what is the connection among critical thinking decision making and problem solving

• Onsite training

3,000,000+ delegates

15,000+ clients

1,000+ locations

• KnowledgePass
• Log a ticket

01344203999 Available 24/7

Problem Solving and Decision Making: Key Differences & Applications

Explore the nuances of solving complex problems and making intricate decisions in this insightful blog. Gain a deeper understanding of the key distinctions between them. In this blog, explore Problem Solving and Decision Making, their key differences and how to apply these abilities in the workplace. Let's dive in!

Exclusive 40% OFF

Training Outcomes Within Your Budget!

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

Share this Resource

• Introduction to Management
• Introduction to Managing People
• Senior Management Training

Have you ever faced the trouble of deciding what is right or wrong? In our daily lives, we often come across situations that require us to confront challenges and make choices. This is why two critical cognitive processes are involved in addressing these situations: Problem Solving and Decision Making. While the terms are frequently used interchangeably, they represent distinct mental activities with specific objectives. Problem Solving involves identifying and resolving issues using critical thinking and creativity. On the other hand, Decision Making entails choosing the best course of action among alternatives and considering risks and rewards. In this blog, we will Learn the differences between Problem Solving and Decision Making, how to apply these abilities at work, and some advice on how to improve them.

Table of Contents 

1) What do you understand by Decision Making? 

2) Understanding Problem Solving 

3) What are the differences between Problem Solving and Decision Making?

4) Tips on how to improve Problem-solving and Decision-making skills

5) How can you integrate Decision Making and Problem Solving? 

6) Conclusion 

What do you understand by Decision Making? 

It is a hard choice when we are faced with the question to make important decisions, in organisational setting and personal life as well. Nevertheless, it is not a reason to be afraid, but rather, to master these tasks through comprehensive knowledge of their consequences. First, we should define Decision Making before going on to the difference between Decision Making and Problem Solving.

It is an intellectual process that has a direct impact on our everyday and work-life matters. It is the process of analysing different options to find the best one in line with various factors and the one that is going to meet the objectives.

Effective Decision Making combines Critical Thinking, analysis, and judgment, and it can be the determinant of outcome and consequences. Let's uncover the important steps to Decision -making and some real-life examples:

1) Evaluation of alternatives: The first step in Decision Making requires the identification of problems and conceptualisation of possible alternatives that can help to deal with the given situation or problem.

2) Rationality and objectivity: The correct Decision Making process consists of a detailed analysis of all the data that is accessible, assessing the pros and cons of each scenario, and selecting a logical and beneficial option. 

3) Heuristics and biases: Sometimes, it is possible that you may have mental heuristics to be quick in the decision process. However, biases may be introduced by shortcuts and suboptimal choices could become inevitable for you.

4) Decision Making under uncertainty: Some times, you have to make important decisions based on the information that is not complete or with determined assumptions. The risk is directly connected and making risk assessment is considered to be the answer to this question. You must enhance on your flexibility to address the unpredictable.

5) Group Decision Making: In collaborative contexts, people may arrive at a decision together having discussed, brainstormed and found a common consensus with one another. Such a method taps into the different perceptions and skills.

6) Strategic Decision Making: In organisations, Strategic Decision Making requires being concerned with the possible long-term implications, aligning decisions with organisational goals, and trying to anticipate potential impacts on stakeholders.  

7) Ethical considerations:  This involves assessing the moral implications of choices, decisions, and actions. It revolves around making the right and just choices, guided by one's ethical values and principles.

8) Learning from outcomes: As an effective decision-maker, one should have the audacity to learn from both successful and unsuccessful outcomes because learning from these will only enhance future Decision Making processes. 

Here are some real-life examples that may require you to make some justified decisions: 

a) Choosing between two job offers based on salary, benefits, and career prospects. 

b) Deciding which college or university to attend, considering factors like location, courses offered, and campus culture. 

c) Selecting an investment option after analysing risk, return potential, and financial goals. 

d) Determining the best marketing strategy for a new product launch, considering target audience, budget, and competition. 

e) Making a medical treatment choice for a patient after weighing the benefits, risks, and patient preferences.   

Understanding Problem Solving  

You're now aware of how you can make effective Decision Making. Let us now learn how to effectively carry out Problem Solving tasks in our daily life. Problem Solving is a fundamental cognitive process that entails identifying challenges, finding solutions, and accompliching the set goals. 

It is a logical process aimed at knowing the problem, looking for possible solutions, and choosing the most efficient solution. This helps you to navigate complexities and arrive at successful conclusions. Let us now look at some tips that can help you in Problem Solving effectively:  

1) Problem identification: As a first step towards Problem Solving, effectively carry out tasks. Also, recognise and define the issue or challenge that needs to be addressed.  

2) Data gathering: Gathering relevant information and data related to the problem is essential for understanding its root causes and implications. This helps you become a good problem solver. 

3) Analysis and diagnosis: Analyse the gathered information to identify the underlying causes of the problem. This helps you in devising targeted solutions. 

4) Solution generation: Brainstorming and generating multiple potential solutions is crucial for you when you are exploring diverse approaches to resolve the problem. 

5) Evaluation of alternatives: Carefully evaluate the pros and cons of each solution. This helps you in selecting the most feasible and effective one. 

6) Implementation: After choosing a solution, you have to put the chosen solution into action. This requires planning, coordination, and effective execution. 

7) Creative thinking: Sometimes adopting an open-minded view towards finding a solution to the challenging situations will encourage you to be creative.

8) Root cause analysis: Finding and tackling the cause behind the problem in itself can make a change that lasts and you will get a much better, sustainable solution to your problem.

Let us now see some real-life examples where you need to apply your Problem Solving skills: 

a) Resolving a technical issue with a computer by identifying and troubleshooting the actual cause of the problem. 

b) Finding an alternative transportation route when faced with unexpected road closures. 

c) Addressing a communication breakdown within a team by facilitating open discussions and conflict resolution. 

d) Solving a math problem by applying various Problem Solving Techniques and mathematical principles. 

e)  Fixing a malfunctioning appliance by diagnosing the issue and performing necessary repairs. 

Learn to be more Mindful when you are applying your Problem Solving skills with our Conflict Management Training .  

What are the differences between Problem Solving and Decision Making?

