logical reasoning problem solving and decision making

• Onsite training

3,000,000+ delegates

15,000+ clients

1,000+ locations

• KnowledgePass
• Log a ticket

01344203999 Available 24/7

What is Logical Thinking? A Beginner's Guide 

What is Logical Thinking? A Beginner's Guide: Discover the essence of Logical Thinking in this detailed guide. Unveil its importance in problem-solving, decision-making, and analytical reasoning. Learn techniques to develop this crucial skill, understand common logical fallacies, and explore how Logical Thinking can be applied effectively in various aspects of life and work.

Exclusive 40% OFF

Training Outcomes Within Your Budget!

We ensure quality, budget-alignment, and timely delivery by our expert instructors.

Share this Resource

• Strategic Planning and Thinking Course
• Leadership Skills Training
• Practical Thinking Course
• Attention Management Training
• Introduction to Supervising a Team

Whether you're solving a complex problem, engaging in critical discussions, or just navigating your daily routines, Logical Thinking plays a pivotal role in ensuring that your thoughts and actions are rational and coherent. In this blog, we will discuss What is Logical Thinking in detail, its importance, and its components. You'll also learn about the various ways that make up Logical Thinking and how to develop this essential skill.    

Table of contents  

1)  Understanding Logical Thinking 

2)  Components of Logical Thinking 

3)  Why is Logical Thinking important? 

4)  What are Logical Thinking skills?   

5)  Developing Logical Thinking skills 

6)  Exercises to improve Logical Thinking 

7)  Conclusion 

Understanding Logical Thinking  

Logical Thinking is the capacity to employ reason and systematic processes to analyse information, establish connections, and reach well-founded conclusions. It entails a structured and rational approach to problem-solving and decision-making. 

For example, consider a scenario where you're presented with a puzzle. To logically think through it, you would assess the provided clues, break down the problem into smaller elements, and systematically find potential solutions. You'd avoid hasty or emotion-driven judgments and rely on evidence and sound reasoning to arrive at the correct answer, showcasing the essence of Logical Thinking in problem-solving.

C omponents of Logical Thinking  

After knowing What is Logic al Thinking, let’s move on to the key components of Logical Thinking. Logical Thinking comprises several key components that work together to facilitate reasoned analysis and problem-solving. Here are the following key components of Logical Thinking.  

1)  Deductive reasoning : Deductive reasoning involves drawing specific conclusions from general premises or facts. It's like moving from a broad idea to a more specific conclusion. For example, if all humans are mortal, and Socrates is a human, then you can logically conclude that Socrates is mortal. 

2)   I nductive reasoning : Inductive reasoning is the procedure of forming general conclusions based on specific observations or evidence. It's the opposite of deductive reasoning. For instance, if you observe that the sun has risen every day, you might inductively reason that the sun will rise again tomorrow.  

3)  Causal inference : Causal inference is the ability to identify cause-and-effect relationships between events, actions, or variables. It involves understanding that one event or action can lead to another event as a consequence . In essence, it's the recognition that a specific cause produces a particular effect.  

4)  Analogy : Analogical reasoning or analogy involves drawing similarities and making comparisons between two or more situations, objects, or concepts. It's a way of applying knowledge or understanding from one context to another by recognising shared features or characteristics. Analogical reasoning is powerful because it allows you to transfer what you know in one domain to another, making it easier to comprehend and solve new problems. 

Why is Logical Thinking Important?  

1)  Effective problem-solving : Logical Thinking equips individuals with the ability to dissect complex problems, identify patterns, and devise systematic solutions. Whether it's troubleshooting a technical issue or resolving personal dilemmas, Logical Thinking ensures that problems are approached with a structured and efficient methodology. 

2)  Enhanced decision-making : Making sound decisions is a cornerstone of success in both personal and professional life. Logical Thinking allows individuals to evaluate options, consider consequences, and choose the most rational course of action. This is particularly critical in high-stakes situations. 

3)   Critical thinking : Logical Thinking is at the core of critical thinking. It encourages individuals to question assumptions, seek evidence, and challenge existing beliefs. This capacity for critical analysis fosters a deeper understanding of complex issues and prevents the acceptance of unfounded or biased information. 

4)  Effective communication : In discussions and debates, Logical Thinking helps individuals express their ideas and viewpoints clearly and persuasively. It enables individuals to construct well-structured arguments, provide evidence, and counter opposing views, fostering productive and respectful communication. 

5)  Academic and professional success : Logical Thinking is highly valued in educational settings and the workplace. It allows students to excel academically by tackling challenging coursework and assignments. In the professional world, it's a key attribute for problem-solving, innovation, and career advancement. 

6)  Avoiding Logical fallacies : Logical Thinking equips individuals with the ability to recognise and avoid common logical fallacies such as circular reasoning, straw man arguments, and ad hominem attacks. This safeguards them from being deceived or manipulated by flawed or deceptive arguments. 

Supercharge Your Sales with our Sales Negotiation Skills Course . Check out now and close deals like a pro!  

What are Logical Thinking skills ?  

Logical Thinking skills are cognitive abilities that allow individuals to process information, analyse it systematically, and draw reasonable conclusions. These skills enable people to approach problems, decisions, and challenges with a structured and rational mindset .  

Developing Logical Thinking skills  

Developing strong Logical Thinking skills is essential for improved problem-solving, decision-making, and critical analysis. Here are some key strategies to help you enhance your Logical Thinking abilities.   

1)  Practice critical thinking : Engage in activities that require critical thinking, such as analysing articles, solving puzzles, or evaluating arguments. Regular practice sharpens your analytical skills.  

2)  L earn formal logic : Study the principles of formal logic, which provide a structured approach to reasoning. This can include topics like syllogisms, propositional logic, and predicate logic. 

3)  I dentify assumptions : When faced with a problem or argument, be aware of underlying assumptions. Question these assumptions and consider how they impact the overall reasoning. 

4)  B reak down problems : When tackling complex problems, break them down into smaller, more manageable components. Analyse each component individually before looking at the problem as a whole . 

5)   Seek diverse perspectives : Engage in discussions and debates with people who hold different viewpoints. This helps you consider a range of perspectives and strengthens your ability to construct and counter -arguments. 

6)  Read widely : Reading a variety of materials, from academic articles to literature, exposes you to different modes of reasoning and argumentation. This broadens your thinking and enhances your ability to connect ideas.  

7)  Solve puzzles and brain teasers : Engaging in puzzles, riddles, and brain teasers challenges your mind and encourages creative problem-solving. It's an enjoyable way to exercise your Logical Thinking. 

8)  Develop mathematical skills : Mathematics is a discipline that heavily relies on Logical Thinking. Learning and practising mathematical concepts and problem-solving techniques can significantly boost your logical reasoning skills. 

Unlock Your sales potential with our Soft Skills Training For Sales Professionals . Elevate your sales game today and boost your success – register now!  

Exercises to improve Logical Thinking  

Enhancing your Logical Thinking skills is achievable through various exercises and activities. Here are some practical exercises to help you strengthen your Logical Thinking abilities:  

1)   Sudoku puzzles : Solve Sudoku puzzles, as they require logical deduction to fill in the missing numbers.  

2)   Crossword puzzles : Crosswords challenge your vocabulary and logical word placement.  

3)  Brain teasers : Engage in brain teasers and riddles that encourage creative problem-solving.  

4)  Chess and board games : Play strategic board games like chess, checkers, or strategic video games that require forward thinking and planning.  

5)  Logical argumentation : Engage in debates or discussions where you must construct reasoned arguments and counter opposing viewpoints.  

6)  Coding and programming : Learn coding and programming languages which promote structured and Logical Thinking in problem-solving. 

7)  Mathematical challenges : Solve mathematical problems and equations, as mathematics is inherently logical.  

8)   Mensa puzzles : Work on Mensa puzzles, which are designed to test and strengthen Logical Thinking skills. 

9)  Logic games : Play logic-based games like Minesweeper or Mastermind.  

10)   Logical analogy exercises : Practice solving analogy exercises, which test your ability to find relationships between words or concepts.  

11)  Visual logic puzzles : Tackle visual logic puzzles like nonograms or logic grid puzzles. 

12)  Critical reading : Read books, articles, or academic papers and critically analyse the arguments and evidence presented. 

13)  Coding challenges : Participate in online coding challenges and competitions that require logical problem-solving in coding. 

14)  Scientific method : Conduct simple science experiments or projects, applying the scientific method to develop hypotheses and draw logical conclusions.  

15)   Poker or card games : Play card games like poker, where you must strategi se and make logical decisions based on probabilities and information. 

16)  Analyse real-world situations : Analyse real-world situations or news stories, evaluating the information, causes, and potential consequences. 

These exercises will help you practice and enhance your Logical Thinking skills in a fun and engaging way, making them an integral part of your problem-solving and decision-making toolkit. 

Take your sales to the next level! Elevate your skills with our Sales Training . Join us today!  

Concluson  

In this blog, we have discussed What is Logical Thinking, its importance, its components and ways to improve this skill. When you learn how to think logically, you start gathering each and every information as much as possible, analyse the facts, and methodically choose the best way to go forward with your decision. Logical Thinking is considered the most important tool in brainstorming ideas, assessing issues and finding solutions. 

Master the art of effective meetings. Elevate your Meeting Skills for success. Get started now!  

Frequently Asked Questions

Upcoming business skills resources batches & dates.

Fri 23rd Aug 2024

Fri 27th Sep 2024

Fri 25th Oct 2024

Fri 22nd Nov 2024

Fri 27th Dec 2024

Fri 10th Jan 2025

Fri 14th Mar 2025

Fri 9th May 2025

Fri 11th Jul 2025

Fri 12th Sep 2025

Fri 14th Nov 2025

Get A Quote

WHO WILL BE FUNDING THE COURSE?

My employer

By submitting your details you agree to be contacted in order to respond to your enquiry

• Business Analysis
• Lean Six Sigma Certification

Share this course

Our biggest summer sale.

We cannot process your enquiry without contacting you, please tick to confirm your consent to us for contacting you about your enquiry.

By submitting your details you agree to be contacted in order to respond to your enquiry.

We may not have the course you’re looking for. If you enquire or give us a call on 01344203999 and speak to our training experts, we may still be able to help with your training requirements.

Or select from our popular topics

• ITIL® Certification
• Scrum Certification
• Change Management Certification
• Business Analysis Courses
• Microsoft Azure Certification
• Microsoft Excel Courses
• Microsoft Project
• Explore more courses

Press esc to close

Fill out your  contact details  below and our training experts will be in touch.

Fill out your   contact details   below

Thank you for your enquiry!

One of our training experts will be in touch shortly to go over your training requirements.

Back to Course Information

Fill out your contact details below so we can get in touch with you regarding your training requirements.

* WHO WILL BE FUNDING THE COURSE?

Preferred Contact Method

No preference

Back to course information

Fill out your  training details  below

Fill out your training details below so we have a better idea of what your training requirements are.

HOW MANY DELEGATES NEED TRAINING?

HOW DO YOU WANT THE COURSE DELIVERED?

Online Instructor-led

Online Self-paced

WHEN WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE THIS COURSE?

Next 2 - 4 months

WHAT IS YOUR REASON FOR ENQUIRING?

Looking for some information

Looking for a discount

I want to book but have questions

One of our training experts will be in touch shortly to go overy your training requirements.

Your privacy & cookies!

Like many websites we use cookies. We care about your data and experience, so to give you the best possible experience using our site, we store a very limited amount of your data. Continuing to use this site or clicking “Accept & close” means that you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more about our privacy policy and cookie policy cookie policy .

We use cookies that are essential for our site to work. Please visit our cookie policy for more information. To accept all cookies click 'Accept & close'.

More From Forbes

The power of critical thinking: enhancing decision-making and problem-solving.

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

Dr. Ron Young, Founder and Board Chair of Trove, Inc . Ron specializes in psychological coaching & transition consulting.

Critical thinking is a fundamental cognitive process that enables individuals to objectively analyze, evaluate and interpret information to make informed decisions and solve complex problems. It involves employing reasoning and logic, questioning assumptions, recognizing biases and considering multiple perspectives. It requires self-monitored, self-directed, self-disciplined and self-corrective thinking. Critical thinking is essential in a world of information and diverse opinions. It helps us see things more clearly and avoid being misled or deceived.

Importance Of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is crucial in various aspects of life, including education, professional endeavors and personal decision-making. In academic settings, it allows students to comprehend and engage with complex subjects while discerning valid arguments from fallacious ones. In the workplace, critical thinking empowers individuals to analyze problems, devise creative solutions and make informed judgments. In everyday life, it helps individuals navigate an increasingly complex world by making sound choices and avoiding cognitive biases. It is our primary defense against misleading or "spun" information.

Benefits Of Critical Thinking

There are many benefits of critical thinking.

Enhanced Decision-Making

Critical thinking helps us trust our gut feelings and think independently. It enables individuals to make logical and well-reasoned decisions based on evidence and objective analysis. It encourages the consideration of all relevant factors and the evaluation of potential consequences, leading to more informed choices.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024, effective problem-solving.

Critical thinking facilitates the identification of underlying issues, the generation of innovative solutions and the evaluation of their viability. It encourages individuals to approach problems from different angles and consider various perspectives, increasing the likelihood of finding effective resolutions.

Reduction Of Cognitive Biases

Critical thinking supports self-reflection. It helps individuals recognize and challenge cognitive biases that hinder clear judgment. Individuals can better overcome confirmation bias, groupthink and the availability heuristic (judging the likelihood of an event based on recall of similar events) by understanding and questioning their assumptions and beliefs. It requires a commitment to overcoming the tendency to see the world from a narrow, self-centered perspective.

Enhanced Communication Skills

Practicing critical thinking fosters effective communication by enabling individuals to articulate and defend their ideas with logical reasoning and evidence. It encourages active listening, empathy and the ability to evaluate and respond to counterarguments, leading to more constructive and meaningful discussions.

More United Citizens

Using critical thinking enables citizens to see the whole picture by better protecting against biases and propaganda. It reduces partisanship and a “we/they” mentality.

Cultivating Critical Thinking

How can you cultivate critical thinking?

Be curious and inquisitive.

Foster a mindset of curiosity and an eagerness to explore and understand the world. Talk with people from different backgrounds, cultures, political affiliations or religions. Ask probing questions, seek new perspectives and engage in active learning. Learn from people who hold different viewpoints.

Develop analytical skills.

You can do this by learning to break down complex problems into manageable parts, recognize patterns and identify cause-and-effect relationships. Remember, not all opinions are equal, and some are flat-out wrong.

Evaluate information.

Develop skills to evaluate the credibility and reliability of information sources. Be aware of bias, assess evidence and differentiate between fact and opinion. Guard against "swallowing information whole" or believing that "If it's on the internet, it must be true."

Practice reflection.

Engage in reflective thinking by evaluating your thoughts, beliefs and assumptions. Consider alternative viewpoints, and be open to changing your perspective based on new information.

Embrace intellectual humility.

Be humble and aware that you could be wrong. Knowledge is an ongoing process; be open to admitting mistakes or gaps in understanding. Embrace a growth mindset that values continuous learning and improvement.

Develop your sense of belonging.

The third tier in Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a sense of belonging. One aspect of belonging is connection. All humans have this need. Without critical thinking, we are vulnerable to making our group's beliefs our own rather than evaluating which beliefs align with our values.

Align your view and your values.

Rather than defining yourself by a particular view, ask whether a different view aligns with your values. When we identify ourselves by the beliefs of our reference group (religious, political, etc.), we look for ways to justify our ideas. In doing so, we deny ourselves access to critical thinking.

Evidence Of Critical Thinking

When you practice critical thinking, it will be evident in several areas:

Evidence-Based Decision-Making

Rely on facts rather than emotions or personal biases. Follow five distinct steps, called the five A’s : ask, access, appraise, apply and audit. Gather relevant information, evaluate the evidence objectively and consider different perspectives before making decisions. Then reevaluate them as you learn new information.

Problem-Solving

Approach problems systematically by defining the issue, gathering relevant data, brainstorming potential solutions and evaluating feasibility. Engage in collaborative problem-solving to benefit from diverse perspectives. Open-mindedly consider alternative systems of thought. Recognize assumptions, implications and practical consequences, then adjust as needed.

Effective Communication

Solve complex problems by clearly and effectively communicating with others. Utilize critical thinking skills to articulate your thoughts clearly, listen actively and engage in respectful and constructive dialogue. Challenge ideas through logical arguments and evidence rather than resorting to personal attacks. Respecting people with different views does not mean you agree with their opinions. Evaluate, formulate and communicate questions with clarity and precision.

Continuous Learning

Apply critical thinking to ongoing personal and professional development. Seek opportunities for further education, engage in intellectual discourse and actively challenge your beliefs and assumptions.

Using Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a powerful cognitive tool that empowers individuals to navigate the complexities of the modern world. Critical thinking enhances decision-making, problem-solving and communication abilities by fostering logical reasoning, analytical skills and an open mindset. It enables individuals to overcome cognitive biases, evaluate information effectively and make informed choices. Cultivating and applying critical thinking skills benefits individuals and contributes to a more thoughtful and rational society. Embracing critical thinking is essential for fostering intellectual growth, facilitating progress and addressing the challenges of the 21st century.

Forbes Coaches Council is an invitation-only community for leading business and career coaches. Do I qualify?

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

• Get started with computers
• Learn Microsoft Office
• Apply for a job
• Improve my work skills
• Design nice-looking docs
• Getting Started
• Smartphones & Tablets
• Typing Tutorial
• Online Learning
• Basic Internet Skills
• Online Safety
• Social Media
• Zoom Basics
• Google Docs
• Google Sheets
• Career Planning
• Resume Writing
• Cover Letters
• Job Search and Networking
• Business Communication
• Entrepreneurship 101
• Careers without College
• Job Hunt for Today
• 3D Printing
• Freelancing 101
• Personal Finance
• Sharing Economy
• Decision-Making
• Graphic Design
• Photography
• Image Editing
• Learning WordPress
• Language Learning
• Critical Thinking
• For Educators
• Translations
• Staff Picks
• English expand_more expand_less

Critical Thinking and Decision-Making  - What is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking and decision-making  -, what is critical thinking, critical thinking and decision-making what is critical thinking.

Critical Thinking and Decision-Making: What is Critical Thinking?

Lesson 1: what is critical thinking, what is critical thinking.

Critical thinking is a term that gets thrown around a lot. You've probably heard it used often throughout the years whether it was in school, at work, or in everyday conversation. But when you stop to think about it, what exactly is critical thinking and how do you do it ?

Watch the video below to learn more about critical thinking.

Simply put, critical thinking is the act of deliberately analyzing information so that you can make better judgements and decisions . It involves using things like logic, reasoning, and creativity, to draw conclusions and generally understand things better.

This may sound like a pretty broad definition, and that's because critical thinking is a broad skill that can be applied to so many different situations. You can use it to prepare for a job interview, manage your time better, make decisions about purchasing things, and so much more.

The process

As humans, we are constantly thinking . It's something we can't turn off. But not all of it is critical thinking. No one thinks critically 100% of the time... that would be pretty exhausting! Instead, it's an intentional process , something that we consciously use when we're presented with difficult problems or important decisions.

Improving your critical thinking

In order to become a better critical thinker, it's important to ask questions when you're presented with a problem or decision, before jumping to any conclusions. You can start with simple ones like What do I currently know? and How do I know this? These can help to give you a better idea of what you're working with and, in some cases, simplify more complex issues.  

Real-world applications

Let's take a look at how we can use critical thinking to evaluate online information . Say a friend of yours posts a news article on social media and you're drawn to its headline. If you were to use your everyday automatic thinking, you might accept it as fact and move on. But if you were thinking critically, you would first analyze the available information and ask some questions :

• What's the source of this article?
• Is the headline potentially misleading?
• What are my friend's general beliefs?
• Do their beliefs inform why they might have shared this?

After analyzing all of this information, you can draw a conclusion about whether or not you think the article is trustworthy.

Critical thinking has a wide range of real-world applications . It can help you to make better decisions, become more hireable, and generally better understand the world around you.

/en/problem-solving-and-decision-making/why-is-it-so-hard-to-make-decisions/content/

What is Critical thinking? 

There are many definitions of Critical thinking. Some of them very long and comprehensive in coverage of everything critical thinking includes, while others are short definitions but  very succintly summarize what Critical thinking is and what leads to becoming a critical thinker. Here are three of them.

1. "Critical thinking is the process of making clear reasoned judgments" ...Beyer, 1995

2. “Critical thinking is the ability to look at a situation and clearly understand it from multiple perspectives while separating facts from opinions, myths, prejudices, hunches (intuition) and assumptions”….. Pearsons

3. "It involves the ability to questions assumptions etc. in order to make logical decisions based on consideration of the options and evaluation of all facts". … Pearsons

What do you need to learn to become a critical thinker? 

All of us know critical thinking by its absence or critical thinking traits that we see in a person. When someone makes a foolish decision or applies the first solution that comes to their mind in problem-solving, we know that critical thinking has not been exercised. But critical thinking itself has not been defined for  most of us -either in our education or later in the workplace.

Maybe we see Critical thinking as applied common sense. Critical thinking may also be defined as the process of making clear reasoned judgments about any claim, issue, or solution to a problem. Some also define it as the process of determining whether a claim is true or false. There are more complex definitions such as Critical thinking is skilled and active participation and evaluation of observations and communications, information, and argumentation (Fisher and Scriven). 

None of the academic definitions manage to communicate what Critical thinking is, its elements, and how it could be useful in the workplace, education, or life. To better understand what Critical thinking is, it is useful to look at the actual elements that go into Critical thinking, and see how they apply in various situations at work and in life.

Critical thinking is the process of making clear reasoned judgements. 

Elements of critical thinking

There are three elements that aid in critical thinking, and another three that obstruct critical thinking.

Logical reasoning: You would not expect an accountant to draw up a balance sheet without the knowledge of the debit/credit system. However, we are expected to be absolutely logical in our reasoning about problems and decision making. The absence of a formal introduction to logical reasoning results in even the most intelligent people miss a few steps in their reasoning. There are three main types of reasoning: Deductive reasoning, Inductive reasoning, and Causal reasoning. Of these, Inductive reasoning and Causal reasoning as the most commonly applied systems of logic in the workplace, education, and our daily life.

Clear thinking and communication: Discussions often end up at cross-purposes and pointless due to a lack of clear communication, and this lack of clarity is often due to a lack of definition of terms, ambiguity, and deliberated or unintended use of vague language.

Credibility: We are often required to evaluate suppliers and people to decide whether to work with them or not. We also rely on the opinions of others to make a varying range of decisions for the business, in education and life. How do we know how much credibility we should attach to the advice we get from these people, or how do we determine whether a supplier will be dependable or not? There are some simple principles that we can use to help us in our process of making judgments about credibility.

Elements that obstruct 

  Rhetoric: In the context of Critical thinking, rhetoric is the use of language to evoke emotions in us and persuade us into belief or action. Words have the power to express, elicit images, and evoke emotions in us. They have tremendous persuasive power or what can be called rhetoric force or emotive force. When a leader calls on soldiers to sacrifice lives for the sake of their country, or when citizens are passionately asked to join a protest to protect freedom, these are appeals to our emotions and not our logical reasoning. Rhetorical language and devices can cloud our ability to reason logically.  

Cognitive biases: A cognitive bias is a systematic error in our thinking and judgment and can be due to a number of different reasons such as faulty memory or perception and processing errors of our brains. There could be a number of other reasons, and scientists are still researching the causes of these cognitive biases. A cognitive bias is different from Fallacies in the sense that these errors are based on our incorrect perception and processing of information by our brains, whereas fallacies are simple errors in reasoning. Knowledge of fallacies can help us avoid reasoning errors, but cognitive biases may arise even if we have knowledge of these biases. Often the only way to mitigate errors due to cognitive biases is to rely on data or seek third party opinions.

