Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this paper, we propose an application of critical thinking (CT) to real-world problems, taking into account personal well-being (PB) and lifelong formation (FO). First, we raise a substantial problem with CT, which is that causal explanation is of little importance in solving everyday problems. If we care about everyday problems, we must treat the identification of causal relationships as a fundamental mechanism and action as a form of solution once the origin of the problem is unequivocally known. Decision-making and problem-solving skills should be the execution of the causal explanations reached. By acting this way, we change reality and achieve our goals, which are none other than those imposed by our PB. However, to achieve changes or results, we must have these fundamental competencies in CT, and these are not innate; we must acquire and develop them, that is, we must train ourselves to have CT competencies according to the demands of today’s world. Finally, in this paper we propose a causal model that seeks to identify and test the causal relationships that exist between the different factors or variables that determine the CT-PB-FO relationship. We present some results on the relevance of causality and how to effectively form and address real-world problems from causality. However, there are still questions to be clarified that need to be investigated in future studies.

Today’s world demands new ways of dealing with problems and different ways of preparing for them. Some studies argue that these new demands also require new skills. Critical thinking (CT) involves a set of skills that are entirely relevant to today’s adaptive needs. In this study, we explore the extent to which CT serves to both account for and improve academic performance. To do this, we measured the CT skills of a number of undergraduate students, along with their university admission grades and average course grades. We successfully established the structural validity of the general construct of CT, along with a strong relationship between CT measurements at two different timepoints (at the beginning and end of studying a critical thinking subject area) and the admission grade and average grade variables. These data lead us to reflect on using CT level as a suitable assessment of academic performance. We also consider the limits of our findings and their implications.

This study examines the relationships between critical thinking, metacognition, psychological well-being, and empathy using structural equation modeling. The study sample consists of 155 university students from a higher education institution in Spain, who completed the PENCRISAL, the metacognitive abilities inventory, the Ryff psychological well-being scale, and the empathy quotient, which assess these psychological constructs. The results indicate that critical thinking has a direct positive effect on metacognition, which, in turn, is significantly associated with higher levels of psychological well-being and empathy. These findings reinforce the essential role of critical thinking in fostering cognitive self-regulation and socioemotional competencies. Furthermore, this study provides empirical evidence supporting the integration of critical thinking into educational programs, emphasizing its potential to enhance reflective thinking, emotional awareness, and interpersonal understanding.

In our daily lives, we are often faced with the need to explain various phenomena, but we do not always select the most accurate explanation. For example, let us consider a “toxic” relationship with physical and psychological abuse, where one of the partners is reluctant to end it. Explanations for this situation can range from emotional or economic dependency to irrational hypotheses such as witchcraft. Surprisingly, some people may turn to the latter explanation and consequently seek ineffective solutions, such as visiting a witch doctor instead of a psychologist. This choice of an inappropriate explanation can lead to actions that are not only ineffective but potentially harmful. This example underscores the importance of inference to the best explanation (IBE) in everyday decision making. IBE involves selecting the hypothesis that would best explain the available body of data or evidence, a process that is crucial to making sound decisions but is also vulnerable to bias and errors of judgment. Within this context, the purpose of our article is to explore how the IBE process and the selection of appropriate explanations impact decision making and problem solving in real life. To this end, we systematically analyze the role of IBE in the ARDESOS-DIAPROVE program, evaluating how this approach can enhance the teaching and practice of critical thinking.