Let us now have a look how Problem Solving and Decision Making skills are different from each other:

1) Definition  

Problem Solving is a step-by-step approach that one uses to identify, analyse, and finally come up with the solution to the issues or challenges they face. It seeks to find the origin of a problem, generate possible ideas or solutions, and choose the best alternative to be implemented. In most researches and practices, the primary aim of Problem Solving is reducing or overcoming the negative impacts of the problem.

On the other hand, the Decision Making process gives the choice, which can be taken from different alternatives. Every process of Decision Making produces a choice like taking action, a strategy, or making a resolution. There is not necessarily a problem but it is applicable in any situation which requires making a choice.

2) Objective 

Problem Solving is an effort to overcome a given obstacle or challenge. Its basic aim is to produce a solution that would change the current situation from less desirable to more desirable. On the other hand, Decision Making aims at selecting the best possible choice from among several alternatives. It could be proactive, such as deciding on an expansion strategy for the market, or it could be reactive, such as deciding on a course of action in response to the moves of a competitor.

3) Nature 

In the Problem Solving process, a problem often arises as a response to a discrepancy between what was expected and what is actually experienced, necessitating a solution. This process is typically reactive. On the other hand, Decision Making can be both proactive and reactive. Proactive Decision Making involves making choices based on anticipation of future events, while reactive Decision Making involves selecting courses of action in response to an immediate situation or problem.

4) Process 

The process of Problem Solving usually starts with understanding and diagnosing the problem. This is followed by brainstorming various solutions and analysing the suitability of each before finally implementing the most fitting one.

On the other hand, the Decision Making process typically begins with identifying a need, often through gathering information. This leads to the search for alternatives and compiling a list of these options. The alternatives are then weighed against criteria such as risks, benefits, and implications before making a choice.

5) Tools and techniques 

In Problem Solving, commonly used tools include root cause analysis, brainstorming, SWOT analysis, and fishbone diagrams (Ishikawa). These tools help in pinpointing the origin of a problem and exploring all possible solutions.

On the other hand, Decision Making often utilises techniques such as decision trees, cost-benefit analysis, pros and cons lists, and grid analysis. These methods assist in evaluating the implications of each available choice.

6) Skills required 

The major skills required in Problem Solving include critical thinking, analytical skills, creativity, and resilience. It is crucial to have the ability to persevere and not be overwhelmed by challenges.

However, Decision Making requires analytical skills, risk assessment, intuition, and foresight. The essential capability here is to be accountable for decisions, which involves predicting the outcomes of every choice

7) Duration and finality  

Problem Solving is time-consuming. It requires a deep dive into understanding the problem before moving on to solutions. The process concludes once a solution is implemented, and the problem is resolved. 

On the other hand, Decision Making can be swift (like everyday decisions) or prolonged (strategic decisions) depending on the complexity of the problems. Once a decision is made, the next step is to implement it, but decisions can sometimes be revisited based on outcomes or changing scenarios. 

Gain a deeper understanding of yourself to take more effective Decision Making with our Decision Making Course .

Tips on how to improve Problem Solving and Decision Making skills

Decision Making and Problem Solving are two most important skills that every individual must possess to excel in their career and in their personal life. There are multiple ways which can be used to improve these skills. Let’s have a look at some of these tips to improve these skills:

Developing skills related to Decision Making and Problem Solving

You can improve your Decision-making and Problem-solving skills by developing other skills such as analytical thinking, creativity and critical thinking. These allied skills will help you boost your analytical thinking skills, will help you think creatively and outside the box. Moreover, honing these skills will help you understand the problems deeply and analyse them without getting partial with your decisions.

Effective communication

Communication is the one of the major keys to success. Effective communication helps in solving problems, miscommunications and helps you understand different perspectives to the same problem. By practicing effective communication, you can convey an information or tasks seamlessly to you team members or colleagues. It helps you understand the root cause of any problem and helps you take an informed decision.

Think about past decisions

It may seem unrelated to you in this context, however, thinking back on your decisions that you made previously can help you not repeat the mistakes, or save you the time that you previously took to make a small decision. Reflecting on past decisions helpin analysing the current problems impartially and help you learn more about your own methods to decide or solve a problem.

Research your industry

Before you make any important decision, or solve out a problem, you need to know about your industry in detail. Since not all situations are same, neither are the industries. Every industry, company or business have their own set of goals, requirements, ideologies, and policies. Whenever you are a part of that specific industry, you should keep in mind, their framework. If you are going beyond their framework or their principles, while solving a problem, there may not be any significant impact taken by your decisions.

Keep yourself updated

It is necessary that you keep yourself updated. As you know that our world is going through many technological advancements. Hence you need to know and update yourself so that you can incorporate all these inventions and discoveries in your industry.

Crack Your Interview with Management Interview Questions and Answers .

How can you integrate Decision Making and Problem Solving? 

Even though Decision Making and Problem-solving have their differences, there are still instances where you need to integrate these two special skills so that you can carry out any challenging tasks or situations, whether it be in the workplace or in your personal life. The following tips will help you show how you can take effective decisions and simultaneously solve problems: 

1) Foster a systematic approach: You can start by adopting a systematic approach to Problem Solving. It involves defining the issue, gathering relevant information, analysing data, generating potential solutions, and evaluating alternatives. Then, you can implement your structured Problem Solving process, which provides a solid foundation for your informed Decision Making. 

2) Identify decision points: You can recognise the key decision points within the Problem-solving process. Then you have to determine which factors require choices and weigh the consequences of each decision on the overall Problem Solving outcome.  

3) Incorporate critical thinking: You can emphasise your critical thinking throughout both Problem Solving and Decision Making. Engage in objective analysis so that you can consider multiple perspectives and challenge assumptions to arrive at well-rounded solutions and decisions.  

4) Utilise data-driven decisions: Ensure that the decisions made during the Problem Solving process are backed by relevant data and evidence. Your data-driven Decision-making minimises biases and increases the chances of arriving at the most suitable solutions. 

Gain a deeper understanding of yourself to take more effective Decision-mking with our Personal & Organisational Development Training . 

Conclusion 

If you integrate both Problem Solving and Decision Making, you can have a more potent approach toward various challenges or tasks. This will help you in making well-informed choices in those circumstances. Moreover, this synergy will empower you to have a Problem -solving mindset to navigate complexities with clarity and achieve effective outcomes. 

Enhance your remote leadership skills with our Managing Remote Teams Course .

Frequently Asked Questions

Problem Solving is both a skill and a competency. It involves the ability to analyse situations, identify issues, generate solutions, and implement them effectively. Developing this capability enhances decision-making, creativity, and adaptability in various personal and professional contexts.

