What Is Critical Thinking? Beginner Explanation
Question assumptionsis this really true? Evaluate evidence for quality and relevance. Consider alternative explanations.
Contributions
Every accepted correction to this page is recorded with the exact change, so readers can see how the page improved over time.
-
Corrected an inverted attribution, four case studies that could not be verified, a mislabeled research instrument, and several other citation errors in this densely sourced article.
What the page claimedArticle inverted the real attribution chain for belief-perseverance research, crediting a study that could not be verified to exist to Timothy Wilson (1981), when the actual foundational study is Ross, Lepper, and Hubbard (1975). It also included an Intel Science Fair longitudinal study that could not be verified, an Army training evaluation misattributed to West Point's Combating Terrorism Center (the actual evaluator is RAND's Arroyo Center), a figure of '374 studies' and a Gwern Branwen study for the Lumosity case that could not be verified, a Gordon Schiff/Massachusetts General Hospital study that could not be verified (Schiff is actually affiliated with Brigham and Women's/Harvard, not MGH), a mischaracterized comparison in Wineburg's 2022 lateral-reading follow-up, a quote attributed to Adam Grant that could not be verified, an incorrect name for Stanovich's real assessment tool ('Rational Thinking Assessment' rather than its actual name, 'Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking'), an altered citation and finding for Tammy Boyce's research, and a 2019 Brendan Nyhan study that could not be verified.
What was correctedCorrected the belief-perseverance attribution to Ross, Lepper, and Hubbard's real 1975 study, removed specific statistics that could not be verified while preserving the real underlying findings for Stanovich, Halpern, and the prebunking researchers, rewrote the Intel Science Fair and Army training case studies to remove unverifiable statistics while preserving their real, general, verifiable elements, corrected the Lumosity case to remove the unverifiable study count and Gwern Branwen attribution, corrected the Schiff case to accurately describe his real affiliation and research focus, corrected Wineburg's 2022 study description, removed the Adam Grant quote, corrected Stanovich's tool name to CART, corrected Boyce's citation and finding, and replaced the Nyhan study reference with an accurately hedged general statement.
Why: Verified against the original research literature for each claim, including Stanovich's actual publications on dysrationalia and his CART assessment tool, Ross/Lepper/Hubbard's 1975 belief perseverance study, RAND Arroyo Center's evaluation of Army training programs, the FTC's actual Lumosity settlement documentation, Gordon Schiff's real institutional affiliation, Wineburg's actual 2022 Journal of Educational Psychology study, and Tammy Boyce's published book on MMR media coverage.
View the full record →