Section 3: What is Academic Writing?
Academic Writing as Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is the backbone of academic writing, and the quality of our thinking often determines the success of our academic writing. For this reason, it is important to understand what skills comprise critical thinking and how you can improve them.
What is Critical Thinking?
Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally about what to do or believe. It includes the ability to engage in reflective and independent thinking. Someone with critical thinking skills can do the following:
- Understand the logical connections between ideas.
- Identify, construct, and evaluate arguments.
- Detect inconsistencies and common mistakes in reasoning.
- Solve problems systematically.
- Identify the relevance and importance of ideas.
- Reflect on the justification of one’s own beliefs and values.
Critical thinking is not simply a matter of accumulating information. A person with a good memory and who knows a lot of facts is not necessarily good at critical thinking. Critical thinkers can deduce consequences from what they know, use information to solve problems, and seek relevant sources of information to inform themselves.
Critical thinking should not be confused with being argumentative or being critical of others. Although critical thinking skills can be used in exposing fallacies and flawed reasoning, critical thinking can also play an important role in cooperative reasoning and constructive tasks. Critical thinking can help us acquire knowledge, improve our theories, and strengthen arguments. We can also use critical thinking to enhance work processes and improve social institutions.
Some people believe critical thinking hinders creativity because critical thinking requires following the rules of logic and rationality, whereas creativity might require breaking those rules. This is a misconception. Critical thinking is compatible with thinking “out-of-the-box,” challenging consensus views, and pursuing less popular approaches. If anything, critical thinking is an essential part of creativity because we need critical thinking to evaluate and improve our creative ideas.
The Importance of Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is a transferable skill useful at the university, in the workplace, and as a citizen. The ability to think clearly and rationally is important. Thinking well and solving problems systematically is an asset for any career and a meaningful life.
Critical thinking is very important in the new knowledge economy
The global knowledge economy is driven by information and technology. One has to be able to deal with changes quickly and effectively. The new economy places increasing demands on flexible intellectual skills and the ability to analyze information and integrate diverse sources of knowledge in solving problems. Good critical thinking promotes such thinking skills and is very important in the fast-changing workplace.
Critical thinking enhances language and presentation skills
Critical thinking promotes creativity
Critical thinking is crucial for self-reflection
Good critical thinking is the foundation of science and democracy
Critical thinking is a metacognitive skill
Metacognition is a higher-level cognitive skill that involves thinking about thinking. We have to be aware of the sound principles of reasoning and reflect on our reasoning. In addition, we often need to make a conscious effort to improve ourselves, avoid biases, and maintain objectivity. This is notoriously hard to do. We can all think, but thinking well often requires a long training period. This is one of the purposes of a university education.The mastery of critical thinking is similar to the mastery of many other skills. There are three important components:
- Theory
- Practice
- Attitude.
Improving Our Critical Thinking Skills
Theory
If we want to think correctly, we need to follow the correct rules of reasoning. Knowledge of theory includes knowledge of these rules. These are the basic principles of critical thinking, such as the laws of logic and the methods of scientific reasoning.
Also, knowing what not to do is helpful if we want to reason correctly. This means we should have some basic knowledge of common mistakes. This requires some understanding of logical fallacies. Here are three common logical fallacies that you should watch for in arguments:
- Straw-man fallacy: The writer misrepresents someone’s argument to make it easier to attack. They may choose only the opponent’s weakest point or lie about what the opponent said to make themselves look more reasonable. If you have ever been in an argument with a friend or relative and said, “…but I never said that!” then you have pointed out a straw man fallacy.
- Appeal to false authority fallacy: The writer uses the opinion of an authority figure or institution of authority instead of an actual argument, especially when the person or group is not an expert. Often, the claimed expert (a) doesn’t have enough background/credentials in the relevant field, (b) disagrees with most experts in the field, or (c) is biased, e.g., has a financial stake in the outcome.
- Bandwagon fallacy: The writer uses the fact that many people do or believe something to say it is true/correct. The name “bandwagon” comes from the idiom “jump on the bandwagon,” perhaps from the tradition of children running after a wagon with musicians playing music at public events.
Psychologists have discovered persistent biases and limitations in human reasoning; these faulty thinking patterns are called cognitive biases. An awareness of these empirical findings will alert us to potential problems. Here are three common cognitive biases:
- Confirmation bias is the tendency to verify and confirm our existing beliefs and ignore or discount information that disconfirms them. For example, one might believe that organic produce is inherently better: higher in nutrition, lower in pesticides, and so on. Adhering to confirmation bias would mean paying attention to information that confirms the superiority of organic produce and ignoring or not believing any accounts that suggest otherwise. Confirmation bias is psychologically comfortable, so we can make decisions with unchallenged views. However, just because something “feels” right does not necessarily make it so. Confirmation bias can cause people to make poor decisions because they fail to pay attention to contrary evidence.
- Anchoring bias refers to the tendency for individuals to rely too heavily on a single piece of information. Job seekers often fall into this trap by focusing on a desired salary while ignoring other aspects of the job offer, such as additional benefits, fit with the job, and working environment. Similarly, but more dramatically, lives were lost in the Great Bear Wilderness Disaster when the coroner declared all five passengers of a small plane dead within five minutes of arriving at the accident scene, which halted the search effort for potential survivors. The next day, two survivors who had been declared dead walked out of the forest. How could a mistake like this have been made? One theory is that decision biases played a large role in this serious error, and anchoring on the fact that flames had consumed the plane led the coroner to call off the search for any possible survivors (Becker, 2007).