The five steps for Problem Solving and decision-making are: 

1) Define the problem

2) Identify possible solutions 

3) Evaluate alternatives

4) Make a decision 

5) Implement and monitor the chosen solution.

The Knowledge Academy’s Knowledge Pass , a prepaid voucher, adds another layer of flexibility, allowing course bookings over a 12-month period. Join us on a journey where education knows no bounds.

The Knowledge Academy offers various Management Courses , including the Management Training for New Managers Course, Problem Solving Course and Introduction to Management Course. These courses cater to different skill levels, providing comprehensive insights into 10 Ways for Developing Leadership Skills .

Our Business Skills Blogs cover a range of topics related to Decision Making, offering valuable resources, best practices, and industry insights. Whether you are a beginner or looking to advance your Management skills, The Knowledge Academy's diverse courses and informative blogs have got you covered.

The Knowledge Academy takes global learning to new heights, offering over 30,000 online courses across 490+ locations in 220 countries. This expansive reach ensures accessibility and convenience for learners worldwide.  

Alongside our diverse Online Course Catalogue , encompassing 17 major categories, we go the extra mile by providing a plethora of free educational Online Resources like News updates, blogs, videos, webinars, and interview questions. Tailoring learning experiences further, professionals can maximise value with customisable Course Bundles of TKA .  

Upcoming Business Skills Resources Batches & Dates

Fri 27th Sep 2024

Fri 29th Nov 2024

Fri 14th Feb 2025

Fri 16th May 2025

Fri 25th Jul 2025

Fri 29th Aug 2025

Fri 10th Oct 2025

Fri 28th 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
• ISO 9001 Certification
• Change Management Certification
• Microsoft Azure Certification
• Microsoft Excel Courses
• 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.

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

SLO campus power outage. Classes starting at 8:45 AM and earlier cancelled today. Next update by 8:15am

• Cuesta College Home
• Current Students
• Student Success Centers

Study Guides

• Critical Thinking

Decision-making and Problem-solving

Appreciate the complexities involved in decision-making & problem solving.

Develop evidence to support views

Analyze situations carefully

Discuss subjects in an organized way

Predict the consequences of actions

Weigh alternatives

Generate and organize ideas

Form and apply concepts

Design systematic plans of action

A 5-Step Problem-Solving Strategy

Specify the problem – a first step to solving a problem is to identify it as specifically as possible.  It involves evaluating the present state and determining how it differs from the goal state.

Analyze the problem – analyzing the problem involves learning as much as you can about it.  It may be necessary to look beyond the obvious, surface situation, to stretch your imagination and reach for more creative options.

seek other perspectives

be flexible in your analysis

consider various strands of impact

brainstorm about all possibilities and implications

research problems for which you lack complete information. Get help.

Formulate possible solutions – identify a wide range of possible solutions.

try to think of all possible solutions

be creative

consider similar problems and how you have solved them

Evaluate possible solutions – weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each solution.  Think through each solution and consider how, when, and where you could accomplish each.  Consider both immediate and long-term results.  Mapping your solutions can be helpful at this stage.

Choose a solution – consider 3 factors:

compatibility with your priorities

amount of risk

practicality

Keys to Problem Solving

Think aloud – problem solving is a cognitive, mental process.  Thinking aloud or talking yourself through the steps of problem solving is useful.  Hearing yourself think can facilitate the process.

Allow time for ideas to "gel" or consolidate.  If time permits, give yourself time for solutions to develop.  Distance from a problem can allow you to clear your mind and get a new perspective.

Talk about the problem – describing the problem to someone else and talking about it can often make a problem become more clear and defined so that a new solution will surface.

Decision Making Strategies

Decision making is a process of identifying and evaluating choices.  We make numerous decisions every day and our decisions may range from routine, every-day types of decisions to those decisions which will have far reaching impacts.  The types of decisions we make are routine, impulsive, and reasoned.  Deciding what to eat for breakfast is a routine decision; deciding to do or buy something at the last minute is considered an impulsive decision; and choosing your college major is, hopefully, a reasoned decision.  College coursework often requires you to make the latter, or reasoned decisions.

Decision making has much in common with problem solving.  In problem solving you identify and evaluate solution paths; in decision making you make a similar discovery and evaluation of alternatives.  The crux of decision making, then, is the careful identification and evaluation of alternatives.  As you weigh alternatives, use the following suggestions:

Consider the outcome each is likely to produce, in both the short term and the long term.

Compare alternatives based on how easily you can accomplish each.

Evaluate possible negative side effects each may produce.

Consider the risk involved in each.

Be creative, original; don't eliminate alternatives because you have not heard or used them before.

An important part of decision making is to predict both short-term and long-term outcomes for each alternative.  You may find that while an alternative seems most desirable at the present, it may pose problems or complications over a longer time period.

• Uses of Critical Thinking
• Critically Evaluating the Logic and Validity of Information
• Recognizing Propaganda Techniques and Errors of Faulty Logic
• Developing the Ability to Analyze Historical and Contemporary Information
• Recognize and Value Various Viewpoints
• Appreciating the Complexities Involved in Decision-Making and Problem-Solving
• Being a Responsible Critical Thinker & Collaborating with Others
• Suggestions
• Read the Textbook
• When to Take Notes
• 10 Steps to Tests
• Studying for Exams
• Test-Taking Errors
• Test Anxiety
• Objective Tests
• Essay Tests
• The Reading Process
• Levels of Comprehension
• Strengthen Your Reading Comprehension
• Reading Rate
• How to Read a Textbook
• Organizational Patterns of a Paragraph
• Topics, Main Ideas, and Support
• Inferences and Conclusions
• Interpreting What You Read
• Concentrating and Remembering
• Converting Words into Pictures
• Spelling and the Dictionary
• Eight Essential Spelling Rules
• Exceptions to the Rules
• Motivation and Goal Setting
• Effective Studying
• Time Management
• Listening and Note-Taking
• Memory and Learning Styles
• Textbook Reading Strategies
• Memory Tips
• Test-Taking Strategies
• The First Step
• Study System
• Maximize Comprehension
• Different Reading Modes
• Paragraph Patterns
• An Effective Strategy
• Finding the Main Idea
• Read a Medical Text
• Read in the Sciences
• Read University Level
• Textbook Study Strategies
• The Origin of Words
• Using a Dictionary
• Interpreting a Dictionary Entry
• Structure Analysis
• Common Roots
• Word Relationships
• Using Word Relationships
• Context Clues
• The Importance of Reading
• Vocabulary Analogies
• Guide to Talking with Instructors
• Writing Help

Dual Enrollment Program Leads CA in Student Participation

Miossi art gallery presents: "the outsiders from the other side", cuesta college's fall semester begins aug. 12.