Critical Thinking Academy is founded with an intention of disseminating Critical thinking skills to executives…

How to Think Critically: Strategies for Effective Decision-Making

Annie Walls

Critical thinking is an essential skill that allows individuals to analyze information, evaluate arguments, and make informed decisions. By employing critical thinking strategies, individuals can overcome biases, consider multiple perspectives, and arrive at well-reasoned judgments. In this article, we will explore the concept of critical thinking, discuss strategies for developing critical thinking skills, examine how critical thinking can be applied in decision-making, and provide tips for improving critical thinking abilities. By the end, readers will have a better understanding of how to think critically and make effective decisions.

Key Takeaways

• Critical thinking involves analyzing information, evaluating arguments, and making informed decisions.
• Developing critical thinking skills requires practicing analytical thinking, logical reasoning, problem-solving, and creativity.
• Applying critical thinking in decision-making involves gathering and evaluating information, identifying assumptions and biases, considering multiple perspectives, and making informed judgments.
• Cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias and availability bias, can hinder critical thinking and decision-making.
• Improving critical thinking skills can be achieved through reflection, seeking feedback, engaging in debates, and continual learning.

Understanding Critical Thinking

Defining critical thinking.

Critical thinking is a vital skill that allows individuals to analyze and evaluate information objectively, enabling them to make informed decisions. It involves the ability to question assumptions, consider multiple perspectives, and identify biases. By developing critical thinking skills , individuals can enhance their problem-solving abilities and become more effective decision-makers.

Importance of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a crucial skill that enables individuals to analyze and evaluate information objectively. It helps in making informed decisions, solving complex problems, and avoiding biases and fallacies. Developing critical thinking skills is essential in today's fast-paced and information-driven world.

Characteristics of a Critical Thinker

A critical thinker possesses several key characteristics that set them apart from others. They have the ability to think independently and objectively, questioning assumptions and seeking evidence to support their conclusions. Curiosity is a fundamental trait of a critical thinker, as they are constantly seeking new information and perspectives. They are also open-minded, willing to consider different viewpoints and evaluate them based on their merits. Additionally, critical thinkers are analytical and have strong problem-solving skills, allowing them to break down complex issues into manageable parts and develop effective solutions.

Developing Critical Thinking Skills

Analytical thinking.

Analytical thinking is a crucial skill for critical thinkers. It involves breaking down complex problems into smaller components and examining them systematically. By analyzing data, facts, and evidence, individuals can gain a deeper understanding of the issue at hand. Analytical thinking allows for objective evaluation and logical reasoning, enabling individuals to make informed decisions.

One effective way to present structured, quantitative data is through a Markdown table. Tables can provide a clear and concise overview of information, making it easier to identify patterns and trends. When using a table, it is important to ensure that the formatting is correct and the data is presented in a succinct manner.

In addition to tables, bulleted or numbered lists can be used to present less structured content. Lists are useful for outlining steps, qualitative points, or a series of related items. They provide a clear and organized format that is easy to follow and understand.

Remember, when analyzing data and information, it is important to remain objective and consider all perspectives. Avoid biases and assumptions that may cloud your judgment.

Improving analytical thinking skills requires practice and continual learning. By regularly engaging in analytical exercises and seeking feedback, individuals can enhance their ability to think critically and make sound decisions.

Logical Reasoning

Logical reasoning is a crucial aspect of critical thinking. It involves the ability to analyze and evaluate arguments based on their logical structure and validity. Sound reasoning allows us to make rational decisions and draw accurate conclusions. Here are some key points to consider when engaging in logical reasoning:

• Identify the premises and conclusions of an argument
• Evaluate the strength of the evidence and reasoning
• Recognize logical fallacies

Remember, logical reasoning is not about personal opinions or emotions, but rather about using objective and rational thinking to arrive at well-founded judgments.

Tip: When evaluating arguments, it can be helpful to break them down into their components and assess each part individually.

Problem Solving

Problem solving is a crucial skill in critical thinking. It involves identifying and analyzing problems, generating potential solutions, and evaluating the effectiveness of those solutions. Creativity plays a significant role in problem solving as it allows for the generation of innovative and out-of-the-box solutions. When faced with a problem, it is important to approach it with an open mind and think creatively to find the best possible solution.

Here are some strategies that can be helpful in problem solving:

• Brainstorming : This technique involves generating a large number of ideas without judgment. It encourages free thinking and allows for the exploration of various possibilities.
• Mind mapping : Mind mapping is a visual technique that helps organize thoughts and ideas. It allows for the identification of relationships between different elements and can aid in finding creative solutions.

Remember, problem solving requires both analytical thinking and creativity. By combining these two skills, you can approach problems from different angles and find innovative solutions.

Creativity and Innovation

Creativity and innovation are essential components of critical thinking. Creativity involves generating new ideas, concepts, and solutions, while innovation is the process of implementing these ideas to create value. In the context of decision-making, creativity and innovation play a crucial role in finding unique and effective solutions to problems.

To foster creativity and innovation, individuals can employ various techniques and strategies. Some of these include:

• Brainstorming : This technique involves generating a large number of ideas without judgment or evaluation. It encourages free thinking and allows for the exploration of different possibilities.
• Mind Mapping : Mind mapping is a visual technique that helps organize thoughts and ideas. It allows for the connection of related concepts and the exploration of different relationships.
• Divergent Thinking : Divergent thinking involves thinking outside the box and considering multiple perspectives and possibilities.

By incorporating these techniques, individuals can enhance their creative and innovative thinking abilities, leading to more effective decision-making processes.

Applying Critical Thinking in Decision-Making

Gathering and evaluating information.

Gathering and evaluating information is a crucial step in the critical thinking process. It involves collecting relevant data and facts from reliable sources to inform decision-making. This step helps ensure that decisions are based on accurate and up-to-date information. To gather information effectively, it is important to:

Identifying Assumptions and Biases

When making decisions, it is important to be aware of the assumptions and biases that may influence our thinking. Assumptions are beliefs or ideas that we take for granted without questioning them. They can shape our perception of a situation and affect the choices we make. Biases, on the other hand, are preconceived notions or prejudices that can cloud our judgment. They can lead us to favor certain options or overlook important information.

To identify assumptions and biases, it is helpful to engage in critical thinking and reflection. We can ask ourselves questions like:

• What assumptions am I making about this situation?
• Are these assumptions based on evidence or personal beliefs?
• Am I favoring certain options because of my biases?

By challenging our assumptions and biases, we can make more informed decisions and avoid potential pitfalls. It is important to approach decision-making with an open mind and consider multiple perspectives. This can help us overcome biases and make choices that are based on rational thinking and evidence.

Considering Multiple Perspectives

When making decisions, it is important to consider multiple perspectives to gain a comprehensive understanding of the situation. Empathy plays a crucial role in this process, as it allows us to put ourselves in others' shoes and understand their viewpoints.

One way to incorporate multiple perspectives is by engaging in active listening . This involves giving full attention to the speaker, suspending judgment, and seeking to understand their point of view. By actively listening, we can gain valuable insights and challenge our own assumptions.

Another strategy is to seek diverse opinions . This can be done by involving individuals with different backgrounds, experiences, and expertise in the decision-making process. By doing so, we can uncover blind spots, identify potential risks, and generate innovative solutions.

It is also important to consider the long-term consequences of our decisions. This requires thinking beyond immediate outcomes and considering how different perspectives may impact various stakeholders over time.

Remember, considering multiple perspectives allows us to make more informed and well-rounded decisions.

Making Informed Judgments

Making informed judgments is a crucial aspect of critical thinking. It involves carefully evaluating the available information and considering multiple perspectives before reaching a conclusion. By gathering and analyzing relevant data, we can make more informed decisions that are based on evidence rather than assumptions or biases. It is important to be aware of our own biases and assumptions and actively seek out diverse viewpoints to ensure a well-rounded judgment. Additionally, considering the potential consequences of our decisions can help us make more ethical and responsible choices.

Overcoming Cognitive Biases

Confirmation bias.

Confirmation bias is a common cognitive bias that affects our decision-making process. It refers to the tendency to seek out and interpret information in a way that confirms our preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. This bias can lead us to ignore or dismiss evidence that contradicts our beliefs, and instead, focus on information that supports what we already think.

One way to overcome confirmation bias is to actively seek out information that challenges our beliefs. By exposing ourselves to different perspectives and considering alternative viewpoints, we can broaden our understanding and make more informed decisions.

Here are a few strategies to help overcome confirmation bias:

• Engage in critical thinking and question your own assumptions.
• Seek out diverse sources of information and consider multiple viewpoints.
• Challenge your own beliefs and be open to changing your mind.

Remember, overcoming confirmation bias is crucial for effective decision-making and critical thinking.

Availability Bias

Availability bias is a cognitive bias that occurs when people rely on immediate examples or information that comes to mind when making decisions or judgments. It is a mental shortcut that can lead to errors in thinking and decision-making. When people are influenced by availability bias, they tend to overestimate the likelihood of events or situations that are easily recalled or readily available in their memory. This bias can impact various aspects of life, including personal relationships, financial decisions, and even professional judgments.

Anchoring Bias

Anchoring bias is a cognitive bias that occurs when individuals rely too heavily on an initial piece of information (the anchor) when making decisions or judgments. This bias can lead to errors in judgment and decision-making, as it limits the consideration of other relevant information. For example, if a person is given a high price as the anchor for a product, they may perceive any subsequent lower price as a good deal, even if it is still relatively expensive.

To overcome anchoring bias, it is important to be aware of its influence and actively seek out additional information and perspectives. By considering a wider range of information and challenging the initial anchor, individuals can make more informed and unbiased decisions.

Here are some strategies to overcome anchoring bias:

• Question the initial anchor: Instead of accepting the initial information as the sole basis for decision-making, question its validity and consider alternative anchors.
• Seek diverse perspectives: Engage with different viewpoints and gather a variety of opinions to broaden your understanding of the situation.
• Use decision-making frameworks: Utilize structured decision-making frameworks that encourage a systematic evaluation of all relevant factors.

Remember, anchoring bias can limit your ability to make objective decisions. By actively challenging the initial anchor and considering a wider range of information, you can overcome this bias and make more informed choices.

Hindsight Bias

Hindsight bias is a cognitive bias that refers to the tendency of individuals to believe that an event was more predictable or foreseeable than it actually was, after it has occurred. This bias often leads people to overestimate their ability to have predicted an outcome or to believe that they would have made different decisions if they had known the outcome beforehand.

To overcome hindsight bias, it is important to recognize that the outcome of an event does not necessarily reflect the quality of the decision-making process. It is crucial to evaluate decisions based on the information available at the time and to avoid judging them solely based on the outcome.

Here are some strategies to help overcome hindsight bias:

• Practice self-reflection and analyze your decision-making process without the influence of hindsight.
• Seek feedback from others to gain different perspectives and insights.
• Consider alternative explanations and possibilities that could have influenced the outcome.
• Continually learn and update your knowledge and skills to make more informed decisions in the future.

Remember, overcoming hindsight bias requires conscious effort and a willingness to challenge your own assumptions and beliefs.

Improving Critical Thinking Skills

Practicing reflection.

Reflection is a crucial component of developing critical thinking skills. It involves taking the time to analyze and evaluate our thoughts, actions, and experiences. By reflecting on our decision-making processes, we can gain valuable insights and identify areas for improvement.

One effective way to practice reflection is through journaling. By writing down our thoughts and experiences, we can better understand our own biases, assumptions, and patterns of thinking. Journaling also allows us to track our progress and identify any recurring challenges or obstacles.

Additionally, engaging in meaningful conversations with others can provide different perspectives and challenge our own beliefs. By actively listening and considering alternative viewpoints, we can broaden our understanding and enhance our critical thinking abilities.

Remember, reflection is not a one-time activity but an ongoing practice. By regularly reflecting on our thoughts and actions, we can continue to refine our critical thinking skills and make more informed decisions.

Seeking Feedback

Seeking feedback is an essential part of developing critical thinking skills. By actively seeking input from others, we can gain valuable insights and different perspectives that can help us refine our ideas and improve our decision-making. Feedback can come from various sources, such as colleagues, mentors, or even customers. It is important to approach feedback with an open mind and a willingness to learn and grow. Receiving constructive criticism can be challenging, but it is an opportunity for personal and professional development. By incorporating feedback into our thought process, we can enhance our critical thinking abilities and make more informed judgments.

Engaging in Debates

Engaging in debates is a valuable way to enhance critical thinking skills and broaden your perspective. It allows you to challenge your own beliefs and consider alternative viewpoints. When engaging in debates, it is important to approach the discussion with an open mind and a willingness to listen to others. Active listening is key to understanding different perspectives and finding common ground.

To make the most out of debates, consider the following:

• Prepare : Research the topic beforehand to gather relevant information and evidence to support your arguments.
• Stay focused : Stick to the topic at hand and avoid personal attacks or getting off track.
• Respectful communication : Use respectful language and tone when expressing your opinions and engaging with others.

Remember, the goal of a debate is not necessarily to win, but to exchange ideas and gain a deeper understanding of the topic. By engaging in debates, you can sharpen your critical thinking skills and become a more effective decision-maker.

Continual Learning

Continual learning is a key aspect of developing critical thinking skills. It involves actively seeking out new knowledge and information, and continuously expanding one's understanding of various subjects. By engaging in continual learning, individuals can stay updated with the latest developments in their field and broaden their perspectives. This can be done through various methods such as reading books and articles, attending workshops and seminars, taking online courses, or participating in professional development programs. Embracing a growth mindset and being open to learning from different sources can greatly enhance one's critical thinking abilities.

Improving Critical Thinking Skills is essential in today's fast-paced and complex world. It allows us to analyze information, solve problems, and make informed decisions. Whether you're a student, professional, or entrepreneur, honing your critical thinking skills can greatly benefit your personal and professional life. By developing the ability to think critically, you can navigate through challenges, identify opportunities, and come up with innovative solutions. If you're looking to enhance your critical thinking skills, visit Keynote Speaker James Taylor's website. James Taylor is an internationally recognized leader in business creativity and innovation. His website offers valuable resources, insights, and strategies to help you improve your critical thinking abilities. Don't miss out on this opportunity to take your thinking to the next level!

In conclusion, developing critical thinking skills is essential for effective decision-making. By employing strategies such as analyzing information , evaluating evidence , and considering alternative perspectives , individuals can make more informed choices. Critical thinking allows us to navigate complex situations, challenge assumptions, and arrive at well-reasoned conclusions. It is a valuable skill that can be honed through practice and application in various aspects of life. So, start cultivating your critical thinking abilities today and enhance your decision-making prowess.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is critical thinking.

Critical thinking is the ability to analyze and evaluate information objectively, using logical reasoning and evidence-based decision-making.

Why is critical thinking important?

Critical thinking is important because it helps individuals make informed decisions, solve problems effectively, and avoid biases and fallacies.

What are the characteristics of a critical thinker?

Critical thinkers are open-minded, curious, logical, reflective, and able to consider multiple perspectives.

How can I develop analytical thinking skills?

You can develop analytical thinking skills by practicing observation, analysis, interpretation, and evaluation of information and data.

What is logical reasoning?

Logical reasoning is the process of using valid and reliable evidence to support arguments and make logical conclusions.

How can critical thinking be applied in decision-making?

Critical thinking can be applied in decision-making by gathering and evaluating relevant information, identifying assumptions and biases, considering multiple perspectives, and making informed judgments.

Popular Posts

Robert hannigan – the power of neurodiversity in innovation, cybersecurity, gchq and counter-intelligence #342.

Explore key insights on intelligence and decision-making from Professor Sir David Omand’s book, focusing on critical thinking and creativity.

Sam Dixon of Womble Bond Dickinson, The Evolving Role of Lawyers in the AI Era #341

John craske of cms, collaboration between humans and machines in the legal industry #340, jd meier of microsoft, productivity strategies for success #339, sir david omand, author of how spies think – 10 lessons in critical thinking #338, meilleur conférencier principal en teambuilding.

Les conférences virtuelles et les sommets peuvent être des moyens très efficaces pour inspirer, informer

James is a top motivational keynote speaker who is booked as a creativity and innovation keynote speaker, AI speaker , sustainability speaker and leadership speaker . Recent destinations include: Dubai , Abu Dhabi , Orlando , Las Vegas , keynote speaker London , Barcelona , Bangkok , Miami , Berlin , Riyadh , New York , Zurich , motivational speaker Paris , Singapore and San Francisco

Latest News

• 415.800.3059
• [email protected]
• Media Interviews
• Meeting Planners
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy

FIND ME ON SOCIAL

© 2024 James Taylor DBA P3 Music Ltd.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

7 Module 7: Thinking, Reasoning, and Problem-Solving

This module is about how a solid working knowledge of psychological principles can help you to think more effectively, so you can succeed in school and life. You might be inclined to believe that—because you have been thinking for as long as you can remember, because you are able to figure out the solution to many problems, because you feel capable of using logic to argue a point, because you can evaluate whether the things you read and hear make sense—you do not need any special training in thinking. But this, of course, is one of the key barriers to helping people think better. If you do not believe that there is anything wrong, why try to fix it?

The human brain is indeed a remarkable thinking machine, capable of amazing, complex, creative, logical thoughts. Why, then, are we telling you that you need to learn how to think? Mainly because one major lesson from cognitive psychology is that these capabilities of the human brain are relatively infrequently realized. Many psychologists believe that people are essentially “cognitive misers.” It is not that we are lazy, but that we have a tendency to expend the least amount of mental effort necessary. Although you may not realize it, it actually takes a great deal of energy to think. Careful, deliberative reasoning and critical thinking are very difficult. Because we seem to be successful without going to the trouble of using these skills well, it feels unnecessary to develop them. As you shall see, however, there are many pitfalls in the cognitive processes described in this module. When people do not devote extra effort to learning and improving reasoning, problem solving, and critical thinking skills, they make many errors.

As is true for memory, if you develop the cognitive skills presented in this module, you will be more successful in school. It is important that you realize, however, that these skills will help you far beyond school, even more so than a good memory will. Although it is somewhat useful to have a good memory, ten years from now no potential employer will care how many questions you got right on multiple choice exams during college. All of them will, however, recognize whether you are a logical, analytical, critical thinker. With these thinking skills, you will be an effective, persuasive communicator and an excellent problem solver.

The module begins by describing different kinds of thought and knowledge, especially conceptual knowledge and critical thinking. An understanding of these differences will be valuable as you progress through school and encounter different assignments that require you to tap into different kinds of knowledge. The second section covers deductive and inductive reasoning, which are processes we use to construct and evaluate strong arguments. They are essential skills to have whenever you are trying to persuade someone (including yourself) of some point, or to respond to someone’s efforts to persuade you. The module ends with a section about problem solving. A solid understanding of the key processes involved in problem solving will help you to handle many daily challenges.

7.1. Different kinds of thought

7.2. Reasoning and Judgment

7.3. Problem Solving

READING WITH PURPOSE

Remember and understand.

By reading and studying Module 7, you should be able to remember and describe:

• Concepts and inferences (7.1)
• Procedural knowledge (7.1)
• Metacognition (7.1)
• Characteristics of critical thinking:  skepticism; identify biases, distortions, omissions, and assumptions; reasoning and problem solving skills  (7.1)
• Reasoning:  deductive reasoning, deductively valid argument, inductive reasoning, inductively strong argument, availability heuristic, representativeness heuristic  (7.2)
• Fixation:  functional fixedness, mental set  (7.3)
• Algorithms, heuristics, and the role of confirmation bias (7.3)
• Effective problem solving sequence (7.3)

By reading and thinking about how the concepts in Module 6 apply to real life, you should be able to:

• Identify which type of knowledge a piece of information is (7.1)
• Recognize examples of deductive and inductive reasoning (7.2)
• Recognize judgments that have probably been influenced by the availability heuristic (7.2)
• Recognize examples of problem solving heuristics and algorithms (7.3)

Analyze, Evaluate, and Create

By reading and thinking about Module 6, participating in classroom activities, and completing out-of-class assignments, you should be able to:

• Use the principles of critical thinking to evaluate information (7.1)
• Explain whether examples of reasoning arguments are deductively valid or inductively strong (7.2)
• Outline how you could try to solve a problem from your life using the effective problem solving sequence (7.3)

7.1. Different kinds of thought and knowledge

• Take a few minutes to write down everything that you know about dogs.
• Do you believe that:
• Psychic ability exists?
• Hypnosis is an altered state of consciousness?
• Magnet therapy is effective for relieving pain?
• Aerobic exercise is an effective treatment for depression?
• UFO’s from outer space have visited earth?

On what do you base your belief or disbelief for the questions above?

Of course, we all know what is meant by the words  think  and  knowledge . You probably also realize that they are not unitary concepts; there are different kinds of thought and knowledge. In this section, let us look at some of these differences. If you are familiar with these different kinds of thought and pay attention to them in your classes, it will help you to focus on the right goals, learn more effectively, and succeed in school. Different assignments and requirements in school call on you to use different kinds of knowledge or thought, so it will be very helpful for you to learn to recognize them (Anderson, et al. 2001).

Factual and conceptual knowledge

Module 5 introduced the idea of declarative memory, which is composed of facts and episodes. If you have ever played a trivia game or watched Jeopardy on TV, you realize that the human brain is able to hold an extraordinary number of facts. Likewise, you realize that each of us has an enormous store of episodes, essentially facts about events that happened in our own lives. It may be difficult to keep that in mind when we are struggling to retrieve one of those facts while taking an exam, however. Part of the problem is that, in contradiction to the advice from Module 5, many students continue to try to memorize course material as a series of unrelated facts (picture a history student simply trying to memorize history as a set of unrelated dates without any coherent story tying them together). Facts in the real world are not random and unorganized, however. It is the way that they are organized that constitutes a second key kind of knowledge, conceptual.

Concepts are nothing more than our mental representations of categories of things in the world. For example, think about dogs. When you do this, you might remember specific facts about dogs, such as they have fur and they bark. You may also recall dogs that you have encountered and picture them in your mind. All of this information (and more) makes up your concept of dog. You can have concepts of simple categories (e.g., triangle), complex categories (e.g., small dogs that sleep all day, eat out of the garbage, and bark at leaves), kinds of people (e.g., psychology professors), events (e.g., birthday parties), and abstract ideas (e.g., justice). Gregory Murphy (2002) refers to concepts as the “glue that holds our mental life together” (p. 1). Very simply, summarizing the world by using concepts is one of the most important cognitive tasks that we do. Our conceptual knowledge  is  our knowledge about the world. Individual concepts are related to each other to form a rich interconnected network of knowledge. For example, think about how the following concepts might be related to each other: dog, pet, play, Frisbee, chew toy, shoe. Or, of more obvious use to you now, how these concepts are related: working memory, long-term memory, declarative memory, procedural memory, and rehearsal? Because our minds have a natural tendency to organize information conceptually, when students try to remember course material as isolated facts, they are working against their strengths.

One last important point about concepts is that they allow you to instantly know a great deal of information about something. For example, if someone hands you a small red object and says, “here is an apple,” they do not have to tell you, “it is something you can eat.” You already know that you can eat it because it is true by virtue of the fact that the object is an apple; this is called drawing an  inference , assuming that something is true on the basis of your previous knowledge (for example, of category membership or of how the world works) or logical reasoning.

Procedural knowledge

Physical skills, such as tying your shoes, doing a cartwheel, and driving a car (or doing all three at the same time, but don’t try this at home) are certainly a kind of knowledge. They are procedural knowledge, the same idea as procedural memory that you saw in Module 5. Mental skills, such as reading, debating, and planning a psychology experiment, are procedural knowledge, as well. In short, procedural knowledge is the knowledge how to do something (Cohen & Eichenbaum, 1993).

Metacognitive knowledge

Floyd used to think that he had a great memory. Now, he has a better memory. Why? Because he finally realized that his memory was not as great as he once thought it was. Because Floyd eventually learned that he often forgets where he put things, he finally developed the habit of putting things in the same place. (Unfortunately, he did not learn this lesson before losing at least 5 watches and a wedding ring.) Because he finally realized that he often forgets to do things, he finally started using the To Do list app on his phone. And so on. Floyd’s insights about the real limitations of his memory have allowed him to remember things that he used to forget.