Resumen El objetivo de la investigación ha sido validar una versión breve de la prueba completa de pensamiento crítico (PC) PENCRISAL, en español y portugués. Aquí se presenta la primera. Esta versión breve consta de 2 factores, con 3 ítems cada uno. Un factor evalúa argumentación general, y el otro las formas de razonamiento más empleadas a diario. Además, ambos factores evalúan indirectamente la toma de decisiones y la solución de problemas, gracias a la naturaleza de los ítems, en los que se plantean problemas cotidianos que se deben resolver y, en ocasiones, hay que tomar decisiones. El análisis factorial confirmatorio nos ofrece índices de ajuste adecuados que avalan la estructura de la versión breve del test presentado. Los coeficientes de fiabilidad y validez son razonablemente robustos, lo que hace que esta prueba sirva a los objetivos de investigación establecidos. Abstract The aim of our study was to validate a short version of the PENCRISAL complete critical thinking test, in Spanish and Portuguese. Here we present the first. This short version consists of 2 factors, with 3 items each. One factor assesses general argumentation, and the other the forms of reasoning most used on a daily basis. In addition, both factors indirectly evaluate decision-making and problem solving, thanks to the nature of the items, in which daily problems are raised that must be solved and for which decisions must sometimes be made. The confirmatory factor analysis offers us solid and consistent indices that support the structure of the short version of the test presented. The reliability and validity coefficients are reasonably robust, as to make this test serve very well for the stated objectives. Resumo O objetivo do nosso estudo foi validar uma versão breve do Teste Completo de Pensamento Crítico (PC) PENCRISAL, em espanhol e português. Aqui apresentamos o primeiro. Esta versão resumida consiste em 2 fatores, com 3 itens cada. Um fator avalia a argumentação geral e o outro as formas de raciocínio mais utilizadas no dia a dia. Além disso, ambos os fatores avaliam indiretamente a tomada de decisão e a resolução de problemas, graças à natureza dos itens, nos quais se levantam problemas diários que devem ser resolvidos e para os quais, às vezes, devem ser tomadas decisões. A análise fatorial confirmatória nos oferece índices adequados de ajustamento que sustentam a estrutura da versão resumida do teste apresentado. Os coeficientes de confiabilidade e validade são razoavelmente robustos, o que faz com que este teste sirva para os objetivos de investigação declarados.

The objective of this research is to ascertain whether new instructional techniques can improve critical thinking. To achieve this goal, two different instruction techniques (ARDESOS, -group 1- and DIAPROVE, -group 2-) were studied and a pre-post assessment of critical thinking in various dimensions such as argumentation, inductive reasoning causal, analogic, and deductive reasoning decision-making and problem-solving was conducted. The results show that both forms of instruction functioned as expected. Both groups improved in all the dimensions of critical thinking. However the group with the new technique was only better in two dimensions with respect to group 1, namely in deductive and inductive reasoning but not in problem-solving and decision-making. One possible reason accountingfor this discrepancy was our inability to implement the new methodology in all dimensions, such that it was applied where there was greater improvement in group 2 than in group 1. The implications of this study are important because they allow us to know which new variables are crucial for instructional methodology.

It is desirable that reasoning, problem-solving and decision-making skills should form an integral part of our private and professional lives. Here we show how these skills can be improved through the use of the ARDESOS program. To test the effect of the program, we have also developed an assessment test (PENCRISAL). Our results are going in the desired direction. The ability to decide and make inductive inferences was improved, and this improvement was also seen in argumentation, although indirectly. In the future we must therefore improve our interventions in all factors, but in particular those referring to induction and problem-solving. Much remains to be done from the procedural point of view, but the preliminary results are very promising and we are convinced that our initiative has a good conceptual grounding. (Contains 2 tables and 1 figure.)

In previous works we developed and assessed a teaching program, ARDESOS v.1, with which we aimed to improve the fundamental skills of Critical Thinking. The results obtained were positive, but modest. After analyzing the limitations of the program we introduced certain modifications and assessed the new version. The changes involved designing the activities programmed by means of rubrics and making the students perform them with less direct orientation from the instructor. In sum specificity and initiative proved to be the key variables in the improved program, ARDESOS v.2. The data collected pointed to a significant improvement of the new version over the old one in the following aspects: a) version 2 improved all the fundamental dimensions, mainly in the pre- and post-test measurements, to a significant extent (Student’s t test); b) the effect size (Cohen’s d) was significantly higher, and finally c) these improvements in the program elicited better performance. Accordingly, an improvement in Critical Thinking can be achieved via an instruction design that attends to the factors that really induce change. Currently, these results have allowed us to successfully add a new improvement to the instruction, which we havere-evaluated.