Short term classes available now.

Register Today!

Critical Thinking vs Problem Solving: Navigating Cognitive Approaches

JTN Article

Critical thinking and problem solving are closely related skills that often go hand in hand. Critical thinking is a prerequisite for effective problem-solving. While they are distinct concepts, they are interdependent and complement each other in various ways. Here's a breakdown of the relationship between critical thinking and problem solving, and strategies to strengthen both skill sets.

Critical Thinking vs. Problem Solving

Critical thinking involves the ability to analyze, evaluate, and assess information, ideas, or arguments in a logical and systematic manner. It includes skills such as reasoning, analyzing evidence, identifying biases, and making informed judgments. Problem solving is the process of finding solutions to specific challenges or issues. It typically involves defining a problem, generating potential solutions, evaluating those solutions, and implementing the best one.

Critical thinking is often considered the foundation of effective problem solving. To solve a problem effectively, you first need to critically assess and understand the problem itself. Critical thinking helps you define the problem, identify its root causes, and gather relevant information.

Both critical thinking and problem solving contribute to informed decision-making. Critical thinking helps individuals evaluate the pros and cons of different solutions, while problem-solving skills help in selecting the most suitable solution. Critical thinking and problem-solving skills promote continuous improvement within an organization in response to changing needs and conditions. Individuals who engage in critical thinking continuously refine their problem-solving abilities, leading to more effective solutions over time.

In summary, critical thinking and problem solving are interconnected skills that support each other. Critical thinking provides the analytical and evaluative tools needed to approach problems effectively, while problem solving puts critical thinking into action by applying these skills to real-world challenges. Together, they enable individuals and teams to make well-informed decisions and find innovative solutions to complex issues.

Understanding Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a cognitive skill and a mental process that involves the objective, deliberate, and systematic evaluation of information, ideas, situations, or problems in order to form well-reasoned judgments, make informed decisions, and solve complex issues. It is a fundamental human capability that goes beyond mere acceptance of information at face value and instead encourages individuals to approach information critically, examining its validity, relevance, and potential biases.

At its core, critical thinking involves these key components: ‍

• ‍ Analysis: Critical thinkers carefully examine information or situations by breaking them down into their constituent parts. They dissect complex ideas or problems into manageable components, making it easier to understand and address. ‍
• Evaluation: Critical thinking requires individuals to assess the quality and credibility of information or arguments. It involves considering the source, evidence, and reasoning behind a statement or claim, and determining whether it is well-founded.
• ‍ Inference: Critical thinkers draw logical and reasonable conclusions based on available evidence and information. They avoid making assumptions or jumping to unwarranted conclusions.
• ‍ Problem-Solving : Critical thinking is a valuable problem-solving tool. It involves identifying problems, exploring potential solutions, and evaluating those solutions to determine the most effective course of action. ‍
• Decision-Making: Informed decision-making is a crucial aspect of critical thinking. It helps individuals choose the most appropriate course of action among several options, taking into account the potential consequences and ethical considerations. ‍
• Reflection: Critical thinkers engage in self-reflection, questioning their own beliefs and assumptions. This self-awareness allows for personal growth and intellectual development. ‍

‍ The Power of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking skills are essential for analyzing complex problems within your organization. When faced with a problem, individuals and teams must critically examine the various components, potential causes, and consequences of the issue. Critical thinking helps break down complex problems into manageable parts. Critical thinking skills also play a crucial role in identifying problems accurately. Without the ability to critically assess situations, individuals may misinterpret problems or focus on symptoms rather than root causes. ‍

Informed Decision-Making ‍

Critical thinking enables leaders and employees to make informed decisions. It involves evaluating information, considering alternatives, and weighing the pros and cons before choosing the best course of action. In a business context, this can lead to better strategic decisions, efficient resource allocation, and effective problem-solving. ‍

Problem Solving ‍

Businesses face a wide range of complex challenges. Critical thinking equips individuals with the skills to analyze problems, identify root causes, and develop innovative solutions. This is crucial for addressing issues promptly and effectively, whether they involve market competition, operational inefficiencies, or customer satisfaction.

‍ Innovation

Critical thinking fosters creativity and innovation. It encourages employees to think outside the box, challenge conventional wisdom, and explore unconventional solutions. This is essential for staying competitive and developing new products, services, or processes. ‍

Conflict Resolution

Conflicts are inevitable in any organization. Critical thinking skills enable individuals to approach conflicts objectively, understand the underlying issues, and propose constructive solutions. This promotes a healthier work environment and fosters collaboration. ‍

Customer Satisfaction

Understanding and meeting customer needs and expectations are crucial in business. Critical thinking helps organizations analyze customer feedback, identify areas for improvement, and innovate to provide better products or services. ‍

Ethical Decision-Making

In an age where ethics and corporate responsibility are paramount, critical thinking plays a role in ethical decision-making. It helps individuals and organizations assess the ethical implications of their actions and make choices that align with their values and societal expectations. ‍

Competitive Advantage

Businesses that encourage and develop critical thinking skills in their employees can gain a competitive advantage. A workforce that can analyze data, adapt to changes, and innovate is more likely to thrive in a rapidly evolving market. ‍

Enhancing Critical Thinking Abilities

Enhancing critical thinking abilities is a valuable skill that can improve decision-making, problem solving, and overall cognitive function. Here are some strategies to help you develop and enhance your critical thinking abilities:

Ask Questions: Encourage curiosity by asking open-ended questions about the information or situation at hand. Questions like "Why?" and "How?" can prompt deeper thinking and analysis.

Gather Information: Seek out diverse sources of information and perspectives. Be open to exploring various viewpoints, even if they challenge your existing beliefs or assumptions.

Evaluate Sources: Assess the credibility and reliability of information sources. Consider the author's qualifications, the publication's reputation, and potential biases.

Analyze Arguments: Break down arguments into their components. Identify premises, conclusions, and any logical fallacies. Evaluate the strength of the evidence and the soundness of the reasoning.

Practice Reflective Thinking: Regularly take time to reflect on your thoughts, experiences, and decisions. Consider what you've learned and how you can apply it to future situations.