All of us have knowledge about the way our own minds work. You may know that you have a good memory for people’s names and a poor memory for math formulas. Someone else might realize that they have difficulty remembering to do things, like stopping at the store on the way home. Others still know that they tend to overlook details. This knowledge about our own thinking is actually quite important; it is called metacognitive knowledge, or  metacognition . Like other kinds of thinking skills, it is subject to error. For example, in unpublished research, one of the authors surveyed about 120 General Psychology students on the first day of the term. Among other questions, the students were asked them to predict their grade in the class and report their current Grade Point Average. Two-thirds of the students predicted that their grade in the course would be higher than their GPA. (The reality is that at our college, students tend to earn lower grades in psychology than their overall GPA.) Another example: Students routinely report that they thought they had done well on an exam, only to discover, to their dismay, that they were wrong (more on that important problem in a moment). Both errors reveal a breakdown in metacognition.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect

In general, most college students probably do not study enough. For example, using data from the National Survey of Student Engagement, Fosnacht, McCormack, and Lerma (2018) reported that first-year students at 4-year colleges in the U.S. averaged less than 14 hours per week preparing for classes. The typical suggestion is that you should spend two hours outside of class for every hour in class, or 24 – 30 hours per week for a full-time student. Clearly, students in general are nowhere near that recommended mark. Many observers, including some faculty, believe that this shortfall is a result of students being too busy or lazy. Now, it may be true that many students are too busy, with work and family obligations, for example. Others, are not particularly motivated in school, and therefore might correctly be labeled lazy. A third possible explanation, however, is that some students might not think they need to spend this much time. And this is a matter of metacognition. Consider the scenario that we mentioned above, students thinking they had done well on an exam only to discover that they did not. Justin Kruger and David Dunning examined scenarios very much like this in 1999. Kruger and Dunning gave research participants tests measuring humor, logic, and grammar. Then, they asked the participants to assess their own abilities and test performance in these areas. They found that participants in general tended to overestimate their abilities, already a problem with metacognition. Importantly, the participants who scored the lowest overestimated their abilities the most. Specifically, students who scored in the bottom quarter (averaging in the 12th percentile) thought they had scored in the 62nd percentile. This has become known as the  Dunning-Kruger effect . Many individual faculty members have replicated these results with their own student on their course exams, including the authors of this book. Think about it. Some students who just took an exam and performed poorly believe that they did well before seeing their score. It seems very likely that these are the very same students who stopped studying the night before because they thought they were “done.” Quite simply, it is not just that they did not know the material. They did not know that they did not know the material. That is poor metacognition.

In order to develop good metacognitive skills, you should continually monitor your thinking and seek frequent feedback on the accuracy of your thinking (Medina, Castleberry, & Persky 2017). For example, in classes get in the habit of predicting your exam grades. As soon as possible after taking an exam, try to find out which questions you missed and try to figure out why. If you do this soon enough, you may be able to recall the way it felt when you originally answered the question. Did you feel confident that you had answered the question correctly? Then you have just discovered an opportunity to improve your metacognition. Be on the lookout for that feeling and respond with caution.

concept :  a mental representation of a category of things in the world

Dunning-Kruger effect : individuals who are less competent tend to overestimate their abilities more than individuals who are more competent do

inference : an assumption about the truth of something that is not stated. Inferences come from our prior knowledge and experience, and from logical reasoning

metacognition :  knowledge about one’s own cognitive processes; thinking about your thinking

Critical thinking

One particular kind of knowledge or thinking skill that is related to metacognition is  critical thinking (Chew, 2020). You may have noticed that critical thinking is an objective in many college courses, and thus it could be a legitimate topic to cover in nearly any college course. It is particularly appropriate in psychology, however. As the science of (behavior and) mental processes, psychology is obviously well suited to be the discipline through which you should be introduced to this important way of thinking.

More importantly, there is a particular need to use critical thinking in psychology. We are all, in a way, experts in human behavior and mental processes, having engaged in them literally since birth. Thus, perhaps more than in any other class, students typically approach psychology with very clear ideas and opinions about its subject matter. That is, students already “know” a lot about psychology. The problem is, “it ain’t so much the things we don’t know that get us into trouble. It’s the things we know that just ain’t so” (Ward, quoted in Gilovich 1991). Indeed, many of students’ preconceptions about psychology are just plain wrong. Randolph Smith (2002) wrote a book about critical thinking in psychology called  Challenging Your Preconceptions,  highlighting this fact. On the other hand, many of students’ preconceptions about psychology are just plain right! But wait, how do you know which of your preconceptions are right and which are wrong? And when you come across a research finding or theory in this class that contradicts your preconceptions, what will you do? Will you stick to your original idea, discounting the information from the class? Will you immediately change your mind? Critical thinking can help us sort through this confusing mess.

But what is critical thinking? The goal of critical thinking is simple to state (but extraordinarily difficult to achieve): it is to be right, to draw the correct conclusions, to believe in things that are true and to disbelieve things that are false. We will provide two definitions of critical thinking (or, if you like, one large definition with two distinct parts). First, a more conceptual one: Critical thinking is thinking like a scientist in your everyday life (Schmaltz, Jansen, & Wenckowski, 2017).  Our second definition is more operational; it is simply a list of skills that are essential to be a critical thinker. Critical thinking entails solid reasoning and problem solving skills; skepticism; and an ability to identify biases, distortions, omissions, and assumptions. Excellent deductive and inductive reasoning, and problem solving skills contribute to critical thinking. So, you can consider the subject matter of sections 7.2 and 7.3 to be part of critical thinking. Because we will be devoting considerable time to these concepts in the rest of the module, let us begin with a discussion about the other aspects of critical thinking.

Let’s address that first part of the definition. Scientists form hypotheses, or predictions about some possible future observations. Then, they collect data, or information (think of this as making those future observations). They do their best to make unbiased observations using reliable techniques that have been verified by others. Then, and only then, they draw a conclusion about what those observations mean. Oh, and do not forget the most important part. “Conclusion” is probably not the most appropriate word because this conclusion is only tentative. A scientist is always prepared that someone else might come along and produce new observations that would require a new conclusion be drawn. Wow! If you like to be right, you could do a lot worse than using a process like this.

A Critical Thinker’s Toolkit 

Now for the second part of the definition. Good critical thinkers (and scientists) rely on a variety of tools to evaluate information. Perhaps the most recognizable tool for critical thinking is  skepticism (and this term provides the clearest link to the thinking like a scientist definition, as you are about to see). Some people intend it as an insult when they call someone a skeptic. But if someone calls you a skeptic, if they are using the term correctly, you should consider it a great compliment. Simply put, skepticism is a way of thinking in which you refrain from drawing a conclusion or changing your mind until good evidence has been provided. People from Missouri should recognize this principle, as Missouri is known as the Show-Me State. As a skeptic, you are not inclined to believe something just because someone said so, because someone else believes it, or because it sounds reasonable. You must be persuaded by high quality evidence.

Of course, if that evidence is produced, you have a responsibility as a skeptic to change your belief. Failure to change a belief in the face of good evidence is not skepticism; skepticism has open mindedness at its core. M. Neil Browne and Stuart Keeley (2018) use the term weak sense critical thinking to describe critical thinking behaviors that are used only to strengthen a prior belief. Strong sense critical thinking, on the other hand, has as its goal reaching the best conclusion. Sometimes that means strengthening your prior belief, but sometimes it means changing your belief to accommodate the better evidence.

Many times, a failure to think critically or weak sense critical thinking is related to a  bias , an inclination, tendency, leaning, or prejudice. Everybody has biases, but many people are unaware of them. Awareness of your own biases gives you the opportunity to control or counteract them. Unfortunately, however, many people are happy to let their biases creep into their attempts to persuade others; indeed, it is a key part of their persuasive strategy. To see how these biases influence messages, just look at the different descriptions and explanations of the same events given by people of different ages or income brackets, or conservative versus liberal commentators, or by commentators from different parts of the world. Of course, to be successful, these people who are consciously using their biases must disguise them. Even undisguised biases can be difficult to identify, so disguised ones can be nearly impossible.

Here are some common sources of biases:

• Personal values and beliefs.  Some people believe that human beings are basically driven to seek power and that they are typically in competition with one another over scarce resources. These beliefs are similar to the world-view that political scientists call “realism.” Other people believe that human beings prefer to cooperate and that, given the chance, they will do so. These beliefs are similar to the world-view known as “idealism.” For many people, these deeply held beliefs can influence, or bias, their interpretations of such wide ranging situations as the behavior of nations and their leaders or the behavior of the driver in the car ahead of you. For example, if your worldview is that people are typically in competition and someone cuts you off on the highway, you may assume that the driver did it purposely to get ahead of you. Other types of beliefs about the way the world is or the way the world should be, for example, political beliefs, can similarly become a significant source of bias.
• Racism, sexism, ageism and other forms of prejudice and bigotry.  These are, sadly, a common source of bias in many people. They are essentially a special kind of “belief about the way the world is.” These beliefs—for example, that women do not make effective leaders—lead people to ignore contradictory evidence (examples of effective women leaders, or research that disputes the belief) and to interpret ambiguous evidence in a way consistent with the belief.
• Self-interest.  When particular people benefit from things turning out a certain way, they can sometimes be very susceptible to letting that interest bias them. For example, a company that will earn a profit if they sell their product may have a bias in the way that they give information about their product. A union that will benefit if its members get a generous contract might have a bias in the way it presents information about salaries at competing organizations. (Note that our inclusion of examples describing both companies and unions is an explicit attempt to control for our own personal biases). Home buyers are often dismayed to discover that they purchased their dream house from someone whose self-interest led them to lie about flooding problems in the basement or back yard. This principle, the biasing power of self-interest, is likely what led to the famous phrase  Caveat Emptor  (let the buyer beware) .  

Knowing that these types of biases exist will help you evaluate evidence more critically. Do not forget, though, that people are not always keen to let you discover the sources of biases in their arguments. For example, companies or political organizations can sometimes disguise their support of a research study by contracting with a university professor, who comes complete with a seemingly unbiased institutional affiliation, to conduct the study.

People’s biases, conscious or unconscious, can lead them to make omissions, distortions, and assumptions that undermine our ability to correctly evaluate evidence. It is essential that you look for these elements. Always ask, what is missing, what is not as it appears, and what is being assumed here? For example, consider this (fictional) chart from an ad reporting customer satisfaction at 4 local health clubs.

Clearly, from the results of the chart, one would be tempted to give Club C a try, as customer satisfaction is much higher than for the other 3 clubs.

There are so many distortions and omissions in this chart, however, that it is actually quite meaningless. First, how was satisfaction measured? Do the bars represent responses to a survey? If so, how were the questions asked? Most importantly, where is the missing scale for the chart? Although the differences look quite large, are they really?

Well, here is the same chart, with a different scale, this time labeled:

Club C is not so impressive any more, is it? In fact, all of the health clubs have customer satisfaction ratings (whatever that means) between 85% and 88%. In the first chart, the entire scale of the graph included only the percentages between 83 and 89. This “judicious” choice of scale—some would call it a distortion—and omission of that scale from the chart make the tiny differences among the clubs seem important, however.

Also, in order to be a critical thinker, you need to learn to pay attention to the assumptions that underlie a message. Let us briefly illustrate the role of assumptions by touching on some people’s beliefs about the criminal justice system in the US. Some believe that a major problem with our judicial system is that many criminals go free because of legal technicalities. Others believe that a major problem is that many innocent people are convicted of crimes. The simple fact is, both types of errors occur. A person’s conclusion about which flaw in our judicial system is the greater tragedy is based on an assumption about which of these is the more serious error (letting the guilty go free or convicting the innocent). This type of assumption is called a value assumption (Browne and Keeley, 2018). It reflects the differences in values that people develop, differences that may lead us to disregard valid evidence that does not fit in with our particular values.

Oh, by the way, some students probably noticed this, but the seven tips for evaluating information that we shared in Module 1 are related to this. Actually, they are part of this section. The tips are, to a very large degree, set of ideas you can use to help you identify biases, distortions, omissions, and assumptions. If you do not remember this section, we strongly recommend you take a few minutes to review it.

skepticism :  a way of thinking in which you refrain from drawing a conclusion or changing your mind until good evidence has been provided

bias : an inclination, tendency, leaning, or prejudice

• Which of your beliefs (or disbeliefs) from the Activate exercise for this section were derived from a process of critical thinking? If some of your beliefs were not based on critical thinking, are you willing to reassess these beliefs? If the answer is no, why do you think that is? If the answer is yes, what concrete steps will you take?

7.2 Reasoning and Judgment

• What percentage of kidnappings are committed by strangers?
• Which area of the house is riskiest: kitchen, bathroom, or stairs?
• What is the most common cancer in the US?
• What percentage of workplace homicides are committed by co-workers?

An essential set of procedural thinking skills is  reasoning , the ability to generate and evaluate solid conclusions from a set of statements or evidence. You should note that these conclusions (when they are generated instead of being evaluated) are one key type of inference that we described in Section 7.1. There are two main types of reasoning, deductive and inductive.

Deductive reasoning

Suppose your teacher tells you that if you get an A on the final exam in a course, you will get an A for the whole course. Then, you get an A on the final exam. What will your final course grade be? Most people can see instantly that you can conclude with certainty that you will get an A for the course. This is a type of reasoning called  deductive reasoning , which is defined as reasoning in which a conclusion is guaranteed to be true as long as the statements leading to it are true. The three statements can be listed as an  argument , with two beginning statements and a conclusion:

Statement 1: If you get an A on the final exam, you will get an A for the course

Statement 2: You get an A on the final exam

Conclusion: You will get an A for the course

This particular arrangement, in which true beginning statements lead to a guaranteed true conclusion, is known as a  deductively valid argument . Although deductive reasoning is often the subject of abstract, brain-teasing, puzzle-like word problems, it is actually an extremely important type of everyday reasoning. It is just hard to recognize sometimes. For example, imagine that you are looking for your car keys and you realize that they are either in the kitchen drawer or in your book bag. After looking in the kitchen drawer, you instantly know that they must be in your book bag. That conclusion results from a simple deductive reasoning argument. In addition, solid deductive reasoning skills are necessary for you to succeed in the sciences, philosophy, math, computer programming, and any endeavor involving the use of logic to persuade others to your point of view or to evaluate others’ arguments.

Cognitive psychologists, and before them philosophers, have been quite interested in deductive reasoning, not so much for its practical applications, but for the insights it can offer them about the ways that human beings think. One of the early ideas to emerge from the examination of deductive reasoning is that people learn (or develop) mental versions of rules that allow them to solve these types of reasoning problems (Braine, 1978; Braine, Reiser, & Rumain, 1984). The best way to see this point of view is to realize that there are different possible rules, and some of them are very simple. For example, consider this rule of logic:

therefore q

Logical rules are often presented abstractly, as letters, in order to imply that they can be used in very many specific situations. Here is a concrete version of the of the same rule:

I’ll either have pizza or a hamburger for dinner tonight (p or q)

I won’t have pizza (not p)

Therefore, I’ll have a hamburger (therefore q)

This kind of reasoning seems so natural, so easy, that it is quite plausible that we would use a version of this rule in our daily lives. At least, it seems more plausible than some of the alternative possibilities—for example, that we need to have experience with the specific situation (pizza or hamburger, in this case) in order to solve this type of problem easily. So perhaps there is a form of natural logic (Rips, 1990) that contains very simple versions of logical rules. When we are faced with a reasoning problem that maps onto one of these rules, we use the rule.

But be very careful; things are not always as easy as they seem. Even these simple rules are not so simple. For example, consider the following rule. Many people fail to realize that this rule is just as valid as the pizza or hamburger rule above.

if p, then q

therefore, not p

Concrete version:

If I eat dinner, then I will have dessert

I did not have dessert

Therefore, I did not eat dinner

The simple fact is, it can be very difficult for people to apply rules of deductive logic correctly; as a result, they make many errors when trying to do so. Is this a deductively valid argument or not?

Students who like school study a lot

Students who study a lot get good grades

Jane does not like school

Therefore, Jane does not get good grades

Many people are surprised to discover that this is not a logically valid argument; the conclusion is not guaranteed to be true from the beginning statements. Although the first statement says that students who like school study a lot, it does NOT say that students who do not like school do not study a lot. In other words, it may very well be possible to study a lot without liking school. Even people who sometimes get problems like this right might not be using the rules of deductive reasoning. Instead, they might just be making judgments for examples they know, in this case, remembering instances of people who get good grades despite not liking school.

Making deductive reasoning even more difficult is the fact that there are two important properties that an argument may have. One, it can be valid or invalid (meaning that the conclusion does or does not follow logically from the statements leading up to it). Two, an argument (or more correctly, its conclusion) can be true or false. Here is an example of an argument that is logically valid, but has a false conclusion (at least we think it is false).

Either you are eleven feet tall or the Grand Canyon was created by a spaceship crashing into the earth.

You are not eleven feet tall

Therefore the Grand Canyon was created by a spaceship crashing into the earth

This argument has the exact same form as the pizza or hamburger argument above, making it is deductively valid. The conclusion is so false, however, that it is absurd (of course, the reason the conclusion is false is that the first statement is false). When people are judging arguments, they tend to not observe the difference between deductive validity and the empirical truth of statements or conclusions. If the elements of an argument happen to be true, people are likely to judge the argument logically valid; if the elements are false, they will very likely judge it invalid (Markovits & Bouffard-Bouchard, 1992; Moshman & Franks, 1986). Thus, it seems a stretch to say that people are using these logical rules to judge the validity of arguments. Many psychologists believe that most people actually have very limited deductive reasoning skills (Johnson-Laird, 1999). They argue that when faced with a problem for which deductive logic is required, people resort to some simpler technique, such as matching terms that appear in the statements and the conclusion (Evans, 1982). This might not seem like a problem, but what if reasoners believe that the elements are true and they happen to be wrong; they will would believe that they are using a form of reasoning that guarantees they are correct and yet be wrong.

deductive reasoning :  a type of reasoning in which the conclusion is guaranteed to be true any time the statements leading up to it are true

argument :  a set of statements in which the beginning statements lead to a conclusion

deductively valid argument :  an argument for which true beginning statements guarantee that the conclusion is true

Inductive reasoning and judgment

Every day, you make many judgments about the likelihood of one thing or another. Whether you realize it or not, you are practicing  inductive reasoning   on a daily basis. In inductive reasoning arguments, a conclusion is likely whenever the statements preceding it are true. The first thing to notice about inductive reasoning is that, by definition, you can never be sure about your conclusion; you can only estimate how likely the conclusion is. Inductive reasoning may lead you to focus on Memory Encoding and Recoding when you study for the exam, but it is possible the instructor will ask more questions about Memory Retrieval instead. Unlike deductive reasoning, the conclusions you reach through inductive reasoning are only probable, not certain. That is why scientists consider inductive reasoning weaker than deductive reasoning. But imagine how hard it would be for us to function if we could not act unless we were certain about the outcome.

Inductive reasoning can be represented as logical arguments consisting of statements and a conclusion, just as deductive reasoning can be. In an inductive argument, you are given some statements and a conclusion (or you are given some statements and must draw a conclusion). An argument is  inductively strong   if the conclusion would be very probable whenever the statements are true. So, for example, here is an inductively strong argument:

• Statement #1: The forecaster on Channel 2 said it is going to rain today.
• Statement #2: The forecaster on Channel 5 said it is going to rain today.
• Statement #3: It is very cloudy and humid.
• Statement #4: You just heard thunder.
• Conclusion (or judgment): It is going to rain today.

Think of the statements as evidence, on the basis of which you will draw a conclusion. So, based on the evidence presented in the four statements, it is very likely that it will rain today. Will it definitely rain today? Certainly not. We can all think of times that the weather forecaster was wrong.

A true story: Some years ago psychology student was watching a baseball playoff game between the St. Louis Cardinals and the Los Angeles Dodgers. A graphic on the screen had just informed the audience that the Cardinal at bat, (Hall of Fame shortstop) Ozzie Smith, a switch hitter batting left-handed for this plate appearance, had never, in nearly 3000 career at-bats, hit a home run left-handed. The student, who had just learned about inductive reasoning in his psychology class, turned to his companion (a Cardinals fan) and smugly said, “It is an inductively strong argument that Ozzie Smith will not hit a home run.” He turned back to face the television just in time to watch the ball sail over the right field fence for a home run. Although the student felt foolish at the time, he was not wrong. It was an inductively strong argument; 3000 at-bats is an awful lot of evidence suggesting that the Wizard of Ozz (as he was known) would not be hitting one out of the park (think of each at-bat without a home run as a statement in an inductive argument). Sadly (for the die-hard Cubs fan and Cardinals-hating student), despite the strength of the argument, the conclusion was wrong.

Given the possibility that we might draw an incorrect conclusion even with an inductively strong argument, we really want to be sure that we do, in fact, make inductively strong arguments. If we judge something probable, it had better be probable. If we judge something nearly impossible, it had better not happen. Think of inductive reasoning, then, as making reasonably accurate judgments of the probability of some conclusion given a set of evidence.

We base many decisions in our lives on inductive reasoning. For example:

Statement #1: Psychology is not my best subject

Statement #2: My psychology instructor has a reputation for giving difficult exams

Statement #3: My first psychology exam was much harder than I expected

Judgment: The next exam will probably be very difficult.

Decision: I will study tonight instead of watching Netflix.

Some other examples of judgments that people commonly make in a school context include judgments of the likelihood that:

• A particular class will be interesting/useful/difficult
• You will be able to finish writing a paper by next week if you go out tonight
• Your laptop’s battery will last through the next trip to the library
• You will not miss anything important if you skip class tomorrow
• Your instructor will not notice if you skip class tomorrow
• You will be able to find a book that you will need for a paper
• There will be an essay question about Memory Encoding on the next exam

Tversky and Kahneman (1983) recognized that there are two general ways that we might make these judgments; they termed them extensional (i.e., following the laws of probability) and intuitive (i.e., using shortcuts or heuristics, see below). We will use a similar distinction between Type 1 and Type 2 thinking, as described by Keith Stanovich and his colleagues (Evans and Stanovich, 2013; Stanovich and West, 2000). Type 1 thinking is fast, automatic, effortful, and emotional. In fact, it is hardly fair to call it reasoning at all, as judgments just seem to pop into one’s head. Type 2 thinking , on the other hand, is slow, effortful, and logical. So obviously, it is more likely to lead to a correct judgment, or an optimal decision. The problem is, we tend to over-rely on Type 1. Now, we are not saying that Type 2 is the right way to go for every decision or judgment we make. It seems a bit much, for example, to engage in a step-by-step logical reasoning procedure to decide whether we will have chicken or fish for dinner tonight.

Many bad decisions in some very important contexts, however, can be traced back to poor judgments of the likelihood of certain risks or outcomes that result from the use of Type 1 when a more logical reasoning process would have been more appropriate. For example:

Statement #1: It is late at night.

Statement #2: Albert has been drinking beer for the past five hours at a party.

Statement #3: Albert is not exactly sure where he is or how far away home is.

Judgment: Albert will have no difficulty walking home.

Decision: He walks home alone.

As you can see in this example, the three statements backing up the judgment do not really support it. In other words, this argument is not inductively strong because it is based on judgments that ignore the laws of probability. What are the chances that someone facing these conditions will be able to walk home alone easily? And one need not be drunk to make poor decisions based on judgments that just pop into our heads.

The truth is that many of our probability judgments do not come very close to what the laws of probability say they should be. Think about it. In order for us to reason in accordance with these laws, we would need to know the laws of probability, which would allow us to calculate the relationship between particular pieces of evidence and the probability of some outcome (i.e., how much likelihood should change given a piece of evidence), and we would have to do these heavy math calculations in our heads. After all, that is what Type 2 requires. Needless to say, even if we were motivated, we often do not even know how to apply Type 2 reasoning in many cases.