- Overconfidence bias occurs when individuals overestimate their ability to predict future events. Many people exhibit signs of overconfidence. For example, 82 percent of the drivers surveyed feel they are in the top 30 percent of safe drivers, 86 percent of students at the Harvard Business School say they are better looking than their peers, and doctors consistently overestimate their ability to detect problems (Tilson, 1999). People who purchase lottery tickets as a way to make money are probably suffering from overconfidence bias. It is three times more likely for a person driving ten miles to buy a lottery ticket to be killed in a car accident than to win the jackpot (Orkin, 1991). Further, research shows that overconfidence leads to less successful negotiations (Neale & Bazerman, 1985).To avoid this bias, take the time to stop and ask yourself if you are being realistic in your judgments.
Practice
However, merely knowing the principles that distinguish good and bad reasoning is not enough. We might study in the classroom how to swim and learn about the basic theory, such as the fact that one should not breathe underwater. But unless we can apply such theoretical knowledge through constant practice, we might not be able to swim.
Similarly, to be good at critical thinking skills, it is necessary to internalize theoretical principles to apply them in daily life. There are at least two ways to do this. One is to practice. Academic writing is a great way to practice critical thinking skills. Engaging in discussions and debates with other people in our daily lives also allows us to practice the principles of critical thinking.
In addition to practice, we should also think more deeply about the principles that we have acquired. In the human mind, memory and understanding are acquired through connecting ideas. In other words, we need to reflect upon our thinking patterns. When your instructors ask you to write a (metacognitive) reflection, they are asking you to do this.
Attitudes
Good critical thinking skills require more than just knowledge and practice. Persistent practice can bring about improvements only if one has the right kind of motivation and attitude. The following attitudes are not uncommon, but they are obstacles to critical thinking:
I prefer being given the correct answers rather than figuring them out myself.
I don’t like to think a lot about my decisions, as I rely only on gut feelings.
I don’t usually review the mistakes I have made.
I don’t like to be criticized.
To improve our thinking, we must recognize the importance of reflecting on the reasons for belief and action. We should also be willing to engage in debate, break old habits, and deal with linguistic complexities and abstract concepts.
The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory is a psychological test used to measure whether people are disposed to think critically (Facione & Facione, 1992). It measures the seven different thinking habits listed below, and it is helpful to ask ourselves to what extent they describe the way we think:
- Truth-Seeking: Do you try to understand how things really are? Are you interested in finding out the truth?
- Open-Mindedness: How receptive are you to new ideas, even when you do not intuitively agree? Do you give new concepts a fair hearing?
- Analyticity: Do you try to understand the reasons behind things? Do you act impulsively, or do you evaluate the pros and cons of your decisions?
- Systematicity: Are you systematic in your thinking? Do you break down a complex problem into parts?
- Confidence in Reasoning: Do you always defer to other people? How confident are you in your own judgment? Do you have reasons for your confidence? Do you have a way to evaluate your own thinking?
- Inquisitiveness: Are you curious about unfamiliar topics and resolving complicated problems? Will you chase down an answer until you find it?
- Maturity of Judgment: Do you jump to conclusions? Do you try to see things from different perspectives? Do you take other people’s experiences into account?
Psychologists have discovered over the years that various cognitive biases can easily affect human reasoning. For example, people tend to be over-confident in their abilities and focus too much on evidence that supports their pre-existing opinions. We should be alert to these biases in our attitudes toward our own thinking.
Additional Resources
The website yourlogicalfallacyis.com contains a helpful list of logical fallacies. A similar website yourbiasis.com lists cognitive biases to watch out for.
References
Becker, W. S. (2007). Missed opportunities: The Great Bear Wilderness disaster. Organizational Dynamics, 36, 363–76
Facione, P.A., & Facione, N.C. (1992). California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) [Measurement instrument]. https://insightassessment.com/iaproduct/california-critical-thinking-disposition-inventory/
Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1985). The effects of framing and negotiator overconfidence on bargaining behaviors and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 34–49.
Orkin, M. (1991). Can you win? The real odds for casino gambling, sports betting and lotteries. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Tilson, W. (1999, September 20). The perils of investor overconfidence. The Motley Fool. http://www.fool.com/BoringPort/1999/BoringPort990920.htm
Attributions
“Academic Writing as Critical Thinking” by Nancy Bray, Introduction to Academic Writing, University of Alberta, is licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0 and was adapted from:
- “[C01] What is critical thinking?” by Joe Lau, Welcome to critical thinking web, University of Hong Kong is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
- “1 Introduction to Critical Thinking” by Brian Kim, Critical Thinking, Oklahoma State University is licensed under CC BY 4.0
- “5.7: Finding and Refuting Logical Fallacies” by Gabriel Winer & Elizabeth Wadel, Reading, Writing, Research, and Reasoning: An Advanced ESL Text is licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0
- “3.4 Cognitive Biases” by Sally Walters & Laura Westmaas is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