Consider Alternative Perspectives: Put yourself in someone else's shoes and try to understand their viewpoint, even if you disagree. This helps you develop empathy and a more comprehensive understanding of issues.

Socratic Questioning: Employ Socratic questioning techniques, which involve asking a series of probing questions to explore ideas and uncover deeper insights.

Problem-Solving Exercises: Regularly tackle problems or puzzles that require analytical thinking. This can be anything from brain teasers to real-world challenges.

Debate and Discussion: Engage in debates and discussions with others, particularly those with different viewpoints. Constructive debates can sharpen your critical thinking skills as you defend your position and respond to counter-arguments.

Continual Learning: Embrace a growth mindset and a commitment to lifelong learning. New information and experiences can challenge and expand your thinking.

Seek Feedback: Encourage others to provide constructive feedback on your thoughts and ideas. Constructive criticism can help you refine your thinking.

Use Critical Thinking Tools: Familiarize yourself with critical thinking tools like the SWOT analysis, the 5 Whys technique, and decision matrices. These tools can help structure your thinking and decision-making process.

Take Courses: Consider enrolling in courses or workshops focused on critical thinking and problem solving. Many educational institutions and online platforms offer such courses.

Collaborate: Collaborate with others on projects or problem-solving tasks. Different perspectives and skills can enhance your critical thinking abilities.

Remember that developing critical thinking is an ongoing process, and improvement takes time. Be patient with yourself and continuously practice these strategies to enhance your critical thinking abilities over time. ‍

Problem Solving: A Key Skillset

Developing critical thinking skills will help you and your team become better problem-solvers. A strong problem-solving skillset is of paramount importance in a professional or business context for several compelling reasons. In the complex and ever-evolving landscape of modern work environments, individuals and organizations alike face a myriad of challenges that demand effective problem-solving abilities.

First and foremost, problem-solving skills empower individuals to tackle obstacles and setbacks with confidence and efficiency. In a professional context, this means overcoming workplace challenges, meeting project deadlines, and addressing unexpected issues head-on. Whether it's resolving technical glitches, navigating interpersonal conflicts, or devising strategies to meet changing market demands, problem-solving is the linchpin that ensures operations run smoothly.

Moreover, in business, problem-solving is intricately linked to innovation and growth. Companies that foster a culture of problem-solving encourage their employees to think creatively and proactively identify opportunities for improvement. These organizations not only respond effectively to market disruptions but also stay ahead of the competition by consistently delivering innovative products, services, and solutions. Problem-solving skillsets, therefore, serve as a catalyst for driving innovation and maintaining a competitive edge in today's fast-paced business world.

Additionally, problem-solving skills facilitate effective decision-making. Professionals who can critically analyze information, weigh alternatives, and assess potential risks are better equipped to make sound decisions that align with their organizations' strategic objectives. From financial choices to resource allocation and market entry strategies, well-honed problem-solving skills are instrumental in choosing the most suitable and advantageous courses of action.

In conclusion, the importance of a problem-solving skillset in a professional or business context cannot be overstated. It empowers individuals to navigate challenges, fosters innovation, supports effective decision-making, and ultimately contributes to the success and growth of both individuals and organizations. In today's dynamic and competitive work environments, honing problem-solving abilities is an investment with dividends that extend far beyond immediate problem resolution. ‍

Unleashing Problem-Solving Abilities ‍

Developing and honing problem-solving abilities at work is a valuable skill that can enhance your effectiveness and contribute to your career growth. Here are some practical strategies to help you cultivate and improve your problem-solving skills in the workplace:

Recognize the Importance: Acknowledge the significance of problem-solving skills in your job and career. Understand that the ability to solve problems efficiently is a valuable asset that can set you apart.

Understand the Problem: Take the time to fully understand the problem at hand. Define the problem clearly and identify its root causes. This step is crucial for finding effective solutions.

Gather Information: Collect relevant data and information related to the problem. This may involve research, data analysis, or consulting with colleagues who have expertise in the area.

Break It Down: Divide complex problems into smaller, more manageable components. This can make the problem-solving process less daunting and help you focus on solving one aspect at a time.

Brainstorm Solutions: Encourage brainstorming sessions with colleagues or team members. Diverse perspectives can lead to innovative solutions. Be open to ideas and avoid judgment during this phase.

Evaluate Solutions: Assess each potential solution objectively. Consider the pros and cons, feasibility, and potential risks associated with each option. Critical thinking is essential at this stage.

Select the Best Solution: Based on your evaluation, choose the solution that seems most effective and suitable for the situation. Consider both short-term and long-term implications.

Create an Action Plan: Develop a clear and actionable plan to implement the chosen solution. Define roles and responsibilities, set deadlines, and allocate resources as needed.

Implement and Monitor: Put the plan into action, and closely monitor its progress. Be prepared to make adjustments if necessary as you encounter new information or challenges.

Learn from Failure: Understand that not all solutions will be successful. When problems persist or new ones arise, view them as opportunities for growth and learning. Analyze what went wrong and use that knowledge to improve.

Seek Feedback: Don't hesitate to seek feedback from colleagues, mentors, or supervisors. Constructive criticism can provide valuable insights and help you refine your problem-solving skills.

Continuous Learning: Stay updated on industry trends, best practices, and emerging technologies. Expanding your knowledge base can provide you with new tools and perspectives for problem-solving.

Practice Patience: Complex problems may not have immediate solutions. Exercise patience and persistence, and don't get discouraged if a solution doesn't come quickly.

Embrace Challenges: Seek out challenging projects or assignments that require problem-solving skills. The more you practice, the more confident and skilled you'll become.

Mentorship: If possible, find a mentor or coach who excels in problem-solving. Learning from someone with experience can accelerate your growth.

Use Problem-Solving Tools: Familiarize yourself with problem-solving methodologies and tools like the 5 Whys technique, root cause analysis, SWOT analysis, and decision matrices. These frameworks can guide your problem-solving process.