So what do we do when we don’t have the knowledge, skills, or time required to make the correct mathematical judgment? Do we hold off and wait until we can get better evidence? Do we read up on probability and fire up our calculator app so we can compute the correct probability? Of course not. We rely on Type 1 thinking. We “wing it.” That is, we come up with a likelihood estimate using some means at our disposal. Psychologists use the term heuristic to describe the type of “winging it” we are talking about. A  heuristic   is a shortcut strategy that we use to make some judgment or solve some problem (see Section 7.3). Heuristics are easy and quick, think of them as the basic procedures that are characteristic of Type 1.  They can absolutely lead to reasonably good judgments and decisions in some situations (like choosing between chicken and fish for dinner). They are, however, far from foolproof. There are, in fact, quite a lot of situations in which heuristics can lead us to make incorrect judgments, and in many cases the decisions based on those judgments can have serious consequences.

Let us return to the activity that begins this section. You were asked to judge the likelihood (or frequency) of certain events and risks. You were free to come up with your own evidence (or statements) to make these judgments. This is where a heuristic crops up. As a judgment shortcut, we tend to generate specific examples of those very events to help us decide their likelihood or frequency. For example, if we are asked to judge how common, frequent, or likely a particular type of cancer is, many of our statements would be examples of specific cancer cases:

Statement #1: Andy Kaufman (comedian) had lung cancer.

Statement #2: Colin Powell (US Secretary of State) had prostate cancer.

Statement #3: Bob Marley (musician) had skin and brain cancer

Statement #4: Sandra Day O’Connor (Supreme Court Justice) had breast cancer.

Statement #5: Fred Rogers (children’s entertainer) had stomach cancer.

Statement #6: Robin Roberts (news anchor) had breast cancer.

Statement #7: Bette Davis (actress) had breast cancer.

Judgment: Breast cancer is the most common type.

Your own experience or memory may also tell you that breast cancer is the most common type. But it is not (although it is common). Actually, skin cancer is the most common type in the US. We make the same types of misjudgments all the time because we do not generate the examples or evidence according to their actual frequencies or probabilities. Instead, we have a tendency (or bias) to search for the examples in memory; if they are easy to retrieve, we assume that they are common. To rephrase this in the language of the heuristic, events seem more likely to the extent that they are available to memory. This bias has been termed the  availability heuristic   (Kahneman and Tversky, 1974).

The fact that we use the availability heuristic does not automatically mean that our judgment is wrong. The reason we use heuristics in the first place is that they work fairly well in many cases (and, of course that they are easy to use). So, the easiest examples to think of sometimes are the most common ones. Is it more likely that a member of the U.S. Senate is a man or a woman? Most people have a much easier time generating examples of male senators. And as it turns out, the U.S. Senate has many more men than women (74 to 26 in 2020). In this case, then, the availability heuristic would lead you to make the correct judgment; it is far more likely that a senator would be a man.

In many other cases, however, the availability heuristic will lead us astray. This is because events can be memorable for many reasons other than their frequency. Section 5.2, Encoding Meaning, suggested that one good way to encode the meaning of some information is to form a mental image of it. Thus, information that has been pictured mentally will be more available to memory. Indeed, an event that is vivid and easily pictured will trick many people into supposing that type of event is more common than it actually is. Repetition of information will also make it more memorable. So, if the same event is described to you in a magazine, on the evening news, on a podcast that you listen to, and in your Facebook feed; it will be very available to memory. Again, the availability heuristic will cause you to misperceive the frequency of these types of events.

Most interestingly, information that is unusual is more memorable. Suppose we give you the following list of words to remember: box, flower, letter, platypus, oven, boat, newspaper, purse, drum, car. Very likely, the easiest word to remember would be platypus, the unusual one. The same thing occurs with memories of events. An event may be available to memory because it is unusual, yet the availability heuristic leads us to judge that the event is common. Did you catch that? In these cases, the availability heuristic makes us think the exact opposite of the true frequency. We end up thinking something is common because it is unusual (and therefore memorable). Yikes.

The misapplication of the availability heuristic sometimes has unfortunate results. For example, if you went to K-12 school in the US over the past 10 years, it is extremely likely that you have participated in lockdown and active shooter drills. Of course, everyone is trying to prevent the tragedy of another school shooting. And believe us, we are not trying to minimize how terrible the tragedy is. But the truth of the matter is, school shootings are extremely rare. Because the federal government does not keep a database of school shootings, the Washington Post has maintained their own running tally. Between 1999 and January 2020 (the date of the most recent school shooting with a death in the US at of the time this paragraph was written), the Post reported a total of 254 people died in school shootings in the US. Not 254 per year, 254 total. That is an average of 12 per year. Of course, that is 254 people who should not have died (particularly because many were children), but in a country with approximately 60,000,000 students and teachers, this is a very small risk.

But many students and teachers are terrified that they will be victims of school shootings because of the availability heuristic. It is so easy to think of examples (they are very available to memory) that people believe the event is very common. It is not. And there is a downside to this. We happen to believe that there is an enormous gun violence problem in the United States. According the the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 39,773 firearm deaths in the US in 2017. Fifteen of those deaths were in school shootings, according to the Post. 60% of those deaths were suicides. When people pay attention to the school shooting risk (low), they often fail to notice the much larger risk.

And examples like this are by no means unique. The authors of this book have been teaching psychology since the 1990’s. We have been able to make the exact same arguments about the misapplication of the availability heuristics and keep them current by simply swapping out for the “fear of the day.” In the 1990’s it was children being kidnapped by strangers (it was known as “stranger danger”) despite the facts that kidnappings accounted for only 2% of the violent crimes committed against children, and only 24% of kidnappings are committed by strangers (US Department of Justice, 2007). This fear overlapped with the fear of terrorism that gripped the country after the 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and US Pentagon and still plagues the population of the US somewhat in 2020. After a well-publicized, sensational act of violence, people are extremely likely to increase their estimates of the chances that they, too, will be victims of terror. Think about the reality, however. In October of 2001, a terrorist mailed anthrax spores to members of the US government and a number of media companies. A total of five people died as a result of this attack. The nation was nearly paralyzed by the fear of dying from the attack; in reality the probability of an individual person dying was 0.00000002.

The availability heuristic can lead you to make incorrect judgments in a school setting as well. For example, suppose you are trying to decide if you should take a class from a particular math professor. You might try to make a judgment of how good a teacher she is by recalling instances of friends and acquaintances making comments about her teaching skill. You may have some examples that suggest that she is a poor teacher very available to memory, so on the basis of the availability heuristic you judge her a poor teacher and decide to take the class from someone else. What if, however, the instances you recalled were all from the same person, and this person happens to be a very colorful storyteller? The subsequent ease of remembering the instances might not indicate that the professor is a poor teacher after all.

Although the availability heuristic is obviously important, it is not the only judgment heuristic we use. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman examined the role of heuristics in inductive reasoning in a long series of studies. Kahneman received a Nobel Prize in Economics for this research in 2002, and Tversky would have certainly received one as well if he had not died of melanoma at age 59 in 1996 (Nobel Prizes are not awarded posthumously). Kahneman and Tversky demonstrated repeatedly that people do not reason in ways that are consistent with the laws of probability. They identified several heuristic strategies that people use instead to make judgments about likelihood. The importance of this work for economics (and the reason that Kahneman was awarded the Nobel Prize) is that earlier economic theories had assumed that people do make judgments rationally, that is, in agreement with the laws of probability.

Another common heuristic that people use for making judgments is the  representativeness heuristic (Kahneman & Tversky 1973). Suppose we describe a person to you. He is quiet and shy, has an unassuming personality, and likes to work with numbers. Is this person more likely to be an accountant or an attorney? If you said accountant, you were probably using the representativeness heuristic. Our imaginary person is judged likely to be an accountant because he resembles, or is representative of the concept of, an accountant. When research participants are asked to make judgments such as these, the only thing that seems to matter is the representativeness of the description. For example, if told that the person described is in a room that contains 70 attorneys and 30 accountants, participants will still assume that he is an accountant.

inductive reasoning :  a type of reasoning in which we make judgments about likelihood from sets of evidence

inductively strong argument :  an inductive argument in which the beginning statements lead to a conclusion that is probably true

heuristic :  a shortcut strategy that we use to make judgments and solve problems. Although they are easy to use, they do not guarantee correct judgments and solutions

availability heuristic :  judging the frequency or likelihood of some event type according to how easily examples of the event can be called to mind (i.e., how available they are to memory)

representativeness heuristic:   judging the likelihood that something is a member of a category on the basis of how much it resembles a typical category member (i.e., how representative it is of the category)

Type 1 thinking : fast, automatic, and emotional thinking.

Type 2 thinking : slow, effortful, and logical thinking.

• What percentage of workplace homicides are co-worker violence?

Many people get these questions wrong. The answers are 10%; stairs; skin; 6%. How close were your answers? Explain how the availability heuristic might have led you to make the incorrect judgments.

• Can you think of some other judgments that you have made (or beliefs that you have) that might have been influenced by the availability heuristic?

7.3 Problem Solving

• Please take a few minutes to list a number of problems that you are facing right now.
• Now write about a problem that you recently solved.
• What is your definition of a problem?

Mary has a problem. Her daughter, ordinarily quite eager to please, appears to delight in being the last person to do anything. Whether getting ready for school, going to piano lessons or karate class, or even going out with her friends, she seems unwilling or unable to get ready on time. Other people have different kinds of problems. For example, many students work at jobs, have numerous family commitments, and are facing a course schedule full of difficult exams, assignments, papers, and speeches. How can they find enough time to devote to their studies and still fulfill their other obligations? Speaking of students and their problems: Show that a ball thrown vertically upward with initial velocity v0 takes twice as much time to return as to reach the highest point (from Spiegel, 1981).

These are three very different situations, but we have called them all problems. What makes them all the same, despite the differences? A psychologist might define a  problem   as a situation with an initial state, a goal state, and a set of possible intermediate states. Somewhat more meaningfully, we might consider a problem a situation in which you are in here one state (e.g., daughter is always late), you want to be there in another state (e.g., daughter is not always late), and with no obvious way to get from here to there. Defined this way, each of the three situations we outlined can now be seen as an example of the same general concept, a problem. At this point, you might begin to wonder what is not a problem, given such a general definition. It seems that nearly every non-routine task we engage in could qualify as a problem. As long as you realize that problems are not necessarily bad (it can be quite fun and satisfying to rise to the challenge and solve a problem), this may be a useful way to think about it.

Can we identify a set of problem-solving skills that would apply to these very different kinds of situations? That task, in a nutshell, is a major goal of this section. Let us try to begin to make sense of the wide variety of ways that problems can be solved with an important observation: the process of solving problems can be divided into two key parts. First, people have to notice, comprehend, and represent the problem properly in their minds (called  problem representation ). Second, they have to apply some kind of solution strategy to the problem. Psychologists have studied both of these key parts of the process in detail.

When you first think about the problem-solving process, you might guess that most of our difficulties would occur because we are failing in the second step, the application of strategies. Although this can be a significant difficulty much of the time, the more important source of difficulty is probably problem representation. In short, we often fail to solve a problem because we are looking at it, or thinking about it, the wrong way.

problem :  a situation in which we are in an initial state, have a desired goal state, and there is a number of possible intermediate states (i.e., there is no obvious way to get from the initial to the goal state)

problem representation :  noticing, comprehending and forming a mental conception of a problem

Defining and Mentally Representing Problems in Order to Solve Them

So, the main obstacle to solving a problem is that we do not clearly understand exactly what the problem is. Recall the problem with Mary’s daughter always being late. One way to represent, or to think about, this problem is that she is being defiant. She refuses to get ready in time. This type of representation or definition suggests a particular type of solution. Another way to think about the problem, however, is to consider the possibility that she is simply being sidetracked by interesting diversions. This different conception of what the problem is (i.e., different representation) suggests a very different solution strategy. For example, if Mary defines the problem as defiance, she may be tempted to solve the problem using some kind of coercive tactics, that is, to assert her authority as her mother and force her to listen. On the other hand, if Mary defines the problem as distraction, she may try to solve it by simply removing the distracting objects.

As you might guess, when a problem is represented one way, the solution may seem very difficult, or even impossible. Seen another way, the solution might be very easy. For example, consider the following problem (from Nasar, 1998):

Two bicyclists start 20 miles apart and head toward each other, each going at a steady rate of 10 miles per hour. At the same time, a fly that travels at a steady 15 miles per hour starts from the front wheel of the southbound bicycle and flies to the front wheel of the northbound one, then turns around and flies to the front wheel of the southbound one again, and continues in this manner until he is crushed between the two front wheels. Question: what total distance did the fly cover?

Please take a few minutes to try to solve this problem.

Most people represent this problem as a question about a fly because, well, that is how the question is asked. The solution, using this representation, is to figure out how far the fly travels on the first leg of its journey, then add this total to how far it travels on the second leg of its journey (when it turns around and returns to the first bicycle), then continue to add the smaller distance from each leg of the journey until you converge on the correct answer. You would have to be quite skilled at math to solve this problem, and you would probably need some time and pencil and paper to do it.

If you consider a different representation, however, you can solve this problem in your head. Instead of thinking about it as a question about a fly, think about it as a question about the bicycles. They are 20 miles apart, and each is traveling 10 miles per hour. How long will it take for the bicycles to reach each other? Right, one hour. The fly is traveling 15 miles per hour; therefore, it will travel a total of 15 miles back and forth in the hour before the bicycles meet. Represented one way (as a problem about a fly), the problem is quite difficult. Represented another way (as a problem about two bicycles), it is easy. Changing your representation of a problem is sometimes the best—sometimes the only—way to solve it.

Unfortunately, however, changing a problem’s representation is not the easiest thing in the world to do. Often, problem solvers get stuck looking at a problem one way. This is called  fixation . Most people who represent the preceding problem as a problem about a fly probably do not pause to reconsider, and consequently change, their representation. A parent who thinks her daughter is being defiant is unlikely to consider the possibility that her behavior is far less purposeful.

Problem-solving fixation was examined by a group of German psychologists called Gestalt psychologists during the 1930’s and 1940’s. Karl Dunker, for example, discovered an important type of failure to take a different perspective called  functional fixedness . Imagine being a participant in one of his experiments. You are asked to figure out how to mount two candles on a door and are given an assortment of odds and ends, including a small empty cardboard box and some thumbtacks. Perhaps you have already figured out a solution: tack the box to the door so it forms a platform, then put the candles on top of the box. Most people are able to arrive at this solution. Imagine a slight variation of the procedure, however. What if, instead of being empty, the box had matches in it? Most people given this version of the problem do not arrive at the solution given above. Why? Because it seems to people that when the box contains matches, it already has a function; it is a matchbox. People are unlikely to consider a new function for an object that already has a function. This is functional fixedness.

Mental set is a type of fixation in which the problem solver gets stuck using the same solution strategy that has been successful in the past, even though the solution may no longer be useful. It is commonly seen when students do math problems for homework. Often, several problems in a row require the reapplication of the same solution strategy. Then, without warning, the next problem in the set requires a new strategy. Many students attempt to apply the formerly successful strategy on the new problem and therefore cannot come up with a correct answer.

The thing to remember is that you cannot solve a problem unless you correctly identify what it is to begin with (initial state) and what you want the end result to be (goal state). That may mean looking at the problem from a different angle and representing it in a new way. The correct representation does not guarantee a successful solution, but it certainly puts you on the right track.

A bit more optimistically, the Gestalt psychologists discovered what may be considered the opposite of fixation, namely  insight . Sometimes the solution to a problem just seems to pop into your head. Wolfgang Kohler examined insight by posing many different problems to chimpanzees, principally problems pertaining to their acquisition of out-of-reach food. In one version, a banana was placed outside of a chimpanzee’s cage and a short stick inside the cage. The stick was too short to retrieve the banana, but was long enough to retrieve a longer stick also located outside of the cage. This second stick was long enough to retrieve the banana. After trying, and failing, to reach the banana with the shorter stick, the chimpanzee would try a couple of random-seeming attempts, react with some apparent frustration or anger, then suddenly rush to the longer stick, the correct solution fully realized at this point. This sudden appearance of the solution, observed many times with many different problems, was termed insight by Kohler.

Lest you think it pertains to chimpanzees only, Karl Dunker demonstrated that children also solve problems through insight in the 1930s. More importantly, you have probably experienced insight yourself. Think back to a time when you were trying to solve a difficult problem. After struggling for a while, you gave up. Hours later, the solution just popped into your head, perhaps when you were taking a walk, eating dinner, or lying in bed.

fixation :  when a problem solver gets stuck looking at a problem a particular way and cannot change his or her representation of it (or his or her intended solution strategy)

functional fixedness :  a specific type of fixation in which a problem solver cannot think of a new use for an object that already has a function

mental set :  a specific type of fixation in which a problem solver gets stuck using the same solution strategy that has been successful in the past

insight :  a sudden realization of a solution to a problem

Solving Problems by Trial and Error

Correctly identifying the problem and your goal for a solution is a good start, but recall the psychologist’s definition of a problem: it includes a set of possible intermediate states. Viewed this way, a problem can be solved satisfactorily only if one can find a path through some of these intermediate states to the goal. Imagine a fairly routine problem, finding a new route to school when your ordinary route is blocked (by road construction, for example). At each intersection, you may turn left, turn right, or go straight. A satisfactory solution to the problem (of getting to school) is a sequence of selections at each intersection that allows you to wind up at school.

If you had all the time in the world to get to school, you might try choosing intermediate states randomly. At one corner you turn left, the next you go straight, then you go left again, then right, then right, then straight. Unfortunately, trial and error will not necessarily get you where you want to go, and even if it does, it is not the fastest way to get there. For example, when a friend of ours was in college, he got lost on the way to a concert and attempted to find the venue by choosing streets to turn onto randomly (this was long before the use of GPS). Amazingly enough, the strategy worked, although he did end up missing two out of the three bands who played that night.

Trial and error is not all bad, however. B.F. Skinner, a prominent behaviorist psychologist, suggested that people often behave randomly in order to see what effect the behavior has on the environment and what subsequent effect this environmental change has on them. This seems particularly true for the very young person. Picture a child filling a household’s fish tank with toilet paper, for example. To a child trying to develop a repertoire of creative problem-solving strategies, an odd and random behavior might be just the ticket. Eventually, the exasperated parent hopes, the child will discover that many of these random behaviors do not successfully solve problems; in fact, in many cases they create problems. Thus, one would expect a decrease in this random behavior as a child matures. You should realize, however, that the opposite extreme is equally counterproductive. If the children become too rigid, never trying something unexpected and new, their problem solving skills can become too limited.

Effective problem solving seems to call for a happy medium that strikes a balance between using well-founded old strategies and trying new ground and territory. The individual who recognizes a situation in which an old problem-solving strategy would work best, and who can also recognize a situation in which a new untested strategy is necessary is halfway to success.

Solving Problems with Algorithms and Heuristics

For many problems there is a possible strategy available that will guarantee a correct solution. For example, think about math problems. Math lessons often consist of step-by-step procedures that can be used to solve the problems. If you apply the strategy without error, you are guaranteed to arrive at the correct solution to the problem. This approach is called using an  algorithm , a term that denotes the step-by-step procedure that guarantees a correct solution. Because algorithms are sometimes available and come with a guarantee, you might think that most people use them frequently. Unfortunately, however, they do not. As the experience of many students who have struggled through math classes can attest, algorithms can be extremely difficult to use, even when the problem solver knows which algorithm is supposed to work in solving the problem. In problems outside of math class, we often do not even know if an algorithm is available. It is probably fair to say, then, that algorithms are rarely used when people try to solve problems.

Because algorithms are so difficult to use, people often pass up the opportunity to guarantee a correct solution in favor of a strategy that is much easier to use and yields a reasonable chance of coming up with a correct solution. These strategies are called  problem solving heuristics . Similar to what you saw in section 6.2 with reasoning heuristics, a problem solving heuristic is a shortcut strategy that people use when trying to solve problems. It usually works pretty well, but does not guarantee a correct solution to the problem. For example, one problem solving heuristic might be “always move toward the goal” (so when trying to get to school when your regular route is blocked, you would always turn in the direction you think the school is). A heuristic that people might use when doing math homework is “use the same solution strategy that you just used for the previous problem.”

By the way, we hope these last two paragraphs feel familiar to you. They seem to parallel a distinction that you recently learned. Indeed, algorithms and problem-solving heuristics are another example of the distinction between Type 1 thinking and Type 2 thinking.

Although it is probably not worth describing a large number of specific heuristics, two observations about heuristics are worth mentioning. First, heuristics can be very general or they can be very specific, pertaining to a particular type of problem only. For example, “always move toward the goal” is a general strategy that you can apply to countless problem situations. On the other hand, “when you are lost without a functioning gps, pick the most expensive car you can see and follow it” is specific to the problem of being lost. Second, all heuristics are not equally useful. One heuristic that many students know is “when in doubt, choose c for a question on a multiple-choice exam.” This is a dreadful strategy because many instructors intentionally randomize the order of answer choices. Another test-taking heuristic, somewhat more useful, is “look for the answer to one question somewhere else on the exam.”

You really should pay attention to the application of heuristics to test taking. Imagine that while reviewing your answers for a multiple-choice exam before turning it in, you come across a question for which you originally thought the answer was c. Upon reflection, you now think that the answer might be b. Should you change the answer to b, or should you stick with your first impression? Most people will apply the heuristic strategy to “stick with your first impression.” What they do not realize, of course, is that this is a very poor strategy (Lilienfeld et al, 2009). Most of the errors on exams come on questions that were answered wrong originally and were not changed (so they remain wrong). There are many fewer errors where we change a correct answer to an incorrect answer. And, of course, sometimes we change an incorrect answer to a correct answer. In fact, research has shown that it is more common to change a wrong answer to a right answer than vice versa (Bruno, 2001).

The belief in this poor test-taking strategy (stick with your first impression) is based on the  confirmation bias   (Nickerson, 1998; Wason, 1960). You first saw the confirmation bias in Module 1, but because it is so important, we will repeat the information here. People have a bias, or tendency, to notice information that confirms what they already believe. Somebody at one time told you to stick with your first impression, so when you look at the results of an exam you have taken, you will tend to notice the cases that are consistent with that belief. That is, you will notice the cases in which you originally had an answer correct and changed it to the wrong answer. You tend not to notice the other two important (and more common) cases, changing an answer from wrong to right, and leaving a wrong answer unchanged.

Because heuristics by definition do not guarantee a correct solution to a problem, mistakes are bound to occur when we employ them. A poor choice of a specific heuristic will lead to an even higher likelihood of making an error.

algorithm :  a step-by-step procedure that guarantees a correct solution to a problem

problem solving heuristic :  a shortcut strategy that we use to solve problems. Although they are easy to use, they do not guarantee correct judgments and solutions

confirmation bias :  people’s tendency to notice information that confirms what they already believe

An Effective Problem-Solving Sequence

You may be left with a big question: If algorithms are hard to use and heuristics often don’t work, how am I supposed to solve problems? Robert Sternberg (1996), as part of his theory of what makes people successfully intelligent (Module 8) described a problem-solving sequence that has been shown to work rather well:

• Identify the existence of a problem.  In school, problem identification is often easy; problems that you encounter in math classes, for example, are conveniently labeled as problems for you. Outside of school, however, realizing that you have a problem is a key difficulty that you must get past in order to begin solving it. You must be very sensitive to the symptoms that indicate a problem.
• Define the problem.  Suppose you realize that you have been having many headaches recently. Very likely, you would identify this as a problem. If you define the problem as “headaches,” the solution would probably be to take aspirin or ibuprofen or some other anti-inflammatory medication. If the headaches keep returning, however, you have not really solved the problem—likely because you have mistaken a symptom for the problem itself. Instead, you must find the root cause of the headaches. Stress might be the real problem. For you to successfully solve many problems it may be necessary for you to overcome your fixations and represent the problems differently. One specific strategy that you might find useful is to try to define the problem from someone else’s perspective. How would your parents, spouse, significant other, doctor, etc. define the problem? Somewhere in these different perspectives may lurk the key definition that will allow you to find an easier and permanent solution.
• Formulate strategy.  Now it is time to begin planning exactly how the problem will be solved. Is there an algorithm or heuristic available for you to use? Remember, heuristics by their very nature guarantee that occasionally you will not be able to solve the problem. One point to keep in mind is that you should look for long-range solutions, which are more likely to address the root cause of a problem than short-range solutions.
• Represent and organize information.  Similar to the way that the problem itself can be defined, or represented in multiple ways, information within the problem is open to different interpretations. Suppose you are studying for a big exam. You have chapters from a textbook and from a supplemental reader, along with lecture notes that all need to be studied. How should you (represent and) organize these materials? Should you separate them by type of material (text versus reader versus lecture notes), or should you separate them by topic? To solve problems effectively, you must learn to find the most useful representation and organization of information.
• Allocate resources.  This is perhaps the simplest principle of the problem solving sequence, but it is extremely difficult for many people. First, you must decide whether time, money, skills, effort, goodwill, or some other resource would help to solve the problem Then, you must make the hard choice of deciding which resources to use, realizing that you cannot devote maximum resources to every problem. Very often, the solution to problem is simply to change how resources are allocated (for example, spending more time studying in order to improve grades).
• Monitor and evaluate solutions.  Pay attention to the solution strategy while you are applying it. If it is not working, you may be able to select another strategy. Another fact you should realize about problem solving is that it never does end. Solving one problem frequently brings up new ones. Good monitoring and evaluation of your problem solutions can help you to anticipate and get a jump on solving the inevitable new problems that will arise.

