Thinking critically about critical thinking: Ability, disposition or both?

Edward Krupat, Jared M. Sprague, Daniel Wolpaw, Paul Haidet, David Hatem, Bridget O'Brien

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives The objectives of this study were to determine the extent to which clinician-educators agree on definitions of critical thinking and to determine whether their descriptions of critical thinking in clinical practice are consistent with these definitions. Methods Ninety-seven medical educators at five medical schools were surveyed. Respondents were asked to define critical thinking, to describe a clinical scenario in which critical thinking would be important, and to state the actions of a clinician in that situation who was thinking critically and those of another who was not. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify patterns and themes. Results The definitions mostly described critical thinking as a process or an ability; a minority of respondents described it as a personal disposition. In the scenarios, however, the majority of the actions manifesting an absence of critical thinking resulted from heuristic thinking and a lack of cognitive effort, consistent with a dispositional approach, rather than a lack of ability to analyse or synthesise. Conclusions If we are to foster critical thinking among medical students, we must reconcile the way it is defined with the manner in which clinician-educators describe critical thinking - and its absence - in action. Such a reconciliation would include consideration of clinicians' sensitivity to complexity and their inclination to exert cognitive effort, in addition to their ability to master material and process information.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)625-635
Number of pages11
JournalMedical education
Volume45
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2011

Fingerprint

disposition
ability
educator
scenario
information medium
information process
lack
reconciliation
medical student
heuristics
content analysis
minority

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education

Cite this

Krupat, Edward ; Sprague, Jared M. ; Wolpaw, Daniel ; Haidet, Paul ; Hatem, David ; O'Brien, Bridget. / Thinking critically about critical thinking : Ability, disposition or both?. In: Medical education. 2011 ; Vol. 45, No. 6. pp. 625-635.
@article{67743edbe3044b77a5ad83f9c8f168a7,
title = "Thinking critically about critical thinking: Ability, disposition or both?",
abstract = "Objectives The objectives of this study were to determine the extent to which clinician-educators agree on definitions of critical thinking and to determine whether their descriptions of critical thinking in clinical practice are consistent with these definitions. Methods Ninety-seven medical educators at five medical schools were surveyed. Respondents were asked to define critical thinking, to describe a clinical scenario in which critical thinking would be important, and to state the actions of a clinician in that situation who was thinking critically and those of another who was not. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify patterns and themes. Results The definitions mostly described critical thinking as a process or an ability; a minority of respondents described it as a personal disposition. In the scenarios, however, the majority of the actions manifesting an absence of critical thinking resulted from heuristic thinking and a lack of cognitive effort, consistent with a dispositional approach, rather than a lack of ability to analyse or synthesise. Conclusions If we are to foster critical thinking among medical students, we must reconcile the way it is defined with the manner in which clinician-educators describe critical thinking - and its absence - in action. Such a reconciliation would include consideration of clinicians' sensitivity to complexity and their inclination to exert cognitive effort, in addition to their ability to master material and process information.",
author = "Edward Krupat and Sprague, {Jared M.} and Daniel Wolpaw and Paul Haidet and David Hatem and Bridget O'Brien",
year = "2011",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03910.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "625--635",
journal = "Medical Education",
issn = "0308-0110",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

Thinking critically about critical thinking : Ability, disposition or both? / Krupat, Edward; Sprague, Jared M.; Wolpaw, Daniel; Haidet, Paul; Hatem, David; O'Brien, Bridget.

In: Medical education, Vol. 45, No. 6, 01.06.2011, p. 625-635.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Thinking critically about critical thinking

T2 - Ability, disposition or both?

AU - Krupat, Edward

AU - Sprague, Jared M.

AU - Wolpaw, Daniel

AU - Haidet, Paul

AU - Hatem, David

AU - O'Brien, Bridget

PY - 2011/6/1

Y1 - 2011/6/1

N2 - Objectives The objectives of this study were to determine the extent to which clinician-educators agree on definitions of critical thinking and to determine whether their descriptions of critical thinking in clinical practice are consistent with these definitions. Methods Ninety-seven medical educators at five medical schools were surveyed. Respondents were asked to define critical thinking, to describe a clinical scenario in which critical thinking would be important, and to state the actions of a clinician in that situation who was thinking critically and those of another who was not. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify patterns and themes. Results The definitions mostly described critical thinking as a process or an ability; a minority of respondents described it as a personal disposition. In the scenarios, however, the majority of the actions manifesting an absence of critical thinking resulted from heuristic thinking and a lack of cognitive effort, consistent with a dispositional approach, rather than a lack of ability to analyse or synthesise. Conclusions If we are to foster critical thinking among medical students, we must reconcile the way it is defined with the manner in which clinician-educators describe critical thinking - and its absence - in action. Such a reconciliation would include consideration of clinicians' sensitivity to complexity and their inclination to exert cognitive effort, in addition to their ability to master material and process information.

AB - Objectives The objectives of this study were to determine the extent to which clinician-educators agree on definitions of critical thinking and to determine whether their descriptions of critical thinking in clinical practice are consistent with these definitions. Methods Ninety-seven medical educators at five medical schools were surveyed. Respondents were asked to define critical thinking, to describe a clinical scenario in which critical thinking would be important, and to state the actions of a clinician in that situation who was thinking critically and those of another who was not. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify patterns and themes. Results The definitions mostly described critical thinking as a process or an ability; a minority of respondents described it as a personal disposition. In the scenarios, however, the majority of the actions manifesting an absence of critical thinking resulted from heuristic thinking and a lack of cognitive effort, consistent with a dispositional approach, rather than a lack of ability to analyse or synthesise. Conclusions If we are to foster critical thinking among medical students, we must reconcile the way it is defined with the manner in which clinician-educators describe critical thinking - and its absence - in action. Such a reconciliation would include consideration of clinicians' sensitivity to complexity and their inclination to exert cognitive effort, in addition to their ability to master material and process information.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955974641&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79955974641&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03910.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03910.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 21564200

AN - SCOPUS:79955974641

VL - 45

SP - 625

EP - 635

JO - Medical Education

JF - Medical Education

SN - 0308-0110

IS - 6

ER -