Develop Soft Skills: Effective problem-solving often involves strong communication, teamwork, and interpersonal skills. Work on improving these soft skills to collaborate effectively with others in solving problems. ‍

Problem Solving in Action

Here are some real-life examples of problem-solving in action in various organizational or business contexts:

• ‍ Customer Complaint Resolution: A customer service team at an e-commerce company receives numerous complaints about delayed deliveries. The team investigates the root causes, which may include inefficient order processing or problems with third-party couriers. They implement process improvements, streamline communication with courier services, and provide proactive delivery updates to customers to address the issue and enhance customer satisfaction. ‍
• Cost Reduction Initiative: A manufacturing company realizes that its production costs are escalating, affecting its profit margins. To solve this problem, the company engages in a cost reduction initiative. They scrutinize every aspect of their operations, identify inefficiencies, negotiate better deals with suppliers, optimize production processes, and implement energy-saving measures, ultimately reducing production costs without compromising quality. ‍
• Employee Engagement Improvement: An organization observes declining employee engagement levels, leading to increased turnover. HR and management collaborate to identify the underlying issues, which may include inadequate training, lack of career growth opportunities, or poor work-life balance. They develop and implement employee engagement strategies, such as training programs, mentorship initiatives, and flexible work arrangements, to boost morale and retain talent. ‍
• Product Quality Enhancement: A technology company receives customer complaints about a particular product's reliability and performance. The engineering team conducts root cause analysis, identifies design flaws, and works on product improvements. They also set up a system for gathering feedback from customers to continuously refine the product's quality.

These real-life examples demonstrate that problem-solving is an essential skill in organizations and businesses across various sectors. Effective problem-solving often involves collaboration among teams, data analysis, creative thinking, and the implementation of well-thought-out solutions to overcome challenges and achieve strategic objectives. ‍

Unraveling the Critical Thinking Puzzle

In a professional or organizational context, the relationship between critical thinking and problem-solving is symbiotic and indispensable. Critical thinking serves as the foundational framework that underpins effective problem-solving, while problem-solving is the practical application of critical thinking skills to address real-world challenges. Together, they form a dynamic duo that drives success and innovation.

Critical thinking equips individuals and teams with the capacity to analyze information, evaluate alternatives, and make informed decisions. It encourages open-mindedness, skepticism, and the ability to see beyond the surface, fostering a culture of intellectual rigor. In the context of problem-solving, critical thinking helps define the problem accurately, assess potential solutions objectively, and identify the most appropriate course of action.

Problem-solving, on the other hand, puts critical thinking into action. It involves taking the insights gained through critical analysis and applying them to real-world scenarios. Effective problem-solving hinges on the ability to break down complex challenges, generate creative solutions, and adapt strategies as circumstances evolve—all skills deeply rooted in critical thinking.

In sum, critical thinking without effective problem-solving remains theoretical, and problem-solving without critical thinking lacks depth and efficacy. In the professional and organizational realm, these two capabilities complement and strengthen each other, fostering innovation, informed decision-making, and the ability to navigate the complexities of today's dynamic business environments. Together, they empower individuals and organizations to thrive, adapt, and excel in a world where challenges and opportunities abound.

Kaitlyn is a member of the training team at JTN Group in New York. She's a master facilitator with experience leading workshops & training programs for SMBs through to Enterprise organizations. Learn about JTN Group here.

Get in Touch With Us

United States

4th Floor 667 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10065 United States +1 877 465 7740 [email protected]

United Kingdom

30th Floor 122 Leadenhall Street London EC3V 4AB United Kingdom +44 20 7099 5535 [email protected]

JTN works globally with ambitious B2B organizations. Let’s stay in touch.

JTN is a registered trademark used under license.

Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills

• First Online: 28 April 2022

Cite this chapter

• Heather Negley 2  

557 Accesses

Critical thinking is a type of systematic thinking that is used to solve problems using logic. The first step is to gather the information needed to help you solve your problem. You start by analyzing and evaluating sources for authority to give you the best shot at finding something truthful and unbiased. Watch Out For information overload. Access to information is easier than ever these days, and it is easy to get overwhelmed by it all. As you conduct your research, keep your information organized by filtering, synthesizing, and distilling it. And keep your effort timeboxed. Start broad enough to obtain a wide berth, like a fisherman casting a large net into an ocean. This helps find multiple points of view. But don’t spend more time than necessary. Practicing collecting what is sufficient to answer your questions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Reitz, Joan. Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science: Accessed 11/07/2021

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Fairfax, VA, USA

Heather Negley

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to APress Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Negley, H. (2022). Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills. In: The Salesforce Consultant’s Guide. Apress, Berkeley, CA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-7960-1_13

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-7960-1_13

Published : 28 April 2022

Publisher Name : Apress, Berkeley, CA

Print ISBN : 978-1-4842-7959-5

Online ISBN : 978-1-4842-7960-1

eBook Packages : Professional and Applied Computing Professional and Applied Computing (R0) Apress Access Books

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Critical Thinking Is About Asking Better Questions

• John Coleman

Six practices to sharpen your inquiry.

Critical thinking is the ability to analyze and effectively break down an issue in order to make a decision or find a solution. At the heart of critical thinking is the ability to formulate deep, different, and effective questions. For effective questioning, start by holding your hypotheses loosely. Be willing to fundamentally reconsider your initial conclusions — and do so without defensiveness. Second, listen more than you talk through active listening. Third, leave your queries open-ended, and avoid yes-or-no questions. Fourth, consider the counterintuitive to avoid falling into groupthink. Fifth, take the time to stew in a problem, rather than making decisions unnecessarily quickly. Last, ask thoughtful, even difficult, follow-ups.

Are you tackling a new and difficult problem at work? Recently promoted and trying to both understand your new role and bring a fresh perspective? Or are you new to the workforce and seeking ways to meaningfully contribute alongside your more experienced colleagues? If so, critical thinking — the ability to analyze and effectively break down an issue in order to make a decision or find a solution — will be core to your success. And at the heart of critical thinking is the ability to formulate deep, different, and effective questions.

• JC John Coleman is the author of the HBR Guide to Crafting Your Purpose . Subscribe to his free newsletter, On Purpose , or contact him at johnwilliamcoleman.com . johnwcoleman

Partner Center

Critical Thinking and Problem Solving

Table of Contents

• Critical Thinking Meaning (with Example)
• Problem Solving Definition (with Example)
• How to Improve?
• Comparison Table

What is Critical Thinking and Problem Solving?

Critical thinking and problem-solving skills are crucial to survive and succeed in today’s increasingly complex life. Rather than just collecting information, we need to be able to think fast and make effective decisions quickly. Moreover, we need to think about ourselves as well as everyone else involved and come up with a quick, effective, and practical solution. Here is where critical thinking and problem solving come in. Employing your critical thinking and problem-solving skills will not only help you personally but will also benefit society.