Please note that this as  an  effective problem-solving sequence, not  the  effective problem solving sequence. Just as you can become fixated and end up representing the problem incorrectly or trying an inefficient solution, you can become stuck applying the problem-solving sequence in an inflexible way. Clearly there are problem situations that can be solved without using these skills in this order.

Additionally, many real-world problems may require that you go back and redefine a problem several times as the situation changes (Sternberg et al. 2000). For example, consider the problem with Mary’s daughter one last time. At first, Mary did represent the problem as one of defiance. When her early strategy of pleading and threatening punishment was unsuccessful, Mary began to observe her daughter more carefully. She noticed that, indeed, her daughter’s attention would be drawn by an irresistible distraction or book. Fresh with a re-representation of the problem, she began a new solution strategy. She began to remind her daughter every few minutes to stay on task and remind her that if she is ready before it is time to leave, she may return to the book or other distracting object at that time. Fortunately, this strategy was successful, so Mary did not have to go back and redefine the problem again.

Pick one or two of the problems that you listed when you first started studying this section and try to work out the steps of Sternberg’s problem solving sequence for each one.

a mental representation of a category of things in the world

an assumption about the truth of something that is not stated. Inferences come from our prior knowledge and experience, and from logical reasoning

knowledge about one’s own cognitive processes; thinking about your thinking

individuals who are less competent tend to overestimate their abilities more than individuals who are more competent do

Thinking like a scientist in your everyday life for the purpose of drawing correct conclusions. It entails skepticism; an ability to identify biases, distortions, omissions, and assumptions; and excellent deductive and inductive reasoning, and problem solving skills.

a way of thinking in which you refrain from drawing a conclusion or changing your mind until good evidence has been provided

an inclination, tendency, leaning, or prejudice

a type of reasoning in which the conclusion is guaranteed to be true any time the statements leading up to it are true

a set of statements in which the beginning statements lead to a conclusion

an argument for which true beginning statements guarantee that the conclusion is true

a type of reasoning in which we make judgments about likelihood from sets of evidence

an inductive argument in which the beginning statements lead to a conclusion that is probably true

fast, automatic, and emotional thinking

slow, effortful, and logical thinking

a shortcut strategy that we use to make judgments and solve problems. Although they are easy to use, they do not guarantee correct judgments and solutions

udging the frequency or likelihood of some event type according to how easily examples of the event can be called to mind (i.e., how available they are to memory)

judging the likelihood that something is a member of a category on the basis of how much it resembles a typical category member (i.e., how representative it is of the category)

a situation in which we are in an initial state, have a desired goal state, and there is a number of possible intermediate states (i.e., there is no obvious way to get from the initial to the goal state)

noticing, comprehending and forming a mental conception of a problem

when a problem solver gets stuck looking at a problem a particular way and cannot change his or her representation of it (or his or her intended solution strategy)

a specific type of fixation in which a problem solver cannot think of a new use for an object that already has a function

a specific type of fixation in which a problem solver gets stuck using the same solution strategy that has been successful in the past

a sudden realization of a solution to a problem

a step-by-step procedure that guarantees a correct solution to a problem

The tendency to notice and pay attention to information that confirms your prior beliefs and to ignore information that disconfirms them.

a shortcut strategy that we use to solve problems. Although they are easy to use, they do not guarantee correct judgments and solutions

Introduction to Psychology Copyright © 2020 by Ken Gray; Elizabeth Arnott-Hill; and Or'Shaundra Benson is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Critical Thinking Models: A Comprehensive Guide for Effective Decision Making

Critical thinking models are valuable frameworks that help individuals develop and enhance their critical thinking skills . These models provide a structured approach to problem-solving and decision-making by encouraging the evaluation of information and arguments in a logical, systematic manner. By understanding and applying these models, one can learn to make well-reasoned judgments and decisions.

Various critical thinking models exist, each catering to different contexts and scenarios. These models offer a step-by-step method to analyze situations, scrutinize assumptions and biases, and consider alternative perspectives. Ultimately, the goal of critical thinking models is to enhance an individual’s ability to think critically, ultimately improving their reasoning and decision-making skills in both personal and professional settings.

Key Takeaways

Fundamentals of critical thinking.

Definition and Importance

Core cognitive skills.

These skills enable individuals to consistently apply intellectual standards in their thought process, which ultimately results in sound judgments and informed decisions.

Influence of Cognitive Biases

To counter the influence of cognitive biases, critical thinkers must be aware of their own assumptions and strive to apply consistent and objective evaluation criteria in their thinking process. The practice of actively recognizing and addressing cognitive biases promotes an unbiased and rational approach to problem-solving and decision-making.

The Critical Thinking Process

Stages of Critical Thinking

Values play a significant role in the critical thinking process. Critical thinkers assess the significance of moral, ethical, or cultural values shaping the issue, argument, or decision at hand. They determine whether these values align with the evidence and logic they have analyzed.

Application in Decision Making

Critical thinking models, the red model.

The RED Model stands for Recognize Assumptions, Evaluate Arguments, and Draw Conclusions. It emphasizes the importance of questioning assumptions, weighing evidence, and reaching logical conclusions.

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Bloom’s Taxonomy is a hierarchical model that classifies cognitive skills into six levels of complexity. These levels are remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. By progressing through these levels, individuals can develop higher-order thinking skills.

Paul-Elder Model

The halpern critical thinking assessment.

These four critical thinking models can be used as frameworks to improve and enhance cognitive abilities. By learning and practicing these models, individuals can become better equipped to analyze complex information, evaluate options, and make well-informed decisions.

Evaluating Information and Arguments

Evidence assessment, logic and fallacies, argument analysis, enhancing critical thinking, strategies for improvement, critical thinking in education.

In the field of education, critical thinking is an essential component of effective learning and pedagogy. Integrating critical thinking into the curriculum encourages student autonomy, fosters innovation, and improves student outcomes. Teachers can use various approaches to promote critical thinking, such as:

Developing a Critical Thinking Mindset

Critical thinking in various contexts, the workplace and beyond.

In the workplace context, critical thinkers are able to recognize assumptions, evaluate arguments, and draw conclusions, following models such as the RED model . They can also adapt their thinking to suit various scenarios, allowing them to tackle complex and diverse problems.

Creative and Lateral Thinking

In conclusion, critical thinking is a multifaceted skill that comprises various thought processes, including creative and lateral thinking. By embracing these skills, individuals can excel in the workplace and in their personal lives, making better decisions and solving problems effectively.

Overcoming Challenges

Recognizing and addressing bias.

By adopting these practices, individuals can minimize the impact of biases and enhance the overall quality of their critical thinking skills.

Dealing with Information Overload

By implementing these techniques, individuals can effectively manage information overload, enabling them to process and analyze data more effectively, leading to better decision-making.

Measuring Critical Thinking

Assessment tools and criteria.

Furthermore, criteria for assessing critical thinking often include precision, relevance, and the ability to gather and analyze relevant information. Some assessors utilize the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment , which measures the application of cognitive skills such as deduction, observation, and induction in real-world scenarios.

The Role of IQ and Tests

Frequently asked questions, what are the main steps involved in the paul-elder critical thinking model.

The Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Model is a comprehensive framework for developing critical thinking skills. The main steps include: identifying the purpose, formulating questions, gathering information, identifying assumptions, interpreting information, and evaluating arguments. The model emphasizes clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, and fairness throughout the critical thinking process. By following these steps, individuals can efficiently analyze and evaluate complex ideas and issues.

Can you list five techniques to enhance critical thinking skills?

What is the red model of critical thinking and how is it applied, how do the ‘3 c’s’ of critical thinking contribute to effective problem-solving.

The ‘3 C’s’ of critical thinking – Curiosity, Creativity, and Criticism – collectively contribute to effective problem-solving. Curiosity allows individuals to explore various perspectives and ask thought-provoking questions, while Creativity helps develop innovative solutions and unique approaches to challenges. Criticism, or the ability to evaluate and analyze ideas objectively, ensures that the problem-solving process remains grounded in logic and relevance.

What characteristics distinguish critical thinking from creative thinking?

What are some recommended books to help improve problem-solving and critical thinking skills, you may also like, how to teach critical thinking in the digital age: effective strategies and techniques, 5 board games to develop critical thinking skills, critical thinking for team collaboration: a guide to effective problem-solving, masterclass vs coursera: an in-depth comparison for eager learners, download this free ebook.

Logical reasoning and decision making

• September 2011
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• Kingston University

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Stuart Appelle

• Karl Popper
• David C. Cassidy
• Max Dresden
• PATTERN RECOGN

• Karl R. Popper
• Norwood R. Hanson

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

How to Apply Rational Thinking in Decision Making

I. introduction.

Have you ever thought about how you make decisions? Every day, in different situations, we need to make a series of decisions – from what to wear or what to eat for breakfast to more significant choices like career moves or financial investments. These decisions can have far-reaching effects on our personal and professional life. That’s why it’s important to approach decision-making in a purposeful and rational manner.

Let’s begin by understanding what rational thinking is: it’s a cognitive process that involves logical and objective reasoning. Basically, it’s a method used to logically process information and make a sensible judgement or decision. It’s about thinking clearly, sensibly, and logically, ensuring our actions are not guided by emotion, bias, or prejudice.

Decisions are an integral part of our lives. However, the quality of these decisions can vary greatly based on how we approach them. Irrational or impulsive decisions can lead to negative consequences or regret. Meanwhile, employing a rational thought process can lead to well-informed, balanced decisions that we can feel confident about.

Rationality is such a pivotal aspect of thoughtful decision-making, and harnessing it can truly be life-changing. In this blog post, we will understand the concept of rational thinking, its role in decision making, and how you can adopt it in your everyday life. By the conclusion of this article, we will also present you with tips to improve these critical thinking skills, and showcase real-life scenarios where rational thinking has proven successful. Let’s embark on this rational journey. It’s decision time!

II. Understanding Rational Thinking

Rational thinking, as the term implies, refers to a certain approach or method that involves the use of reason in processing information and formulating decisions. It encourages us to act based on facts, evidence, and logic rather than succumbing to emotional impulses or personal biases.

A. Detailed Definition of Rational Thinking

Rational thinking, in the broadest sense, is the cognitive process wherein the identification and evaluation of evidence guide an action or belief. Its synonyms include critical thinking, logical reasoning, or analytical thinking, and it is the cornerstone of problem-solving, innovation, and decision-making.

This form of thinking is characterized by deductive and inductive reasoning - where you draw general conclusions from specific observations or specific conclusions from general principles.

“In its essence, rational thinking is a systematic, disciplined process demanding keen intellect and an open mind” - Dr. Janeen DeMarte, Psychologist

B. Core Elements of Rational Thinking

So, what goes into rational thinking? Here are the three major elements that define the process:

1. Objectivity

One of the primary parts of rational thinking is maintaining objectivity. This means having an unbiased outlook and assessing situations based on facts rather than personal feelings or preconceived notions. It involves a scientific approach to thinking, where all available evidence is considered before making a judgment.

Logic is the bedrock of rational thinking. Every argument or conclusion that you make via rational thinking must logically follow from the premises. Anything that contradicts this principle is considered fallacious or invalid.

Lastly, honesty is integral to rational thinking. Often people manipulate facts to match their predetermined conclusion, but rational thinking necessitates an honest approach. It involves being truthful about the facts and accepting the conclusion that follows, no matter how it aligns with initial assumptions or desires.

C. Why Is Rational Thinking Important?

Rational thinking serves as our guiding light to navigate the complexities of the world around us. The more rational we are, the better we can understand reality, solve problems, and make informed decisions. It helps us step out of our emotional chaos and subjective bias, ensuring our decisions are grounded in reason and logic.

The importance of rational thinking is not confined to grandiose decisions, but also to our routine lives. From simply deciding your daily diet to complex decisions like career planning, rational thinking plays an essential role.

“Rational thinking helps us stay aligned with reality, improve the quality of our lives, and bring us closer to our objectives.”

V. Case Study: Successful Rational Decision Making in Real-life Scenarios

Let’s delve into some real-world instances where a rational approach led to successful decision-making outcomes. These case studies provide tangible insight into how rationality can have a profound impact on the decision-making process, and underscores the value of thinking rationally in our daily undertakings.

A. Steve Jobs and the Creation of the iPhone

One celebrated instance of rational decision-making is the creation of the revolutionary product – the iPhone. Steve Jobs, the late co-founder of Apple Inc., is renowned for his resolute decision to push for the iPhone’s development despite facing internal opposition.

Jobs identified the problem – the absence of a substantial mobile device merging a music player and a communication tool. He gathered relevant information about the technological landscape, the market, potential competitors, and customer needs.

Employing logic, he assessed this data objectively and determined that such a product stood a good chance of carving a niche in the market. His bold, rational decision gave birth to one of the world’s most sought-after pieces of technology.

B. Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol Crisis Response

Another notable example comes from the pharmaceutical industry. In 1982, Johnson & Johnson faced a severe crisis when seven people in Chicago died after consuming its widely popular product, Tylenol, which had been laced with cyanide.

Regardless of the unknown culprit being an external actor, Johnson & Johnson embarked on a highly rational decision-making process. They first recognized the problem – a massive blow to their product’s credibility and potential loss of customer trust.

Information was gathered on the scale of the disaster and potential options to reinstate public confidence. Evincing remarkable honesty, the company opted to recall all Tylenol capsules, costing them over $100 million. This proved to be a rational decision in the long term, as it exemplified their enduring commitment to customer safety and restored their damaged reputation.

C. Elon Musk’s SpaceX Venture

Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX, offers a more recent example. His decision to enter the space industry was a steep one, as space exploration had been dominated by national governmental organizations, like NASA.

The problem Musk identified was the lack of affordable methods to explore and travel in space. Gathering information about the industry, technological capacities, and prices, he realized with objectivity the huge challenge he faced. However, he saw a possibility where others did not.

SpaceX was established to create more affordable spacecraft and has since successfully launched many missions, proving that a private company can compete in this astoundingly complex field. This indicates that rational thinking and calculated risk-taking can pave the way for ground-breaking revolutions.

VI. Tips to Improve Rational Thinking Skill

Rational thinking isn’t an inborn skill that some are privileged to have and others not. Rather, it’s a learnable skill that can be honed and developed with time, effort, consistency and patience. Here are some methods you can use to elevate your rational thinking:

A. Self-awareness

Cultivating self-awareness is the first step to improving your rational thinking skill. This involves being mindful of your thoughts, feelings, actions, and biases. Question your beliefs and conclusions, and try to understand both the emotion and rationality behind your thoughts.

“> Cultivating self-awareness is like pulling the curtain back on your internal drama, revealing the characters in play and understanding their motivations.”

Being aware of your cognitive biases can also enhance your rational thinking. Cognitive biases are thinking errors we make that can affect our decisions and judgments. For instance, the confirmation bias can block us from accepting new information. By recognizing these biases, we can counteract them and think more rationally.

B. Constant Learning

Rational thinking isn’t a static skill. Instead, it constantly needs fuel in the form of knowledge to grow stronger. Surround yourself with diverse knowledge sources such as books, podcasts, articles, seminars, conversations with people from different walks of life and industry experts. The more information you gather, the more well-rounded your understanding of the world will be, allowing for more sound judgments.

“> Lifelong learning is a limitless source of fuel for rational thoughts. It broadens your experiences and perspectives and helps you make decisions from an informed viewpoint.”

C. Cultivating Patience

Rational thinking requires patience. Quick decisions often lead to irrational outcomes. When you have more patience, you are much more likely to gather all the relevant information and think the situation over before coming to a decision. Be patient, take the time to think, and do not be swayed by the impulsiveness that often accompanies decision-making.

“> Patience is more than simply waiting. It’s the ability to keep a good attitude while working hard, focusing on your goal and trusting in the process.”

Remember, rational thinking is a journey, not a destination, and growth often takes effort to realize. But with consistency, self-awareness, patience, and the desire to learn, you can substantially improve your rational thinking skills and make more informed and logical decisions in your day-to-day life.

VII. Conclusion

In conclusion, it’s clear that rational thinking is a highly beneficial tool when it comes to decision making. Logic, honesty and objectivity are the key elements that enable us to make rational decisions.

“Rational thinking is not just about making decisions that benefit us in the short term, it’s about making decisions that will continue to benefit us in the long run.”

If we let our situations, emotions or biases determine our decisions, we may face unfavorable outcomes. Hence, exercising rationality helps us avoid the negative consequences of irrationality.

Rational thinking doesn’t only enable us to make well thought-out decisions, it also allows us to understand why we make certain decisions. We learnt about a simple step-by-step guide which can be integrated into our everyday life, helping us approach even the most complex problems rationally.

Remember the stories of successful rational decision making we shared? They provide real-life examples of how beneficial rational thinking can be. These people were able to achieve great things by thinking rationally and you can too!

Furthermore, we should always strive to improve our rational thinking skills. This can be achieved by promoting self-awareness, practicing patience, and dedicating ourselves to constant learning.

All in all, it’s important to realize that our decisions shape our lives. Consequently, the way we approach our decisions plays a big role in determining our successes and failures. By incorporating rational thinking into our decision making, we can ensure that we’re making the best possible decisions that will lead us towards our desired outcomes.

To paraphrase a famous quote,

“Every decision we make, and every step we take, is a result of our thinking. Therefore, if we want to change our lives, we must first change our thinking.”

Let’s strive to apply rational thinking in our everyday decision making and see the powerful positive impact it can have on our lives!

VIII. Call to Action

In conclusion, rational thinking plays a crucial role in making sound decisions personally or professionally.

“The key to good decision making is evaluating alternatives carefully and thoroughly. This calls for us to utilize our cognitive abilities rationally.”

Taking the time to analyze situations objectively, consider all feasible options, and logically draw conclusions will greatly improve our decision-making abilities.

Implement Rational Thinking

Now that you have a better understanding of rational thinking’s importance in decision-making, it is time to evaluate your own decision-making processes. Start by identifying opportunities in your daily life where you can apply rational thinking. You may be surprised at how often you encounter decision-making scenarios. From determining what to have for breakfast, choosing the route for your daily commute to making important business decisions, rational thinking can be applied intelligibly.

Continuous Improvement

Enriching rational thinking skills isn’t a process that happens overnight. It requires sustained effort and continuous learning.

• Try to maintain a continuous self-awareness of your decision-making processes.
• Aim to always gather relevant information before making decisions.
• Strive to interpret the given information objectively without any personal bias.
• Ensure to consider all possible options and outcomes before coming to a conclusion.

In addition, developing patience is equally critical as rushing through decisions can lead to errors in judgment.

“Genius might be the ability to say a profound thing in a simple way.” ~ Charles Bukowski

The beauty of rational thinking lies in its simplicity. It’s about being grounded in reality, and making decisions logically.

Further Resources

While this post provides a good starting point, there’s much more to explore when it comes to rational thinking and decision making. Books, online courses, and workshops can provide in-depth information and practical exercises to help you further improve your rational thinking skills. Search for resources that best suit your learning style, and make a commitment to continuous growth.

Remember, every decision we make shapes our life. Thus, each decision, no matter how small, should be made after thorough rational consideration. Adopt rational thinking today and make it an integral part of your daily life. Your future self will thank you!

Unlock Your Purpose Through Passion

Effective negotiation strategies, 3 steps to improved rational thinking, 5 surprising statistics about rational thinking, 10 irrational thoughts we must eliminate, why do we often lack rational thinking.

Explore Jobs

• Jobs Near Me
• Remote Jobs
• Full Time Jobs
• Part Time Jobs
• Entry Level Jobs
• Work From Home Jobs

Find Specific Jobs

• $15 Per Hour Jobs
• $20 Per Hour Jobs
• Hiring Immediately Jobs
• High School Jobs
• H1b Visa Jobs

Explore Careers

• Business And Financial
• Architecture And Engineering
• Computer And Mathematical

Explore Professions

• What They Do
• Certifications
• Demographics

Best Companies

• Health Care
• Fortune 500

Explore Companies

• CEO And Executies
• Resume Builder
• Career Advice
• Explore Majors
• Questions And Answers
• Interview Questions

The Most Important Decision-Making Skills (With Examples)

• Most Common Skills
• What Are Soft Skills?
• What Are Leadership Skills?
• What Are What Are Hybrid Skills?
• What Are Teamwork Skills?
• What Are Communication Skills?
• What Are Organizational Skills?
• What Are Personal Skills?
• What Are Interpersonal Skills?
• What Are Decision Making Skills?
• What Are Negotiation Skills?
• How To Multitask
• What Are Creative Thinking Skills?
• What Are Adaptability Skills?
• What Are Internal Analysis?
• What Are Multitasking Skills?
• What Is Professional Networking?
• What Is Nonverbal Communication?
• What Are Critical Thinking Skills?
• Presentation Skills
• What Is Accountability?
• What Is Emotional Intelligence?
• Verbal Communication Skills

Find a Job You Really Want In

Good decision-making skills are sought by almost all companies. Whether you’re applying for an entry-level position or an executive role, you should highlight your decision-making skills throughout the application process.

In this article, we will go over what decision-making skills are, how to improve your skills in this area, and how to highlight your ability to make good decisions.

Key Takeaways:

You make decisions every day for various functions, from personal to professional, and consistently making good decisions can only help your career.

There are three main ways to approach decision-making: using intuition, reasoning, or a combination of both.

When making a decision you should identify the problem, do some research, and evaluate your options before you make a decision.

What are decision-making skills?

The most important decision-making skills, more decision-making skills, the decision-making process, how to improve your decision-making skills, how to highlight your decision-making skills while job hunting, decisiveness skills faqs.

• Sign Up For More Advice and Jobs

Decision-making skills are about your ability to choose a good option out of two or more alternatives. It takes a host of skills to be able to quickly and compassionately make wise choices that are good for both the present and the future.

There are three main categories of decision-making skills that correspond to three different ways to make decisions: using intuition, reasoning, or a combination of both.

Intuition is your default response, or the gut feeling you get when presented with a problem or decision to make. This first reaction comes from a combination of things you’ve learned, experiences you’ve had, and opinions you hold, so everyone’s intuition is different.

Using intuition means basing your decision on your lived experiences, so it can be subjective. Skills like creativity and emotional intelligence fall into this category.

Reasoning , on the other hand, is rooted in data. You reason when you use the data available to you and only base a decision on facts and figures instead of your instinctive reaction. This is a more objective way to come to a decision and it’s usually how bigger decisions are made.

Problem-solving and logical thinking are examples of decision-making skills in this category.

