History of psychology</title><addtitle>Hist Psychol</addtitle><description>"Critical thinking" is widely regarded as important, but difficult to define. This article provides an historical perspective by describing how "critical thinking" emerged as an object of psychological study, how the forms it took were shaped by practical and social concerns, and how these related to "critical thinking" as something that results in certain conclusions, rather than as a process of coming to conclusions. "Critical thinking" became a scientific object when psychologists attempted to measure it. The original measurement treated "critical thinking" as both an ability and an attitude. It measured logical abilities, and consistency and extremity of views, but it avoided making assumptions about the correctness of specific real-world beliefs. The correctness of such beliefs was, as problems with other related tests showed, open to dispute. Subsequent tests increasingly focused on logical abilities, and attempted to minimize further the relevance of what people believed about the real world, though they continued to depend on there being correct answers to test items, which privileged the outcome over the process. While "critical thinking" was primarily the domain of philosophers, there was renewed psychological interest in the topic in the 1980s, which increasingly presented "critical thinking" as incompatible with certain real-world ("unscientific") beliefs. Such a view more explicitly privileged the outcome over the process. It is argued that a more reflective approach, though it may be more difficult to measure, is essential if we wish to understand not only what critical thinking has been, but also what it is now.</description><subject>Attitude Measures</subject><subject>Critical Thinking</subject><subject>History of medicine and histology</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Philosophers</subject><subject>Psychologists</subject><subject>Reflectiveness</subject><subject>Test Items</subject><subject>Wishful Thinking</subject><issn>1093-4510</issn><issn>1939-0610</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpd0E1LwzAYB_AgipvTix9AyjwoSvVJ0zTJUYpvMPBSzyFLU9fZNTVpD_v2ZnQqmENe4Mf_CX-EzjHcYSDsfmU7CAun9ABNsSAihgzDYbiDIHFKMUzQiffrYHh4HKMJSbDAkMEUXRUrE-W29b0bdF_bNrJVNM9d3ddaNVGxqtvPuv2Yn6KjSjXenO3PGXp_eizyl3jx9vyaPyxiRTjr48TopabK6JQKxlIt0gqTTPMKmAJKqqVQrCSpwFlGWZbgUiVYiazknCUlaCAzdD3mds5-Dcb3clN7bZpGtcYOXiaECcCcAA_08h9d28G14XejopRzEtTNqLSz3jtTyc7VG-W2EoPc1Sf_6gv4Yh85LDem_KU_fQVwOwLVKdn5rVYuFNUYrwfnTNvvwsJ0ScKWkG9GX3aL</recordid><startdate>20200801</startdate><enddate>20200801</enddate><creator>Lamont, Peter</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><general>Educational Publishing Foundation</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200801</creationdate><title>The Construction of "Critical Thinking"</title><author>Lamont, Peter</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a387t-2ecbc5aec459774c94f136c8f07a053fb9a7d34916657621da21a96d8872d0c03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Attitude Measures</topic><topic>Critical Thinking</topic><topic>History of medicine and histology</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Philosophers</topic><topic>Psychologists</topic><topic>Reflectiveness</topic><topic>Test Items</topic><topic>Wishful Thinking</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lamont, Peter</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>History of psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lamont, Peter</au><au>Weidman, Nadine</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Construction of "Critical Thinking": Between How We Think and What We Believe</atitle><jtitle>History of psychology</jtitle><addtitle>Hist Psychol</addtitle><date>2020-08-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>232</spage><epage>251</epage><pages>232-251</pages><issn>1093-4510</issn><eissn>1939-0610</eissn><abstract>"Critical thinking" is widely regarded as important, but difficult to define. This article provides an historical perspective by describing how "critical thinking" emerged as an object of psychological study, how the forms it took were shaped by practical and social concerns, and how these related to "critical thinking" as something that results in certain conclusions, rather than as a process of coming to conclusions. "Critical thinking" became a scientific object when psychologists attempted to measure it. The original measurement treated "critical thinking" as both an ability and an attitude. It measured logical abilities, and consistency and extremity of views, but it avoided making assumptions about the correctness of specific real-world beliefs. The correctness of such beliefs was, as problems with other related tests showed, open to dispute. Subsequent tests increasingly focused on logical abilities, and attempted to minimize further the relevance of what people believed about the real world, though they continued to depend on there being correct answers to test items, which privileged the outcome over the process. While "critical thinking" was primarily the domain of philosophers, there was renewed psychological interest in the topic in the 1980s, which increasingly presented "critical thinking" as incompatible with certain real-world ("unscientific") beliefs. Such a view more explicitly privileged the outcome over the process. It is argued that a more reflective approach, though it may be more difficult to measure, is essential if we wish to understand not only what critical thinking has been, but also what it is now.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>32191060</pmid><doi>10.1037/hop0000145</doi><tpages>20</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1093-4510
ispartof History of psychology, 2020-08, Vol.23 (3), p.232-251
issn 1093-4510
1939-0610
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2379018308
source APA PsycARTICLES
subjects Attitude Measures
Critical Thinking
History of medicine and histology
Human
Measurement
Philosophers
Psychologists
Reflectiveness
Test Items
Wishful Thinking
title The Construction of "Critical Thinking": Between How We Think and What We Believe
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T00%3A01%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Construction%20of%20%22Critical%20Thinking%22:%20Between%20How%20We%20Think%20and%20What%20We%20Believe&rft.jtitle=History%20of%20psychology&rft.au=Lamont,%20Peter&rft.date=2020-08-01&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=232&rft.epage=251&rft.pages=232-251&rft.issn=1093-4510&rft.eissn=1939-0610&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/hop0000145&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2379055883%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2379055883&rft_id=info:pmid/32191060&rfr_iscdi=true