Critical thinking and problem-solving have similarities and differences in advantages, improvement methods, and more. This article will cover everything that is similar as well as that differs for both skills.

Start Your Free Personal Development Course

Effective resume making, job hunting, campus recruitment training & others

Critical Thinking Meaning

Critical thinking is when you think about ideas carefully and ask questions to understand information in a better way. It means processing information in multiple ways, thinking about the topic from different angles. It helps cover all aspects of an issue or idea before taking action, which helps make sensible and thoughtful life decisions.

Imagine Agatha, a passionate and ambitious entrepreneur, running a successful tech startup. However, the demand for her main product is falling because her competitors are rising with the use of new cutting-edge technology.

Rather than giving up, Agatha arranges a brainstorming session with her team. They use the SCAMPER ( Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put, Eliminate, Reverse ) technique to analyze their product and determine how to increase its demand. Using this critical thinking technique, Agatha and her team realize that they need to upgrade their product. After evaluating all aspects of the issue, they conclude that rather than improving their product, they must steer their business towards providing consultancy services to the new companies entering the technology world. Their valuable expertise and resources help them revive their business.

Problem Solving Definition

Problem solving is the step-by-step process where you first identify the main problem as well as other small relative issues, collect information and use this data to find a practical solution. Being proficient in this skill will help you solve any issue easily and quickly in all areas of your life.

Ben, a product manager at a top firm in Los Angeles, is currently working on launching a new product. After completing the product design & manufacturing, the team prepares for the launch. However, as the company faces financial challenges, Ben is told to keep the expenses for the launch minimum.

Rather than just accepting the situation, Ben uses his problem-solving skills to find a way to get the necessary funds. First, he works to find the cause of the financial constraint. He finds that due to simultaneous advertising of other products, there is excessive spending. So, he creates a presentation to ask the higher management to stop advertising the company’s other products except for the best-selling products. This way, they can move the funds to this launch, and the customer’s sole focus will be on the launch, making it a hit.

Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills

Apart from a few common skills, several skills are specifically fit for each individual. In this section, we first see the skills common between both and then the differing skills.

Common Skills

Along with each skill, we added a technique to help you practice and improve your skill.

1. Analysis

It is the ability to understand the information by breaking it into smaller pieces of data and then analyzing each aspect individually to find an effective solution.

Six Thinking Hats Technique: Developed by Edward de Bono, this technique suggests that you use six different thinking styles or perspectives (hats) while analyzing an issue.

2. Creativity

When you have to think about one single topic in several different ways, you need a creative approach where you find the connection between seemingly unrelated subjects.

Fishbone/Ishikawa Diagram Technique: This diagram contains all possible causes for the presented problem, which can help us identify the leading causes quickly.

3. Decision-Making

A necessary step in critical thinking and problem solving is the decision-making process. Here, you need to collect all the initial information, weigh the pros and cons, give your input, and arrive at a final decision.

Decision Matrix Technique: It is a matrix that checks how effective various solutions can be to solve specific criteria.

Differing Skills

Why is Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Important?

Common advantages.

• Adapting to Change: Once you master the skill of critical thinking and problem solving, you can quickly adapt to any change in your life. It is because both skills require you to keep going through any unexpected or unfamiliar situations and challenges.
• Better Decision Making: Once you learn to analyze and evaluate information comprehensively, you see every decision as a problem and use critical thinking or problem solving to make the best decision for you and everyone else.
• Enhanced Creativity: When you practice critical thinking and problem solving often, your mind becomes used to viewing every detail in a creative manner. It then encourages you to think differently in every situation.

Differing Advantages

How to Improve Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills?

Common Techniques

1. be inquisitive.

The best thing one can do to improve their critical thinking and problem-solving skills is to ask questions. Asking questions whenever you encounter a new or unknown situation will help you gain knowledge and a deeper understanding of the subject.

2. Solve Puzzles

Working on brain teasers, puzzles, sudoku, etc., will help you think logically, creatively, and sometimes within time constraints. All this improves your ability to think critically and solve problems easily.

3. Encourage Feedback

Ask your trusted colleagues, friends, family, and social network for feedback on your presentation skills, communication skills, ideas, written blogs, etc. It will help you improve several necessary skills, improving your critical thinking and problem solving skills.

4. Keep a Journal to Practice Self-Reflection

After every problem or conflict you resolve, write it down in a journal. It will help you go back to your past experiences and either improve our methods or help your decision-making process.

5. Collaborate with Others

Engaging in debates, group discussions, book clubs, etc., helps you learn how others think and analyze situations. This broadens your perspective and enhances your skills.

Differing Techniques

Critical Thinking vs. Problem Solving – Comparison Table

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q1. what are the 6 stages of critical thinking.

Answer: Proposed by Richard Paul and Linda Elder, the six stages of critical thinking are as follows:

• Unreflective Thinker: It is when you just go with your instinct, guts, and emotions.
• Challenged Thinker: When you face a situation that goes against your belief, you start questioning your beliefs and biases.
• Beginning Thinker: At this stage, you start critical thinking by questioning everything and believing facts based on evidence and reasoning only.
• Practicing Thinker: Now, you start applying your critical thinking skill to every situation.
• Advanced Thinker: Once you practice the skill enough, you can easily and quickly resolve any issues by making accurate judgments.
• Master Thinker: This is when you become an expert critical thinker and make well-thought decisions exceptionally quickly.

Q2. What is the AAA approach to critical thinking?

Answer: The AAA approach in critical thinking consists of three steps: Ask, Assess, and Assert. It involves asking relevant questions, assessing the information critically, and then making a well-structured assertion (claim) based on the evidence.

Q3. Courses to learn problem-solving skills.

Answer: Courses to learn problem-solving skills:

• Data Analysis and Data Science
• Project Management
• Computer Science and Programming
• Mathematics and Logic
• Problem-Solving and Decision-Making
• Critical Thinking

Recommended Articles

This article guides you through the various similarities and differences between critical thinking and problem solving. We explore its meanings with examples, skills, and their importance. We have also mentioned methods that you can use to improve these skills. To learn more about similar topics, visit the recommended articles below.

• The Art of Public Speaking
• Self Development Skills
• Self-Improvement Tips
• Personal Growth and Development

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy .

*Please provide your correct email id. Login details for this Free course will be emailed to you

Forgot Password?