Both. Most often, decisions are made with some combination of both intuition and reasoning. Using both is a good way to check and make sure your choice is logical while also paying attention to the human element of it.

Since we make decisions all the time, we usually don’t stop to think about whether we should make an intuition-based or reason-based decision. Instead, we naturally use a combination of the two.

Many skills go into making effective decisions, from problem-solving to emotional intelligence. Here are some of the most important ones:

Problem-solving. The number one skill you need to be an effective decision-maker is problem-solving. Since decisions are just a type of problem (determining which option is the best), having strong problem-solving skills is definitely an asset.

If you approach a decision from a logical mindset as if it were a problem to solve, odds are that the solutions you come up with and your final decision will be stronger.

Choosing a reliable manufacturer to supply the product you sell. Comparing candidates to the job requirements. Reassigning tasks when an employee unexpectedly resigns.

Collaboration. Decisions can’t always be made by one person. You need to have good collaboration and compromise skills to make the best decision sometimes when it involves a group.

Even when you’re making a decision on your own, getting extra input from friends or coworkers can help you brainstorm the best outcome. Collaboration is your friend, both when you need to make a group decision and when you’re the one responsible for making the decision.

Brainstorming potential names for a new product. Asking staff about the impact of extended hours. Listening to employee needs and preferences for a new office space.

Emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence , or EQ, is the ability to observe and understand your own emotions and the emotions of the people around you. Being able to take emotions into account will make you a stronger decision-maker.

Think of this as related to intuitive decision-making. You need to balance facts, figures, and emotions to come to a good decision.

Proposing the best way to boost sales. Evaluating the impact of cutting spending. Choosing an interim manager from an internal pool.

Logical reasoning. This skill is key for the middle steps of the decision-making process. Being able to fully evaluate and analyze your information, options, and decisions will make your decisions stronger.

This skill is more closely related to reasoning, the side of decision-making that relies on facts and figures instead of on emotions.

Deciding how bonuses will be given for the year. Choosing which employee or employees to lay off. Creating an employee schedule based on time off requests and coverage needs.

Creativity. The more creative you are in your problem-solving, the better options and potential outcomes you’ll have to work with, as well as having creative ways to implement your decision.

The most straightforward option isn’t always the best one, and sometimes you need to think outside the box to find a solution that meets everyone’s needs.

Arranging a small office space so that everyone can fit comfortably and be productive. Finding ways to lower costs without sacrificing performance. Developing a new record-keeping system that meets your team’s needs.

Organization . Being organized can help you keep all of your background information, options, and other tools in order.

This allows you to stay clear-headed in your decision-making, reducing the risk that you’ll overlook a key piece of information. It can also help you feel less overwhelmed by the decision, which also results in better choices.

Creating a centralized calendar where employees can update their schedule preferences. Organizing data that will help you decide whether or not to continue a project. Collecting employee feedback in survey form to make it simpler to see what the majority wants.

There are many more skills that will help you sharpen your ability to make good decisions. Take a look at this list and see what you’re already good at and where you could improve.

Time management. Making decisions in a timely manner isn’t just about making a quick, hasty decision. Managing your time to properly work through the seven steps is a skill that will put you above everyone else.

Leadership . When collaborating and making a group decision, someone needs to take charge and make sure the decision is implemented, which is when good leadership skills are needed.

Ethics. Making ethical decisions is a necessary skill to have, so knowing how to weigh the ethical pros and cons is key.

Research . The better research you can gather in the first steps of the decision-making process, the better prepared you’ll be to make a good decision.

Analysis . Having strong analytical skills will help you ensure that your decisions are logical and reasonable.

Flexibility. Quick-thinking and flexibility are your friends when it comes to making decisions since sometimes you’ll have to compromise or new constraints will pop up, changing how you approach a decision.

Effective decision-makers use a seven-step process to tackle decisions. While it isn’t necessary to go through these exact steps when you make a basic decision, like what to cook for dinner, it can be a great way to check your thinking as you make a big work decision, like which strategy will lead to better sales.

Identify the problem. First, you need to see the decision that you need to make and understand what will go into making that decision. This step is crucial since everything else builds upon what you do here.

Make sure you properly understand the situation, what’s being asked of you, and what tools you have available to you before moving to the next step.

Do some digging. For any decision you’ll need some background information to help you choose the right option. Sometimes this means just thinking back to details from meetings, or it can be doing more sophisticated research. You can use step one to help you identify what information you’ll need to make a good decision.

Think creatively. In this step you want to think of as many solutions as possible. It doesn’t matter if they’re good or bad, you just want to consider all of your options.

Feel free to be as creative in your thinking as you want with this step. There are no bad options here since you want to think of every possible outcome. You’ll have a chance to check all of your brainstormed options later.

Evaluate your options. Here’s the part where you’ll give all your potential outcomes a second check. Go through the list of solutions you came up with in step three and test which ones feel better or sound more logical to you.

Don’t forget to keep your end goal in mind when you consider all the choices. That way you’re sure to make a good decision.

Make the decision . It’s time to pick one of the options you came up with. Keep in mind that you can choose a solution you came up with or even combine solutions to make the best decision possible. Reflect on your process for step four and pick the decision you feel best about.

Act on your decision. Once you’ve decided what to do, you need to start taking the actions that will help you implement the decision. These can be big or small steps, but stay focused and resolved to get the job done.

Don’t be afraid to bring other people into your process in this step. Especially for large workplace decisions, you might want to call on your coworkers to help you get things done.

Look back. When your decision is made and you’ve had some time to see its effects, take a second to evaluate that decision. Think about whether the decision had the outcome you wanted it to, or if it wasn’t so successful.

Taking this time to reflect on your decision-making is a great way to not only improve your ability to make a good decision but also to learn more about yourself. You can even ask other people for their opinion on the effects of a decision to see how your perception of the impact lines up with others’ opinions.

To improve your decision-making skills, practice goal-setting, reducing your number of choices, and conducting good research. You should also work on your communication skills and give yourself a limit on how long you have to make a decisions.

Set good goals . Having your eye on the big picture is enormously helpful when it comes to decision-making. Someone can make all the right decisions, but if their ultimate goal is wrongheaded, then those great decisions don’t add up to anything useful.

Reduce choice. Americans love options, but being inundated with too many potential choices can paralyze you. Before you begin making decisions, try to narrow down your possible choices to the top three.

Research. Decision-making isn’t easy when you don’t have all the facts in front of you. Good decisions are predicated on good data, so start working to improve your research skills. The greater your knowledge and expertise, the simpler most decisions become.

Communicate early and often. Communication skills complement decision-making skills well. Whether you’re seeking out advice or expressing a project’s goal, thorough communication helps you make decisions more effectively.

Don’t analyze forever. The phrase “paralysis by analysis” is all too true. Don’t be afraid to make small decisions without 100% of the information you might need. A few minor failures can actually help generate better ideas. Start with the minimum viable solution, and iterate from there.

To highlight your decision-making skills in your job search , look for decision-making skills and terms in the job description, and incorporate any that apply to you into your resume and cover letter. You should also highlight them in your interview answers.

Check the job description. Read the job description carefully and look for words that indicate decision-making like:

Incorporate the decision-making skills from the job description into your resume. Look for ways to incorporate the same language from the job description into your resume .

Let’s take a look at an example resume’s work experience section showcasing decision-making skills:

Saved product team over $50k annually in materials costs by analyzing low ROI spends and rerouting funds to lucrative projects Reduced accounting labor hours by 21% by automating payroll systems and creating streamlined tracking spreadsheets Optimized virtual meeting schedule, netting an average of 3 hours of meetings saved weekly, while improving employee productivity by 6%

Expound on your decision-making skills in your cover letter. A cover letter should cover similar accomplishments where you leveraged your top-notch decision-making skills. However, you can go into more detail about one or two accomplishments, rather than briefly touching on them as you would in a resume .

Highlight your decision-making skills in your interview. For a job interview , it’s equally important to know what metrics your performance will be judged on. By showing that you’re already thinking of how to achieve the most important results, you’re painting yourself as a candidate with great decision-making abilities.

What are the key skills for decision-making?

Key skills for decision-making are problem-solving, logical reasoning, and emotional intelligence. These skills combine to help you navigate almost any decision. This is because you use your logic and EQ to consider your reasoning and intuition and come up with a balanced approach. Your problem-solving skills will also help you build confidence when you have to make a choice and stick with it.

How can I be a good decision maker?

To be good at making decisions, match your decision based on your goals and values. This ensures that your decision is one that you can stand by, regardless of the outcome. However, sometimes this is hard to figure out.

If you struggle to make decisions, make sure to manage your stress, consider all the outcomes, and weigh the pros and cons. Additionally, if you can, take some time to avoid making rash decisions. It also helps to talk to others or to write out your thoughts and feelings in the process.

What are the characteristics of a good decision?

A good decision comes with clear reasoning, judgment of values, and is realistically accomplished. As long as your decision does not bring harm to others, you can use these characteristics to determine whether or not your decision was a good one. Your decisions should, in one way or another, bring you closer to your goals, both big and small.

What is strategic decision-making?

Strategic decision-making is when you base short-term decisions on long-term goals. In a sense, your decisions are part of your “strategy” to achieve some end. Strategic decision-making is particularly useful for businesses when they need to align daily needs with long-term objectives.

How do you demonstrate strong decision-making skills?

Demonstrate strong decision-making skills by providing examples of times you’ve used good decision-making skills. You can do this in your resume, cover letter , or during your interview.

Consumer Protection Financial Bureau – Financial Knowledge and Decision-Making Skills

Harvard Business School – 5 Key Decision-Making Techniques For Managers

UMass Dartmouth – Decision-Making Process

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating / 5. Vote count:

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

Amanda is a writer with experience in various industries, including travel, real estate, and career advice. After taking on internships and entry-level jobs, she is familiar with the job search process and landing that crucial first job. Included in her experience is work at an employer/intern matching startup where she marketed an intern database to employers and supported college interns looking for work experience.

Recent Job Searches

• Registered Nurse Jobs Resume Location
• Truck Driver Jobs Resume Location
• Call Center Representative Jobs Resume Location
• Customer Service Representative Jobs Resume
• Delivery Driver Jobs Resume Location
• Warehouse Worker Jobs Resume Location
• Account Executive Jobs Resume Location
• Sales Associate Jobs Resume Location
• Licensed Practical Nurse Jobs Resume Location
• Company Driver Jobs Resume

Related posts

What Is Accountability In The Workplace? (With Examples)

What Are Hybrid Skills? (With Examples)

What Is Aptitude And Why Do You Need To Know About It?

What Is The Law Of Diminishing Marginal Returns? (With Examples)

• Career Advice >
• Decision Making Skills

Logical Reasoning in Formal and Everyday Reasoning Tasks

• Open access
• Published: 26 December 2019
• Volume 18 , pages 1673–1694, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Hugo Bronkhorst   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8181-1299 1 ,
• Gerrit Roorda 2 ,
• Cor Suhre 2 &
• Martin Goedhart 1  

76k Accesses

24 Citations

6 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Logical reasoning is of great societal importance and, as stressed by the twenty-first century skills framework, also seen as a key aspect for the development of critical thinking. This study aims at exploring secondary school students’ logical reasoning strategies in formal reasoning and everyday reasoning tasks. With task-based interviews among 4 16- and 17-year-old pre-university students, we explored their reasoning strategies and the reasoning difficulties they encounter. In this article, we present results from linear ordering tasks, tasks with invalid syllogisms and a task with implicit reasoning in a newspaper article. The linear ordering tasks and the tasks with invalid syllogisms are presented formally (with symbols) and non-formally in ordinary language (without symbols). In tasks that were familiar to our students, they used rule-based reasoning strategies and provided correct answers although their initial interpretation differed. In tasks that were unfamiliar to our students, they almost always used informal interpretations and their answers were influenced by their own knowledge. When working on the newspaper article task, the students did not use strong formal schemes, which could have provided a clear overview. At the end of the article, we present a scheme showing which reasoning strategies are used by students in different types of tasks. This scheme might increase teachers’ awareness of the variety in reasoning strategies and can guide classroom discourse during courses on logical reasoning. We suggest that using suitable formalisations and visualisations might structure and improve students’ reasoning as well.

Similar content being viewed by others

Human inference beyond syllogisms: an approach using external graphical representations

Putting Context Dependent Human Logical Reasoning into the Right Context

How diagrams can support syllogistic reasoning: an experimental study.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

P21's Framework for twenty-first Century Learning describes critical thinking as an important skill to be successful in professional and everyday life situations in an increasingly complex world (P21, 2015 ). Of great value for critical thinking is ‘reason effectively’, which is explained in the twenty-first century skills framework as “[using] various types of reasoning (inductive, deductive, etc.) as appropriate to the situation” (P21, 2015 , p. 4). Liu, Ludu, and Holton ( 2015 ) support this view and consider valid logical reasoning as a key element for sound critical thinking. Other authors suggest that improving logical reasoning skills as part of higher order thinking skills is an important objective of education (Zohar & Dori, 2003 ).

To support the development of critical thinking, it seems essential that teachers devote attention to students’ strategies to reason logically. So far, not much is known about the reasoning processes of secondary school students in different logical reasoning tasks. Therefore, this article addresses this issue by exploring how 16- and 17-year-old students reason within formal reasoning and everyday reasoning tasks. The information provided by this study seems important to increase teachers’ awareness of reasoning strategies used by students and reasoning difficulties they encounter, as well as to be able to develop instruction materials to support and improve students’ logical reasoning skills.

Theoretical Background

Halpern ( 2014 ) describes critical thinking as “purposeful, reasoned, and goal-directed” (p. 8) and contends that many definitions of critical thinking in literature use the term “reasoning/logic” (p. 8), so being able to apply the rules of logic can be seen as a requirement for critical thinking. Many studies report difficulties with logical reasoning for different age groups (e.g. Daniel & Klaczynski, 2006 ; Galotti, 1989 ; O’Brien, Shapiro, & Reali, 1971 ; Stanovich, West, & Toplak, 2016 ). Because of those difficulties, it is by no means certain that secondary school students are able to reason logically and thus develop their critical thinking abilities autonomously.

Formal Reasoning.

The area of logic can be divided into formal logic and informal logic. Aristotle already differentiated between formal logic with syllogisms described in Analytica Priora and ‘dialectics’ in his combined work Topica exploring arguments and opinions (Aristotle, 2015 version). Almost 2000 years later, Gottlob Frege (1848 – 1925) studied and developed formal systems to analyse thoughts, reasoning, and inferences. Also, he developed the so-called ‘predicate logic’, inspired by Leibniz (1646 – 1716), which is more advanced than the ‘propositional logic’ (Look, 2013 ; Zalta, 2016 ). Nowadays, those types of systems are often called ‘symbolic logic’ with strict validity as a key aspect (De Pater & Vergauwen, 2005 ) in which formal deductive reasoning is applied.

In general, formal systems contain a set of rules and symbols and the reasoning within these systems will provide valid results as long as one follows the defined rules (Schoenfeld, 1991 ). The corresponding reasoning is often called formal reasoning and “characterized by rules of logic and mathematics, with fixed and unchanging premises” (Teig & Scherer, 2016 , p. 1). The same use of formal procedures can be found in definitions of logical reasoning as well. For instance “Logical reasoning involves determining what would follow from stated premises if they were true” (Franks et al., 2013 , p. 146), and “When we reason logically, we are following a set of rules that specify how we ‘ought to’ derive conclusions” (Halpern, 2014 , p. 176).

However, there is no consensus on the term reasoning and it is not exclusively used for formal deductive reasoning or mathematical situations only. Although reasoning in mathematics differs immensely from everyday reasoning (Yackel & Hanna, 2003 ), even reasoning in mathematical proof is not only a formal procedure, but involves discussion, discovery, and exploration (Lakatos, 1976 ) and shows us a need for more informal methods when approaching formal reasoning problems.

Informal Reasoning.

In the previous section, we indicated that, dependent on the situation, reasoning demands more than applying rules of logic. For instance, the importance of transforming information as stated by Galotti ( 1989 ): “[Reasoning is a] mental activity that consists of transforming given information … in order to reach conclusions” (p. 333) and the role of samenesses as stated by Grossen ( 1991 ): “Analogical and logical reasoning are strategies for finding and using samenesses. … logical reasoning applies these derived samenesses in order to understand and control our experience” (p. 343).

The notion of broadening formal methods with more informal methods is not new. Toulmin already discusses the limitations of formal logic for all sorts of arguments in his famous book The Uses of Argument ( 1958 ). He distinguishes different logical types to emphasise how logic is used in different fields, such as law, science, and daily-life situations. In his layout of an argument, he schematises the grounds for a claim balanced with reasons that rebut a claim. He also uses qualifiers to indicate the probability of a claim.

Philosophers and educators were also dissatisfied with the dominance of formal logic, that they considered as inappropriate for evaluating real-life arguments, and started in the 1970s an informal logic movement for another approach of analysing arguments stated in ordinary, daily-life language (Van Eemeren et al., 2014 ). One of the major textbooks still in print today is Logical Self-Defense (Johnson & Blair, 2006 ), which covers an introduction in “logical thinking, reasoning, or critical thinking … that focuses on the interpretation and assessment of ‘real life’ arguments” (p. xix). In literature, this is often indicated as informal or everyday reasoning, but this term has various meanings, from reasoning originating from formal systems to all reasoning related to everyday life events (Blair & Johnson, 2000 ; Voss, Perkins, & Segal, 1991 ). Different from formal reasoning, the reasoning and the conclusions depend on the context and can be questioned on their validity as already shown by Toulmin. Therefore, the topics are open for debate and invite to ponder on justifications and objections. The argument, as the result of the reasoning, often concerns open-ended, ill-structured real world problems without one conclusive, correct response (Cerbin, 1988 ; Kuhn, 1991 ). For this, Johnson and Blair ( 2006 ) use “acceptable premises that are relevant to the conclusion and supply sufficient evidence to justify accepting it” (p. xiii). The use of acceptable premises can arise from practical reasons to reach a certain goal and often includes presumptions or presuppositions. Walton ( 1996 ) uses the term ‘presumptive reasoning’ for this kind of arguments, which he sees as dialogues.

Although presumptive reasoning is not always conclusive or accepted by everyone, it is, in particular if full knowledge is unavailable or unobtainable, according to Walton, the best supplement to describe and discuss everyday life reasoning, for which he uses argumentation schemes. Even though Blair ( 1999 ) acknowledges the importance of presumptive reasoning for describing human reasoning and the strength of conclusions derived from the premises, he questions if all arguments are dialogues and discusses the completeness of the schemes.

To sum up, we define informal reasoning as reasoning in ordinary language to construct an argument which requires a critical review of the given premises and transforming of information, as well as finding additional or similar information provided by the problem solver or by external sources.

Towards a Definition for Logical Reasoning in This Study.

Now, we have seen that for well-founded reasoning, formal and informal methods are useful, we need to formulate a definition of logical reasoning for this study, which captures both aspects. A definition of logical reasoning should contain both the context and the way of reasoning, which can consist of formal and informal strategies. In other words, a definition of logical reasoning should not be synonymous with formal deductive reasoning. Important key words taken from the previous sections are ‘derive conclusions’ from Halpern and ‘transforming information’ from Galotti. That can be done with rules derived from formal systems, but that is not a necessity, so informal reasoning will also be part of our definition and thus seen as a valid reasoning process. Therefore, we conclude that logical reasoning involves several steps and define logical reasoning for this study as selecting and interpreting information from a given context , making connections and verifying and drawing conclusions based on provided and interpreted information and the associated rules and processes.

Formal and Everyday Reasoning Tasks.

Until now, we focused on the ways of reasoning and stressed the importance of the context. If we want to study how students reason in a variety of contexts, we have to differentiate between closed tasks with one correct answer and more open tasks. For this, we will use Galotti’s ( 1989 , p. 335) division: ‘formal reasoning tasks’ and ‘everyday reasoning tasks’. Formal reasoning tasks are self-contained, in which all premises are provided. For those tasks, established procedures are often available which lead to one conclusive answer. In everyday reasoning tasks, premises might be implicit or not provided at all. For those tasks, established procedures are often not available and it depends on the situation when an answer is good enough. In daily-life situations, everyday reasoning problems “are [often] not self-contained” and “the content of the problem typically has potential personal relevance” (Galotti, 1989 , p. 335). For both types of tasks, but for everyday reasoning tasks in particular, selecting and encoding relevant information is of great importance. We will call that the interpretation of the task.

Formal reasoning tasks may be provided in different forms: with symbols and completely in ordinary language without symbols. As shown in Fig.  1 , we differentiate formal reasoning tasks in formally stated and in non-formally stated tasks. Formally stated tasks are stated with a certain set of symbols, for example a task with the premises ‘(1) All A are B. (2) All B are C.’ Non-formally stated tasks are tasks stated in ordinary language, for example a task with the premises ‘(1) All mandarins are oranges. (2) All oranges are fruits.’ For each task, students’ reasoning starts with an interpretation of the given information. That might be either a formal interpretation, in other words, an interpretation within a certain set of symbols (e.g. A ⊆ B ⊆ C ⇒ “All A are C”), or an informal interpretation in ordinary language.

Types of tasks and interpretation

Everyday reasoning tasks are not translatable to formal reasoning tasks and often contain implicit premises as, for instance, in everyday life stories. Like in formal reasoning tasks, students will need to interpret the information in everyday reasoning tasks as well. That can be done completely informally, but a formal representation, such as a schematic overview, might help students to get an overview of the given situation. In this study, we focus both on students’ interpretation and the reasoning strategies that follow from there.

Formalisations.

From prior research among university students (e.g. Lehman, Lempert, & Nisbett, 1988 ; Stenning, 1996 ), we conjecture that reasoning in all kinds of situations will benefit from the use of formal representations or formalisations. We will use the term formalisation in its broadest sense, including all sorts of symbols, schematisations, visualisations, formal notations and (formal) reasoning schemes. Stenning ( 1996 ) gives support for the role of (elementary) formal notations and rules by mentioning that “learning elementary logic can [emphasis added] improve reasoning skills” (p. 227) and can help to understand formal thoughts and arguments. Also, Lehman et al. ( 1988 ) found support for the notion that reasoning in general can improve as a result of teaching formal rules within a particular field. Nonetheless, this does not imply that every formalisation is helpful: The chosen representation should support the thinking process for the specific context, rather than that it should capture all aspects (McKendree, Small, Stenning, & Conlon, 2002 ). In this study, we will investigate which formalisations are used by the participants and if those formalisations are beneficial.

Research Questions

Since little is known about the reasoning processes of 16- and 17-year-old students in logical reasoning tasks, our aim is to explore their reasoning strategies. Because of its exploratory nature, we selected, according to the division provided in Fig. 1 , three elementary types of reasoning tasks: two formal reasoning tasks, to be presented with (formally stated) and without (non-formally stated) symbols, and an everyday reasoning task. Our exploratory study was guided by the following research questions: (1) How do students reason towards a conclusion in formal reasoning and everyday reasoning tasks, whether or not by using formalisations? And (2) what kind of reasoning difficulties do they encounter when proceeding to a conclusion?

For this exploratory study, we selected closed tasks (formal reasoning tasks) concerning linear ordering and syllogisms and an open-ended newspaper comprehension task (everyday reasoning task). The formal reasoning tasks were presented formally and non-formally, of which the non-formally stated task is a counter-item of the formally stated one. A non-formally stated counter-item is a translation of the corresponding formally stated task in ordinary language and vice versa. Both tasks have similar conclusions as final answer, so that the reasoning processes can be compared. Figures  2 and 3 show these formal reasoning tasks, both formally stated and non-formally stated.

Formal reasoning tasks about linear ordering, formally and non-formally stated

Formal reasoning tasks about invalid syllogisms, formally and non-formally stated

Figure 4 shows the everyday reasoning task and this task does not have a counter-item. This newspaper task is an open-ended task with implicit premises and hidden assumptions. In this task, students have to reconstruct the line of the argument. An expert in logic validated all items by checking wording and comprehensibility of the tasks.

Everyday reasoning task, reasoning in a newspaper article

This selection of tasks captures each category shown in Fig. 1 in which we expect different reasoning strategies and contains familiar and unfamiliar tasks to our students. For each task, we provide example interpretations and solutions below. These solutions are used as reference solutions to check the correctness of students’ answers, but, of course, the reasoning towards a conclusion can differ. In the everyday reasoning task in particular, different formulations are possible.

The linear ordering tasks (see Fig. 2 ), which are formal reasoning tasks, have ‘P > S’ and ‘Peter is older than Sally’ as correct answers respectively. If taken a formal interpretation, the reasoning can be P > Q > R > S for the order of the letters. If taken an informal interpretation, you can take example ages for the four persons. For example, if Peter is 50 years old, then Quint can be 20 years old, because Peter is older than Quint. Rosie is younger than Quint, so Rosie can be 10 years old. Rosie is older than Sally, so Sally can be 5 years old. In conclusion, if Peter is 50 years old and Sally 5 years old, then Peter must be older than Sally.

The syllogism tasks (see Fig. 3 ), which are formal reasoning tasks too, should have ‘does not follow necessarily from the given premises’ as correct answer as the only valid conclusive option. For the formally stated version of the syllogism task, possible formal and informal interpretations are visualised in Fig.  5 . At the left, the given syllogism is translated into ordinary language completely and thus called an informal interpretation. In this case, it is example-based with a counterexample in ordinary language, which is, of course, a sufficient explanation why the conclusion does not necessarily follow from these premises. However, it is important to recognise that an example does not always lead to a general conclusion, in particular for valid syllogisms, so in that case, there must be a translation back to the formal setting.

Formal and informal interpretations of the formally stated syllogism task

The formal interpretation with Euler diagrams at the right of Fig. 5 shows that C does not necessarily overlap with A. In this interpretation, the original given set of letter symbols is used. Similar diagrams can be drawn for the non-formally stated version of the task.

The everyday reasoning task (Fig. 4 ) requires students to (1) identify the premises (reasons) leading to the author’s conclusion, and (2) to hypothesise how these premises might be connected to the conclusion by using general knowledge or evidence that might support the author’s conclusion. Our example solution (see Fig.  6 ) is scheme-based with phrases in ordinary language. We analyse such a scheme as a formal interpretation in which the three reasons (the identified premises) are linked directly or indirectly to the author’s conclusion. For the third reason, one needs an additional reasoning step by mentioning another hidden assumption to make the argument complete. We assume that there is sufficient general knowledge on this subject among the participants. The arrows represent if-then statements and are not only part of the formal scheme, but also formalisations in themselves.

Formal scheme for the everyday reasoning task

Nevertheless, the if-then statements in the scheme can be explained in full sentences too. For the first two reasons, that will look like ‘If people smoke or inhale particulate matter, then it will affect their health and thus shorten their life.’ Such considerations based on common knowledge still show the connection, but it is not yet formalised, neither with a scheme, nor with any symbols and thus considered as a completely informal interpretation (see Fig. 1 ). As soon as one introduces logical symbols, we will call those symbols formalisations. In combination with the if-then rule, the sentence can be represented as ‘(smoking ∨ inhaling particulate matter) ⇒ unhealthy ⇒ shorter life’.

Participants

Our participants are Dutch secondary school students in their penultimate year of pre-university secondary education (11th graders) and volunteered to participate in think-aloud sessions. The first author of this article was their teacher and they all signed an informed consent. These students did not take advanced mathematics or science, but followed a mathematics course in which logical reasoning has recently become a compulsory domain (College voor Toetsen en Examens, 2016 ). This study was conducted before the participants received teaching in logical reasoning. In this article, work is discussed from two male (Edgar, James) and two female students (Anne, Susan).

We conducted task-based interviews in which students solved logical reasoning tasks aloud (Goldin, 2000 ; Van Someren, Barnard, & Sandberg, 1994 ). The interviews were conducted in Dutch and recorded with a smartpen so that verbal and written information could be connected. The students were asked to say aloud everything they were thinking of. The interviewer, who is the first author of this article, refrained from commenting as much as possible, so that ‘free problem-solving’ was a key aspect of the sessions. If a student did not understand the task or thought it was done, the interviewer would ask additional (clarification) questions, but did never provide feedback on the given answers.

The transcripts of the interviews were analysed in Dutch and selected parts were translated to English for this article. Students’ task solving was analysed qualitatively in an interpretive way and data-driven (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007 ). To get a clear picture of the reasoning process, the data sources, interview transcripts and students’ written notes, were analysed according to our definition of logical reasoning. Our analysis included the following steps: (1) students’ understanding of the task, (2) students’ interpretation of the task, (3) students’ reasoning process and strategies used, (4) students’ use of formalisations and (5) the correctness of students’ final answers. If students switch between interpretations, we will call the predominant interpretation, their main interpretation.

Students’ reasoning in counter-items is intended as an exploration of possible variation in reasoning. Because students worked on only one of each two counter-items, we cannot analyse the differences between individual students’ strategies on alternative versions of similar closed tasks.

To judge the correctness of their final answers, students’ written notes, as well as the interview transcripts, are used and compared. Possible differences are marked and combined with their interpretations and reasoning. We have to note that the verbal explanations in itself can be seen as informal, because if students are asked to do tasks aloud, they use ordinary language, but if explained with a (given) set of symbols, the interpretation of the task can still be formal. Furthermore, the verbal explanations are linked to written notes, in which possible use of formalisations is clearly visible.

Table 1 provides an overview of the results. Thereafter, for each task students’ reasoning will be illustrated in detail.

Reasoning with Linear Ordering

Formal reasoning tasks with linear ordering (see Fig. 2 ) are familiar to the students because these types of tasks are common in primary and secondary education. We summarise the findings first: All four students used rule-based strategies, but their initial interpretation differed. All answers were correct and well-reasoned. Only one student came up with an additional formalisation other than the given symbols. She used a very suitable tool, a number line representation with formal letters symbols, to get a clear overview of the order. We will present a detailed description of the four students.

Formally Stated, Edgar.

Edgar interprets the task in a formal way by copying the formal notation, see first three lines in Fig.  7 . After writing that down, his first statements are switching to example-based reasoning (informal interpretation) that involves filling in some numbers (line [1] in transcript). After that, he quickly weighs his two interpretations (lines [2] and [3]) and switches back to the formal situation, by comparing the given letters P, R and S with the symbol for ‘greater than’ (line [4] and Fig. 7 ). Although the verbal explanations are in words, inherent to thinking aloud, he solves the task by following mathematical rules by staying in the formal system with the corresponding formal symbols. This way of reasoning provides the correct answer quickly and using the given symbols only gives a clear structure: P > R, R > S, P > S.

Formally stated linear ordering task at the left, Edgar’s written notes at the right

Edgar: [1] well, yes, you could just fill in numbers of course as an example, [2] well oh no, let's wait[3] we are not going to do that at first [4] uhm, P is greater than Q, so P is also greater than R, …

Formally Stated, Anne.

After reading the task, Anne starts immediately with a translation of the formal symbols into expressions in ordinary language by writing down ‘greater than’ and ‘less than’ in full, thus giving an informal transformation of most of the formally stated task (see Fig.  8 ). Although she still reasons with the given formal letters, she switches to ordinary language for applying the mathematical rules. She provides the correct answer.

Anne’s written notes at the left, English translation at the right

Non-formally Stated, Susan.

Susan translates the non-formally stated version of this formal reasoning task immediately into a formal situation with letter abbreviations for the names and the symbols > and < for ‘older than’ and ‘younger than’. Besides these formal symbols, she puts the letters in sequential order horizontally, which can be seen as a ‘number line’ representation with formal letter symbols, starting with P-Q-R reasoning that Q must be in the middle, see Fig.  9 . We call that another formalisation. After adding S as well, she comes to the right conclusion that Peter must be older than Sally, which is a translation from her formal system to the conclusion asked for in ordinary language.

Susan’s written notes

Non-formally Stated, James.

James reasons in words within the non-formally stated version of this task leading to a correct conclusion. We call his interpretation informal with a correct application of mathematical rules. After the confirmation that he has to write his reasoning down, his written explanation is completely in ordinary language, using the given names and the phrases ‘older than’ and ‘younger than’ (see Fig.  10 ). So, James’s interpretation is completely informal without switching.

James’s written notes at the left, English translation at the right

Reasoning with an Invalid Syllogism

Formal reasoning tasks with syllogisms (see Fig. 3 ) are unfamiliar tasks to these students because they are not used to reasoning within syllogisms. We summarise the findings first: Three of the four students used an informal interpretation, but only two students provided a correct answer. The formally stated version caused difficulties due to not understanding the task or due to incomplete translations to an informal example. Also, the misinterpretation of ‘are’ and the confusion between ‘all’ and ‘some’ are noteworthy. We also found that a recognisable non-formally stated context can support the reasoning, despite some hindrance of real-life experiences concerning the context as well. We present a detailed description of the four students.

Formally Stated, Susan.

Susan shows that she understands that she has to accept the two premises in this formal reasoning task, regardless of their truths by writing “true” behind it, see Fig.  11 . Her next step is formalising the given statements even further by introducing the equality sign, see first lines in her written notes in Fig.  12 , so she interprets the task completely formally.

Susan accepts the given premises, English translation at the right

Formalisations used by Susan, English translation at the right

Susan tries to reason with the given letters four times (see four sections transcript) before she gives up. Again, her verbal explanations are in ordinary language, of course, inherent to thinking aloud, but she uses the given letters and stays in the formal system, so we call that a formal interpretation. In her first try (lines [1] – [7] in transcript), she states that A and B are equal (line [5]), but she cannot connect this with C. In her second try (lines [8] – [14]), she starts with stating that A and B are equal, but cannot connect C with that although saying that some B are not C (line [10]). In her third try (lines [15] – [17]), she says, once more, that A and B are equal, but she cannot connect that with C, because she does not know which B’s are C. The fourth time she writes down the last two lines shown in Fig.  12 , connecting some with a symbol for approximately, but that does not help either (lines [18] – [25]). It is important to notice that she uses the equality sign each time as equal to which conflicts with the original premise containing an inclusion.

After underlining her conclusion ‘A ≈ C’ in the fourth try, she gives up and sighs: “I just do not understand the logic of all this” (line [25]). Susan only reasoned with the given letters and formal symbols and did not switch to an informal situation.

Susan: [1] all A are B, …, so is equal [2] but some of those are C[3] so some are not, some A are not either, some A are [4] … mmm … [5] all A are B, so A and B are equal [6] some B are C, so some B are only A [7] and some B are C … mmm … [start reasoning from the beginning again] [8] all A are B, A and B are equal [9] some of those are C and some are not [10] some B are not C [11] some A, that is also B [12] some B … some A are C [13] … but all A are B, and some B are C, some A are C [rereading given syllogism] [14] no, I don’t think so [start reasoning from the beginning again] [15] I think that, … uhm …, if all A are B, A and B are equal [16] but some B are C, so some of those B’s, that has to be the case, do not necessarily have to be A, because you do not know which B’s are C, because those are equal to C, and A and B are equal, some A are C [17] ow, I really think this is difficult … [start reasoning from the beginning once more] [18] okay, all A are B [writes down A=B] [19] some B are C, so approximately [writes down B≈C] [20] and some A are C, but A and B are equal[21] some of those B are C [writes down behind A=B: ➔ B≈C] [22] and some A are C [writes down A≈C] [23] so, my conclusion, … mmm … [underlines A≈C] [24] I really don’t know [25] I just do not understand the logic of all this

Formally Stated, James.

James recognises that he does not know how to solve this task in a formal way by expressing “I don’t know”, so he switches to an informal interpretation of the formally stated task: starting with searching for an example in ordinary language. This can be seen as analogy- and example-based reasoning. His explanation is closely related to our example in Fig. 5 , but James only looks for one valid example instead of a counterexample. He chooses an example in which ‘some’ represents all apes (line [3] in transcript), because the set of apes not being mammals is empty. We assume that he did not recognise that because of his incorrect conclusion. He tries to use a logical structure ‘if-then’ (lines [2] – [4]) as well, but that does not solve the problem. After the valid conclusion of his example in ordinary language, he tries to explain the validity of his conclusion in a more formal way with the given letters (lines [5] – [7]) and writes that down as well (see Fig.  13 ). For this, James also states that A and B are equal (line [5]) in the same way as Susan did, and is not able to provide a more precise explanation after clarification questions by the interviewer.

James: [1] okay, well, I am going to have a look with a similar example I think [2] if, uhm, all humans are apes [3] some apes are mammals [4] then some humans are … also mammals [5] so, I think it is correct, because A and B are equal, [6] because that is necessarily true, [7] so if that’s the case for some B, it is also the case for A

Non-formally Stated, Edgar.

Edgar’s interpretation of the non-formally stated version of this formal reasoning task is informal. He draws the correct conclusion quite easily (line [2] in transcript). He also explains, although this is not necessarily true, the possibility that some flowers might refer to roses as well as to other flowers (line [6]), which shows a notion of the rules of logic. In his written notes (see Fig.  14 ) he also shows that the word flower could contain more than one type of flowers. This reflection is quite strong and shows insight in the generality of a syllogism.

Edgar’s written notes at the left, English translation at the right

Edgar: [1] uhm… well… let’s see… [2] yes, you would say that this does not follow logically, because some flowers does not necessarily refer to all roses [3] let’s see [4] some, yes, [5] uhm… [6] it does not have to mean that roses fade quickly since some flowers might also be daisies or, well, something, or other flowers consequently

Non-formally Stated, Anne.

Anne also draws the right conclusion in the non-formally stated version of this task. She uses an informal interpretation and comes up with a correct answer quickly (line [1] in transcript) and provides a more complete explanation in her next sentence (line [2]), which is similar to her written answer (see Fig.  15 ). However, Anne is not completely sure about her answer. Asked for an explanation, she says that her uncertainty comes from her knowledge about fading flowers (line [8] and [9]), although she recognises that one cannot conclude that from these premises, which shows that she understands the rules of logic.

Anne:  [1] You do not know if it’s the roses that fade, so you also don’t know if some roses fade quickly. [2] All roses can still be flowers, and some flowers can still fade quickly, but that does not have to mean that roses [sighs] fade quickly. [3] Yes, I think so. [4] I am less certain about this one. … [5] because roses can still be flowers, but, ow wait, and [6] … that does not have to mean that, per se, the roses fade quickly, … Intvwr: [7] And why are you less sure than in the previous task? Anne:  [8] uhm… yes, because, some flowers fade quickly, yes, I don’t know, I know, I think it’s difficult to explain, but I am just more in doubt here, because … [9] I was thinking because I know, of course, that there are many other species of flowers than only roses, only from these premises you cannot see that of course

Reasoning in a Newspaper Article

An everyday reasoning task about the analysis of a newspaper article (see Fig. 4 ) is considered unfamiliar to these students. We summarise the findings first: Both students used informal interpretations and only some basic formalisations to sum up reasons or make connections even though one of the students (Susan) provided to some extent a schematic overview. Although not essential, they did not build a (strong) formal scheme as, for example, shown in Fig. 6 . We present a detailed description of the two students.

Susan starts this task with identifying the three premises (step 1) in a structured way by writing down the three reasons mentioned in the article behind bullets (see first three lines Fig.  16 ). Thereafter, she takes her time to reconsider these reasons, the wording of the task and the phrase ‘hidden assumption’. She writes down “the hidden assumption is that people from Rotterdam live less healthy”, which hypothesises how the premises are linked to the conclusion (step 2). She explains that “it has to do with people’s health” because of the first two reasons, smoking and worse environment, but Susan struggles with an explanation for the third reason: lower education and income level (see line [1] in transcript). This reason demands more evidence. Susan implies that poorer families are the missing connection for the lower income (line [4]). For that, she uses another formalisation, which structures her written notes: an arrow to make the connection. Verbally, she provides a further explanation for the assumption ‘poorer families’ (line [5]), but she did not write that down.

Susan’s written notes at the left, English translation at the right

Overall, in her verbal explanation, she has connected all the mentioned reasons with a hidden assumption leading to her main assumption ‘poorer health’, which she underlines as well. In her written notes, she uses formalisations at three moments: at the beginning (bullets) for the first step involving identifying the premises, and arrows at two times for connections, either with hypothesised evidence based on her own knowledge (step 2), or to emphasise the main hidden assumption. Her notes provide more or less a schematic overview, but Susan did not compile a complete formal scheme.

Susan: [1] ... mmm, so ... the lower education and income level what does that have to do with ... lower level of education, ... mmm ..., yes, the amount of smokers has to do with health and the high concentration of particulate matter in the air, so it means that the health of people from Rotterdam is worse than the health of other people in the Netherlands [2] uh, to link, explain how the reasons mentioned are linked to the shorter life, by describing the hidden assumption, uhm ... [3] The shorter life is caused by ... the ... poorer health in Rotterdam compared to other Dutch people. [4] Then, the hidden assumption is that poorer health and ... maybe, uh ... lower education and income level, so perhaps poorer families [draws an arrow to connect this with lower education and income level] [5] ... and they may not buy very expensive and organic food and everything, so they would live less healthy or something, I think the hidden assumption is that they eat less healthy, or live less healthy lives especially, yes that’s what I think [6] This is what I think, the poorer health [underlines poorer health], that’s the hidden assumption. [adds arrow]

Anne underlines the three main reasons in the text: smokers, particulate matter, lower education and income level, which shows that she identified the premises (step 1). After that, she lists the three reasons behind bullets (see Fig.  17 ). That is the only formalisation she uses. The rest of the reasoning, verbal and written, is done in ordinary language. For the second and third reason, she provides a hidden assumption: “particulate matter is bad for someone and thus shortens one’s life, and the lower education level and the lower income level leads to poorer living conditions and thus shortens one’s life”. She uses her own knowledge to state that particulate matter is bad for someone’s health and to hypothesise that a lower income level leads to poorer living conditions (step 2). However, she forgets to provide a connection for the first reason, so the interviewer asked for further explanations before she added “bad for you and thus” (see top line Fig.  17 ) for the connection between smoking and shortening one’s life.

Overal, Anne identified the premises quite quickly and provided support for the reasons easily. Probably, she assumed that the connection between smoking and a shorter life was generally known, so that she only provided additional evidence after a clarification question by the interviewer.

Conclusions and Discussion

The purpose of this study was to gain insights into the reasoning processes of 16- and 17-year-old pre-university secondary school students on logical reasoning tasks, aimed at fostering their critical thinking skills as an important objective in the twenty-first century skills framework (P21, 2015 ). In this exploratory study, we investigated (1) the way of reasoning students used in formal reasoning and everyday reasoning tasks and their use of formalisations, and (2) the difficulties they encounter in their reasoning.

In the linear ordering tasks and in the syllogism tasks, students used rule-, analogy- and example-based reasoning strategies. In the newspaper article task, students reasoned partly scheme-based, but mainly in ordinary language only. Except for the formally stated syllogism task, students used appropriate strategies to find correct answers. Although the linear ordering tasks are familiar to the students, both formats (formally and non-formally stated) led to formal and informal interpretations.

Students do not always feel certain about their method and answer, in particular in the syllogism tasks and in the everyday reasoning task. The incomplete written answers in the everyday reasoning task show that our students probably have doubts if their answers are good enough, because they have the feeling that more answers are possible. Even though the newspaper task is taken from an everyday life context and—we expect—recognisable and meaningful, students still fulfil a task for which they expect that there should be one correct answer, as is common in mathematics tasks (e.g. Jäder, Sidenvall, & Sumpter, 2017 ). The doubt students express is in line with Galotti’s ( 1989 ) description for everyday reasoning tasks, because she states that “it is often unclear whether the current ‘best’ solution is good enough” (p. 335) in contrast to formal reasoning tasks where “it is typically unambiguous when the problem is solved” (p. 335).

In our formally stated syllogism task, the students misinterpreted the phrases ‘all…are…’ and ‘some…are…’. Consequently, they did not see that their representations, such as the use of the equality sign as a formal symbol, were not suitable. Susan was completely stuck in the formally stated version and could not find a way out. The misuse of the equality sign (=) for ‘all… are…’ is a common mistake (e.g. Galotti, 1989 , p. 336). Stenning and Van Lambalgen ( 2008 ) also describe difficulties with understanding and interpreting syllogisms.

An overview of our findings is visualised in a scheme (Fig.  18 ) as an extension of Fig. 1 . We showed that students’ initial interpretations, their first thoughts, do not always match with their later choices, so students seem to switch between formal and informal interpretations. This is visualised by the arrow in the scheme. The strategies included in this scheme are derived from our exploratory study among 16- and 17-year-old students and might not provide a complete overview. Consequently, the overview can be supplemented with argumentation schemes based on presumptive reasoning (Walton, 1996 ; Walton, Reed, & Macagno, 2008 ) in further research. Our everyday reasoning task gives only a limited view of students’ possible reasoning strategies, because students were only asked to identify the premises and to use their own knowledge to find connections with the conclusion. They were not asked to find rebuttals or further backing of the claims. The connections provided by the students should be sufficient for justifiable reasoning. This correspondents to the earlier mentioned description from Johnson and Blair ( 2006 ) about acceptable premises.

Types of tasks combined with students’ interpretations and reasoning strategies

Each of the strategies shown in Fig.  18 can be supported by the use of formalisations. For example, in the non-formally stated linear ordering task, Susan used letter abbreviations, mathematical symbols and a number line representation. For cases in which students reason in ordinary language without clearly showing causality, comparison or examples, we added the category ‘informal reasoning’. This category is based on our definition of informal reasoning in the corresponding section in the Theoretical Background. We believe it is important to present ‘informal reasoning’ as separate category in the scheme, because students still managed to construct an argument in ordinary language, but without clearly showing a visible reasoning strategy, such as rule-based, example-based, scheme-based, et cetera.. Therefore, we used a dotted line in Fig.  18 . Consequently, in that case, formalisations can only be used to a certain extent as, for example, shown by Anne in her analysis of the newspaper article where she separated her three informal arguments by bullets.

In this article, we hypothesised that suitable formalisations can support the reasoning process and summarised those tools at the right-hand side of Fig. 18 . We believe that our hypothesis is strengthened by the findings in this exploratory study. Symbols (like ‘greater than’ and ‘less than’, or the equality sign) and letter abbreviations are suitable tools to shorten notations, while other tools (like a number line representation) are strong tools to visualise information. Although not used by our students, Venn and Euler diagrams are also strong tools to visualise data. However, it is our conviction that the use of formalisations, including visualisations such as Venn and Euler diagrams, is teachable and can be linked to the strategies used by the students, also in everyday reasoning tasks.

A limitation of the study is related to our choice of tasks. In our selection of tasks, we used formally stated tasks and non-formally stated tasks as counter-items for similar reasoning problems. In our design, different students worked on one of the counter-items and therefore, we could not compare the performance of an individual student on both tasks. The non-formally stated tasks were more easily to interpret by the students and led to other strategies, because their prior knowledge was helpful. Hintikka ( 2001 ) explains that “in real-life reasoning, even when it is purely deductive, familiarity with the subject matter can be strategically helpful” (p. 46). On the other hand, sometimes our students may doubt their answers, because premises in the task (e.g. Anne in the non-formally stated syllogism task) might conflict with their prior knowledge. In general, this means that our counter-items (formally versus non-formally stated tasks) cannot be considered as equivalent.

Despite the fact that our study has a limitation in the number of participants (small and selective sample) and a limited number of tasks, the information in Fig.  18 shows a variety of reasoning strategies, which is important for teachers to understand the diversity of students’ reasoning and possible difficulties in the interpretations of tasks, in particular for tasks that are not familiar to students or lead to incorrect answers.

Future Research and Recommendations

This study not only shows the complex matter of reasoning and everyday life reasoning in particular, it also confirms that more research is needed as already mentioned by Galotti ( 1989 , 2017 ). Our exploratory study is a first step to get insights in the reasoning process of 16- and 17-year-old pre-university students and shows a gap between their verbal and written explanations. We will continue our research for an in-depth understanding. Unfamiliar tasks, such as all sorts of non-formally stated syllogisms (formal reasoning tasks) and everyday reasoning tasks seem to be useful contexts to investigate how students solve reasoning tasks and which formalisations, including visualisations, they use. Our definition of logical reasoning, mentioned in the Theoretical Background, fits this future research.

Our results show that students do not structure everyday life contexts automatically, so it is plausible that similar difficulties occur in authentic everyday life reasoning too. In future research, we intend to show that students may be supported by learning more structured reasoning strategies and the use of formalisations and visualisations.

One of the key aspects for lessons in logical reasoning must be classroom discourse when solving reasoning tasks. Lakatos ( 1976 ) already stressed the importance of dialogue in the construction of mathematical and logical reasoning. Our research might increase teachers’ awareness of that importance and, more practically, for which Fig.  18 serves as a guideline for discussion. Different interpretations and possible strategies used by students are made explicit and can be used as input for classroom discussions. We suggest that formalisations and visualisations are part of those discussions and might establish a deeper understanding. Above all, logical reasoning tasks where several ways of reasoning are possible, are highly connected to the twenty-first century skills (P21, 2015 ), and thus with the development of critical thinking skills.

Aristotle. (2015).  Topics  (W. A. Pickard-Cambridge, Trans.). London: Aeterna Press.

Blair, J. A. (1999). [Review of the book Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning , by D. N. Walton] Argumentation, 13 , 338–343.

Blair, J. A., & Johnson, R. H. (2000). Informal logic: An overview. Informal Logic, 20 (2), 93–107.

Google Scholar  

Cerbin, B. (1988). The nature and development of informal reasoning skills in college students . Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED298805).

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Book   Google Scholar  

College voor Toetsen en Examens. (2016). Wiskunde C vwo, syllabus centraal examen 2018 (bij het nieuwe examenprogramma) nader vastgesteld 2 . https://www.examenblad.nl/examenstof/syllabus-2018-wiskunde-c-vwo/2018/vwo/f=/syllabus_wiskunde_C_2_versie_vwo_2018_nader_vastgesteld2_def.pdf . Accessed 27 Oct 2016.

Daniel, D. B., & Klaczynski, P. A. (2006). Developmental and individual differences in conditional reasoning: Effects of logic instructions and alternative antecedents. Child Development, 77 (2), 339–354.

Article   Google Scholar  

De Pater, W. A., & Vergauwen, R. (2005). Logica: formeel en informeel . Leuven: Universitaire pers.

Franks, B. A., Therriault, D. J., Buhr, M. I., Chiang, E. S., Gonzalez, C. M., Kwon, H. K., . . . Wang, X. (2013). Looking back: Reasoning and metacognition with narrative texts. Metacognition Learning, 8 (2), 145–171.

Galotti, K. M. (1989). Approaches to studying formal and everyday reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 105 (3), 331–351.

Galotti, K. M. (2017). Cognitive development: Infancy through adolescence (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Goldin, G. A. (2000). A scientific perspective on structured, task-based interviews in mathematics education research. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 517–545). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Grossen, B. (1991). The fundamental skills of higher order thinking. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24 (6), 343–353.

Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (5th ed.). New York: Psychology Press.

Hintikka, J. (2001). Is logic the key to all good reasoning? Argumentation, 15 (1), 35–57.

Jäder, J., Sidenvall, J., & Sumpter, L. (2017). Students’ mathematical reasoning and beliefs in non-routine task solving. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15 (4), 759–776.

Johnson, R. H., & Blair, J. A. (2006). Logical self-defence . New York: Idebate press.

Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery . J. Worrall & E. Zahar (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lehman, D. R., Lempert, R. O., & Nisbett, R. E. (1988). The effects of graduate training on reasoning: Formal discipline and thinking about everyday-life events. American Psychologist, 43 (6), 431–442.

Liu, H., Ludu, M., & Holton, D. (2015). Can K-12 math teachers train students to make valid logical reasoning? In X. Ge, D. Ifenthaler, & J. M. Spector (Eds.), Emerging technologies for STEAM education: Full STEAM ahead (pp. 331–353). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Look, B. C. (2013). Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2014 ed). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/leibniz/ . Accessed 21 Nov 2016.

McKendree, J., Small, C., Stenning, K., & Conlon, T. (2002). The role of representation in teaching and learning critical thinking. Educational Review, 54 (1), 57–67.

O’Brien, T. C., Shapiro, B. J., & Reali, N. C. (1971). Logical thinking—Language and context. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 4 (2), 201–219.

P21. (2015). P21 framework definitions. http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/docs/P21_Framework_Definitions_New_Logo_2015.pdf . Accessed 5 Oct 2018.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1991). On mathematics as sense-making: An informal attack on the unfortunate divorce of formal and informal mathematics. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 311–343). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2016). The rationality quotient: Toward a test of rational thinking . Cambridge: MIT Press.

Stenning, K. (1996). Embedding logic in communication: Lessons from the logic classroom. In J. van Benthem, F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, & F. Veltman (Eds.), Logic and argumentation (pp. 227–240). Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy.

Stenning, K., & van Lambalgen, M. (2008). Human reasoning and cognitive science . Cambridge: MIT Press.

Teig, N., & Scherer, R. (2016). Bringing formal and informal reasoning together—A new era of assessment? Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 1097.

Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument . Cambridge: University Press.

Van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., Krabbe, E. C. W., Henkemans, A. F. S., Verheij, B., & Wagemans, J. H. M. (2014). Informal logic. In F. H. van Eemeren, B. Garssen, E. C. W. Krabbe, A. F. S. Henkemans, B. Verheij, J. H. M. Wagemans (Eds.),  Handbook of argumentation theory (pp. 373–423). Dordrecht, Springer Netherlands.

Van Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modelling cognitive processes . London: Academic Press.

Voss, J. F., Perkins, D. N., & Segal, J. W. (Eds.). (1991). Informal reasoning and education . Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Walton, D. N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning . Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Walton, D. N., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation schemes . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Yackel, E., & Hanna, G. (2003). Reasoning and proof. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics  (pp. 227-236). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Zalta, E. N. (2016). Gottlob Frege. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2016 ed.). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/frege/ . Accessed 21 Nov 2016

Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12 (2), 145–181. Accessed 21 Nov 2016.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is part of the research programme Doctoral Grant for Teachers with project number 023.007.043, which is (partly) financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute for Science Education and Communication, Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 407, 9700 AK, Groningen, The Netherlands

Hugo Bronkhorst & Martin Goedhart

Teacher Education, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Grote Kruisstraat 2/1, 9712 TS, Groningen, The Netherlands

Gerrit Roorda & Cor Suhre

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hugo Bronkhorst .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Bronkhorst, H., Roorda, G., Suhre, C. et al. Logical Reasoning in Formal and Everyday Reasoning Tasks. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 18 , 1673–1694 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10039-8

Download citation

Received : 07 February 2019

Accepted : 01 December 2019

Published : 26 December 2019

Issue Date : December 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10039-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Twenty-first century skills
• Critical thinking
• Formal and everyday reasoning tasks
• Logical reasoning
• Secondary mathematics education
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

What is Logical Thinking & How to Improve It? With Example

Home Blog Career What is Logical Thinking & How to Improve It? With Example

Logical thinking skills play a significant role in developing careers because they help you reason through vital decisions, generate creative ideas, set goals, and solve problems. You may encounter multiple challenges in your life when you enter the job industry or advance your career. Therefore, need strong logical reasoning skills to solve your problems.

But you must know ‘what is logical thinking’ before you move forward or come up with solutions.

What Is Logical Thinking?

Logical thinking is your ability to think in a disciplined manner or base significant thoughts on evidence and facts. The process involves incorporating logic into an individual’s thinking abilities when analyzing a problem to devise a solution. Logical thinking may require Soft Skills Courses because it involves progressive analysis systems.

Now that you know the logical thinking meaning, you can undertake Knowledgehut Training to become probable, reasonable, and actionable with your thoughts. Many fields, such as project management, can benefit from logical thinking skills. Also, consider obtaining some accredited PMP certification programs as well.

Importance of Logical Thinking

According to a global report , problem-solving, a critical and logical thinking aspect, is one of the top skills employers look for in job candidates. So, it explains the demand for logical thinking or reasoning abilities.

You have already gone through the logical reasoning meaning earlier. Now, it is time to understand its importance through the following points.

1. It Encourages Independent Abilities

You may require multiple demonstrations and examples in your life to learn and comprehend processes. However, prolonged and frequent demonstration systems do not work because problem-solving requires reasoning and analysis. So, you must acquire independent reasoning abilities that define logical thinking.

2. It Promotes Creativity and Innovation

Think out of the box to devise creative solutions to your problems. Here is where logical thinking comes in handy because it allows you to innovate better ideas and give a controlled sense to the events happening in your life.

3. It Helps Enhance Analytical Thinking

You weigh down all possible results and evaluate different options to ensure a favorable outcome for your decisions. Logical reasoning enables you to master multiple choice questions in various ways to get the desired answer by thinking better about the solution.

4. It Helps Strengthen the Brain

If you think about logical reasoning meaning, it involves diverse tasks that help activate various parts of your brain - memory, visual-shape memory, verbal-logic memory, etc. The process helps strengthen your brain and enables you to distinguish significant facets of life.

5. It Helps Enhance Focus

Logical thinking is one of the best ways to increase your concentration. The reasoning ability tests require your focus on problem-solving and include multiple methods and strategies to keep you hooked and develop positive self-esteem.

Ways To Improve Your Logical Thinking

Logical thinking ability definition helps you understand that you must possess this significant skill to move forward in life. So, you must improve and develop your logical thinking through proper activities and exercises. Here is a breakdown of tips to help improve your logical thinking abilities.

• Learn from your life’s mistakes.  
• Anticipate what lies ahead of you and other future happenings.  
• Take complex mental tests.  
• Stimulate your brain through multiple activities.  
• Differentiate between observation and inferences.  
• Try to recognize repetitive patterns like a sequence of numbers.  
• Indulge in analytical values like critical thinking, interpreting, deciding, and concluding facts.

Logical Thinking Skills

The best way to define logical reasoning skills is the ability to focus on tasks and activities by following a chain of thought processes and relating statements to one another. The process allows you to find a logical solution to your problem.

How To Build Logical Thinking Skills?

Work on your logical thinking development to enhance your problem-solving abilities. Here is a breakdown of the techniques to help you overcome your thinking obstacles and understand what the concept of logical thinking is.

• Do not view things from your perspective and understand other people’s opinions.  
• Think before you start doing things by devising efficient strategies.  
• Analyze the meaning of words and sentences carefully.  
• Enhance your thinking skills through games and mystery books.

How To Think Logically in Five Steps?

Logical reasoning means rationalizing your thoughts and creating positive outcomes. The process combines situational awareness and the ability to regulate emotions to enable efficient decision-making. Here is how you can think logically before making decisions.

1. Take Part in Creative Activities

Creative activities like painting, writing, drawing, music, etc., help stimulate your brain and promote logical thinking. Creative thinking also helps develop problem-solving abilities to make you a better performer.

2. Practice Asking Meaningful Questions

Try asking questions regularly to gain a comprehensive perspective of the facts. It will enable you to approach problems creatively and logically and devise solutions strategically.

3. Spend Time with Other People

Try developing meaningful relationships with other people to help broaden your views and perspectives. Socializing with them will help you think logically and provide alternative viewpoints to solutions.

4. Learn New Skills

You must learn new skills frequently to sharpen your logical reasoning abilities. Take opportunities to learn as often as possible and practice your skills daily to help thoughtfully approach situations.

5. Visualize the Outcome of Your Decisions

You must consider your decisions and their impact on your future to help assess positive outcomes. Visualizing the outcome of your choices and decisions will help you strengthen your logical thinking skills.

Engage with the top trending KnowledgeHut's Category Courses:

Components Of Logical Thinking

When someone asks you what the meaning of logical thinking is, your answer should be emotional reasoning and intelligence. It means you possess self-awareness of your feelings and prevent them from affecting your decision-making process.

You must know four significant components after understanding  what  the logical thinking concept is.   

1. Deductive Reasoning

Deductive Reasoning or Deduction is a significant component of logical thinking that seeks to reach specific conclusions. The process makes it easier for you to gain a simplified understanding and indulge in rational and logical thought processes.

2. Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning or induction enables you to think more logically and rely on generalizations. Your general notions depend on anecdotal experiences, facts, and personal observations of your life that are either true or false.

3. Causal Inference

Causal inference involves recognizing the change and evolvement in reasoning things to help you think logically. The process enables taking specific actions and making a logical or causal inference to reason your activities.

Analogical reasoning or analogy enables you to find the things between two different perspectives. Analogy helps you know and understand every situation to help you think logically and make rational decisions.

Example s of Thinking Logically on Different Occasions

What is a logical thinking example? I f you are asking yourself this question, look at the following situations for reference.  

1. Logical Thinking When You Are in Disagreement

You and your friend discuss the upcoming cricket match, and both disagree on who will be the opening batsman. You try logically reasoning out the facts and back out by stating that your friend’s prediction is correct.

2. Logical Thinking to Complete Your Work

You had planned a day out with friends for the weekend, but you got caught up with some pending work. The logical way to sort the situation would be to complete your work beforehand and head out for your getaway.

3. Logical Thinking When Making a Tough Decision

You get a good job opportunity in another city, but it makes you emotional thinking you have to leave your hometown. The logical way is to think of the opportunities awaiting you in the other place and decide to take the job.   

4. Logical Thinking When You Do Not Know the Answer

If you do not know the answer to a few questions about your recent assignment, the logical way of solving them is by approaching your teacher and asking for clarification.   

5. Other Logical Thinking Examples

Logical thinking involves reasoning skills to study problems and find rational conclusions or solutions. One of the best examples is the following situation.

You are facing some problems in the office. So, you use the available facts using your logical reasoning skills to address them.

Here is another example of logical reasoning.

You develop a fever ahead of an important meeting that you cannot miss at any cost. The logical way to solve the problem is to attend the meeting virtually instead of remaining physically present.

How to Show Logical Thinking Skills on a Job Application?

Logical thinking skills are crucial for many roles. Here's how to highlight them effectively on your job application:

• Match Job Requirements: Align your experiences with the job description.
• Use Specific Examples: Mention instances where you applied logical thinking, such as solving complex problems or optimizing processes.
• Clear Articulation: Emphasize your ability to think critically and logically in your cover letter.

a. On a Resume

Incorporating logical thinking skills into your resume is essential. Here's a sample snippet:

1234 Elm Street, City, State, 12345 (123) 456-7890 | [email protected]

Professional Experience

Project Manager | ABC Corporation | City, State | Jan 2020 – Present

• Implemented a project management system, improving team efficiency by 30%.
• Resolved complex issues, reducing project delays by 20%.
• Led training sessions to enhance team logical thinking and problem-solving skills.

Bachelor of Science in Business Administration | XYZ University | City, State | Graduated May 2019

b. In an Interview

Showcasing your logical thinking skills in an interview involves:

• Specific Situations:  Describe a scenario where you used logical reasoning to solve a problem.
• Step-by-Step Process:  Outline how you gathered information, analyzed data, and implemented a solution.
• Insightful Questions: Demonstrate your logical thinking by asking thoughtful questions about the role and company.
• Decision-Making Approach:  Discuss your approach to making decisions logically and methodically.

In Conclusion

Logical thinking is an act of analyzing situations and using reasoning abilities to study the problem and make a rational conclusion.  When you become a logical thinker, you gather all the information you can, assess the facts, and methodically decide the best way to move forward with your decision. Most people consider logical thinking an essential tool to brainstorm ideas, analyze problems, and find answers at home, workplace, or in educational institutions.

Secure your future with the  highest paying jobs  in the world. Stay ahead in a rapidly evolving job market and unlock a world of financial possibilities!  

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

You can consider yourself a logical thinker if you are attentive, get your facts straight, and have clear ideas about situations.

Yes, logical thinking is a soft skill that is tangible, easy to practice, and improves your reasoning abilities.

Economists, software developers, accountants, chemical engineers, technical writers, criminologists, and other related careers use logical thinking.

Logical thinkers are good at observing and analyzing situations, feedback, and reactions to draw rational conclusions.

Abhresh Sugandhi

Abhresh is specialized as a corporate trainer, He has a decade of experience in technical training blended with virtual webinars and instructor-led session created courses, tutorials, and articles for organizations. He is also the founder of Nikasio.com, which offers multiple services in technical training, project consulting, content development, etc.

Avail your free 1:1 mentorship session.

Something went wrong

Invest in Your Future: Upcoming High-Paying Career Courses to Consider

Build an Agentic RAG Pipeline with Llama 3.1 and NVIDIA NeMo Retriever NIMs

Employing retrieval-augmented generation ( RAG ) is an effective strategy for ensuring large language model (LLM) responses are up-to-date and not hallucinated. 

While various retrieval strategies can improve the recall of documents for generation, there is no one-size-fits-all approach. The retrieval pipeline depends on your data, from hyperparameters like the chunk size, and number of documents returned, to retrieval algorithms like semantic search or graph retrieval.  

Retrieval strategies may differ, but it’s becoming more common for modern RAG systems to add an agentic framework on top of a retrieval system. This framework handles reasoning, decision-making, and reflection on the retrieved data. An agent is a system that can use an LLM to reason through a problem, create a plan to solve the problem and execute the plan with the help of a set of tools. 

For example, LLMs are notoriously bad at solving math problems. Giving an LLM a calculator “tool” that it can use to perform mathematical tasks while it reasons through calculating a YoY increase of a company’s revenue can be described as an agentic workflow. 

As generative AI systems start transitioning towards entities capable of performing agentic tasks, we need robust models trained on the ability to break down tasks, act as central planners, and have multi-step reasoning abilities with model and system-level safety checks. With the Llama 3.1 family, Meta is launching a suite of LLMs spanning 8B, 70B, and 405B parameters with these tool-calling capabilities for agentic workloads. NVIDIA has partnered with Meta to make sure the latest Llama models can be deployed optimally through NVIDIA NIMs .

With the general availability of the NVIDIA NeMo Retriever collection of NIM microservices, enterprises have access to scalable software to customize their data-dependent RAG pipelines. The NeMo Retriever NIMs can be easily plugged into existing RAG pipelines and interfaces with open-source LLM frameworks like LangChain or LlamaIndex, so you can easily integrate retriever models into generative AI applications.

LLMs and NIMs: A powerful RAG duo

In a customizable agentic RAG, an LLM capable of function calling plays a greater role than the final answer generation. While NeMo Retriever NIMs bring the power of state-of-the-art text embedding and reranking to your retrieval pipeline, the LLM can be used for higher-level decision-making on retrieved data, structured output generation, and tool calling.

NVIDIA NeMo Retriever NIMs

To create the final pipeline, a set of NeMo Retriever microservices can be used for embedding and reranking. These microservices can be deployed within the enterprise locally, and are packaged together with NVIDIA Triton Inference Server and NVIDIA TensorRT for optimized inference of text for embedding and reranking.  Additional enterprise benefits include:

• Scalable deployment : Whether you’re catering to a few users or millions, NeMo Retriever embedding and reranking NIMs can be scaled seamlessly to meet your demands.
• Flexible integration : Easily incorporate NeMo Retriever embedding and reranking NIMs into existing workflows and applications, thanks to the OpenAI-compliant API endpoints–and deploy anywhere your data resides.
• Secure processing : Your data privacy is paramount. NeMo Retriever embedding and reranking NIMs ensure that all inferences are processed securely, with rigorous data protection measures in place.

Meta Llama 3.1 tool calling

The new Llama 3.1 set of models can be seen as the first big push of open-source models towards serious agentic capabilities. These models can now become part of a larger automation system, with LLMs planning and picking the right tools to solve a larger problem. Since NVIDIA Llama 3.1 NIMs have the necessary support for OpenAI style tool calling, libraries like LangChain can now be used with NIMs to bind LLMs to Pydantic classes and fill in objects/dictionaries. This combination makes it easier for developers to get structured outputs from NIM LLMs without resorting to regex parsing. 

As seen in the following Langchain tool calling snippet.

RAG with agents

Retrieving passages or documents within a RAG pipeline without further validation and self-reflection can result in unhelpful responses and factual inaccuracies. Since the models aren’t explicitly trained to follow facts from passages post-generation verification is necessary. 

To solve this, several RAG strategies like self-RAG and corrective RAG etc have been proposed which essentially market an agentic framework on top of the baseline RAG pipeline. These frameworks can be multi-agent, which provides the additional decision-making abilities needed to improve the quality of retrieved data and generated responses.

Architecture

Multi-agent frameworks, like LangGraph, enable developers to group LLM application-level logic into nodes and edges, for finer control over agentic decision-making. LangGraph with NVIDIA LangChain OSS connectors can be used for embedding, reranking, and implementing the necessary agentic RAG techniques with LLMs (as discussed previously). 

To implement this, an application developer must include the finer-level decision-making on top of their RAG pipeline. Figure 1 shows one of the many renditions on a router node depending on the use case. Here, the router switches between retrieving documents from local search or answering with an “I don’t know.”

In Figure 2, we replace the default router with a web search tool, which resorts to searching the web for documents in case the questions aren’t relevant to documents stored locally.

Finally,  a decision can be made to ask the question differently by rewriting the query with help on an LLM, perchance of better recall from the retriever as shown in Figure 3.

Node specifications

Some of the noteworthy nodes and checkers, which every RAG pipeline may benefit from include

• Query decomposer: Breaks down the question into multiple smaller logical questions, and is helpful when a question needs to be answered using chunks from multiple documents.
• Router: Decides if chunks need to be retrieved from the local retriever to answer the given question based on the relevancy of documents stored locally. Alternatively, ‌the agent can be programmed to do a web search or simply answer with an ‘I don’t know.’
• Retriever: This is the internal implementation of the RAG pipeline. For example, a hybrid retriever of a semantic and keyword search retriever.
• Grader: Checks if the retrieved passages/chunks are relevant to the question at hand.
• Hallucination checker: Checks if the LLM generation from each chunk is relevant to the chunk.  Post-generation verification is necessary since the models are not explicitly trained to follow facts from passages.

Depending on the data and the use case, additional nodes and tools can be added to the example multi-agent workflow above. For example, a financial service copilot might need a calculator tool to go along with the query decomposition tool, to accurately answer questions about trends, percentage increases, or YoY growth.. Ultimately, a developer’s final decision for ‌graph construction depends on accuracy, throughput, and cost requirements. 

Getting started

NeMo Retriever embedding and reranking NIM microservices are available today.  Developers can download and deploy docker containers and find Llama 3.1 NIMs at ai.nvidia.com . Check out our developer Jupyter notebook with a step-by-step implementation of the agentic RAG on GitHub .

Related resources

• GTC session: Generative AI Theater: Meet Your NVIDIA GTC Host
• GTC session: Best Practices for Building LLM RAG Using NVIDIA AI
• GTC session: Beyond RAG Basics: Building Agents, Co-Pilots, Assistants, and More!
• NGC Containers: retail-shopping-advisor-chatbot-service
• NGC Containers: retail-shopping-advisor-frontend-service
• SDK: NeMo Retriever

About the Authors

Related posts

Tips for Building a RAG Pipeline with NVIDIA AI LangChain AI Endpoints

How to Take a RAG Application from Pilot to Production in Four Steps

Video: Build a RAG-Powered Chatbot in Five Minutes

RAG 101: Demystifying Retrieval-Augmented Generation Pipelines

Build Enterprise Retrieval-Augmented Generation Apps with NVIDIA Retrieval QA Embedding Model

Revolutionizing Data Center Efficiency with the NVIDIA Grace Family

Deliver Personalized Retail Experiences with an AI-Powered Shopping Advisor

Enhancing RAG Pipelines with Re-Ranking

Access to NVIDIA NIM Now Available Free to Developer Program Members

Creating Synthetic Data Using Llama 3.1 405B