This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy. By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a link or continuing to browse otherwise, you agree to our Privacy Policy

Explore 1000+ varieties of Mock tests View more

Submit Next Question

Early-Bird Offer: ENROLL NOW

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Critical Thinking: A Model of Intelligence for Solving Real-World Problems

Diane f. halpern.

1 Department of Psychology, Claremont McKenna College, Emerita, Altadena, CA 91001, USA

Dana S. Dunn

2 Department of Psychology, Moravian College, Bethlehem, PA 18018, USA; ude.naivarom@nnud

Most theories of intelligence do not directly address the question of whether people with high intelligence can successfully solve real world problems. A high IQ is correlated with many important outcomes (e.g., academic prominence, reduced crime), but it does not protect against cognitive biases, partisan thinking, reactance, or confirmation bias, among others. There are several newer theories that directly address the question about solving real-world problems. Prominent among them is Sternberg’s adaptive intelligence with “adaptation to the environment” as the central premise, a construct that does not exist on standardized IQ tests. Similarly, some scholars argue that standardized tests of intelligence are not measures of rational thought—the sort of skill/ability that would be needed to address complex real-world problems. Other investigators advocate for critical thinking as a model of intelligence specifically designed for addressing real-world problems. Yes, intelligence (i.e., critical thinking) can be enhanced and used for solving a real-world problem such as COVID-19, which we use as an example of contemporary problems that need a new approach.

1. Introduction

The editors of this Special Issue asked authors to respond to a deceptively simple statement: “How Intelligence Can Be a Solution to Consequential World Problems.” This statement holds many complexities, including how intelligence is defined and which theories are designed to address real-world problems.

2. The Problem with Using Standardized IQ Measures for Real-World Problems

For the most part, we identify high intelligence as having a high score on a standardized test of intelligence. Like any test score, IQ can only reflect what is on the given test. Most contemporary standardized measures of intelligence include vocabulary, working memory, spatial skills, analogies, processing speed, and puzzle-like elements (e.g., Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Fourth Edition; see ( Drozdick et al. 2012 )). Measures of IQ correlate with many important outcomes, including academic performance ( Kretzschmar et al. 2016 ), job-related skills ( Hunter and Schmidt 1996 ), reduced likelihood of criminal behavior ( Burhan et al. 2014 ), and for those with exceptionally high IQs, obtaining a doctorate and publishing scholarly articles ( McCabe et al. 2020 ). Gottfredson ( 1997, p. 81 ) summarized these effects when she said the “predictive validity of g is ubiquitous.” More recent research using longitudinal data, found that general mental abilities and specific abilities are good predictors of several work variables including job prestige, and income ( Lang and Kell 2020 ). Although assessments of IQ are useful in many contexts, having a high IQ does not protect against falling for common cognitive fallacies (e.g., blind spot bias, reactance, anecdotal reasoning), relying on biased and blatantly one-sided information sources, failing to consider information that does not conform to one’s preferred view of reality (confirmation bias), resisting pressure to think and act in a certain way, among others. This point was clearly articulated by Stanovich ( 2009, p. 3 ) when he stated that,” IQ tests measure only a small set of the thinking abilities that people need.”

3. Which Theories of Intelligence Are Relevant to the Question?

Most theories of intelligence do not directly address the question of whether people with high intelligence can successfully solve real world problems. For example, Grossmann et al. ( 2013 ) cite many studies in which IQ scores have not predicted well-being, including life satisfaction and longevity. Using a stratified random sample of Americans, these investigators found that wise reasoning is associated with life satisfaction, and that “there was no association between intelligence and well-being” (p. 944). (critical thinking [CT] is often referred to as “wise reasoning” or “rational thinking,”). Similar results were reported by Wirthwein and Rost ( 2011 ) who compared life satisfaction in several domains for gifted adults and adults of average intelligence. There were no differences in any of the measures of subjective well-being, except for leisure, which was significantly lower for the gifted adults. Additional research in a series of experiments by Stanovich and West ( 2008 ) found that participants with high cognitive ability were as likely as others to endorse positions that are consistent with their biases, and they were equally likely to prefer one-sided arguments over those that provided a balanced argument. There are several newer theories that directly address the question about solving real-world problems. Prominent among them is Sternberg’s adaptive intelligence with “adaptation to the environment” as the central premise, a construct that does not exist on standardized IQ tests (e.g., Sternberg 2019 ). Similarly, Stanovich and West ( 2014 ) argue that standardized tests of intelligence are not measures of rational thought—the sort of skill/ability that would be needed to address complex real-world problems. Halpern and Butler ( 2020 ) advocate for CT as a useful model of intelligence for addressing real-world problems because it was designed for this purpose. Although there is much overlap among these more recent theories, often using different terms for similar concepts, we use Halpern and Butler’s conceptualization to make our point: Yes, intelligence (i.e., CT) can be enhanced and used for solving a real-world problem like COVID-19.

4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence

One definition of intelligence that directly addresses the question about intelligence and real-world problem solving comes from Nickerson ( 2020, p. 205 ): “the ability to learn, to reason well, to solve novel problems, and to deal effectively with novel problems—often unpredictable—that confront one in daily life.” Using this definition, the question of whether intelligent thinking can solve a world problem like the novel coronavirus is a resounding “yes” because solutions to real-world novel problems are part of his definition. This is a popular idea in the general public. For example, over 1000 business managers and hiring executives said that they want employees who can think critically based on the belief that CT skills will help them solve work-related problems ( Hart Research Associates 2018 ).

We define CT as the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. It is used to describe thinking that is purposeful, reasoned, and goal directed--the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions, when the thinker is using skills that are thoughtful and effective for the particular context and type of thinking task. International surveys conducted by the OECD ( 2019, p. 16 ) established “key information-processing competencies” that are “highly transferable, in that they are relevant to many social contexts and work situations; and ‘learnable’ and therefore subject to the influence of policy.” One of these skills is problem solving, which is one subset of CT skills.

The CT model of intelligence is comprised of two components: (1) understanding information at a deep, meaningful level and (2) appropriate use of CT skills. The underlying idea is that CT skills can be identified, taught, and learned, and when they are recognized and applied in novel settings, the individual is demonstrating intelligent thought. CT skills include judging the credibility of an information source, making cost–benefit calculations, recognizing regression to the mean, understanding the limits of extrapolation, muting reactance responses, using analogical reasoning, rating the strength of reasons that support and fail to support a conclusion, and recognizing hindsight bias or confirmation bias, among others. Critical thinkers use these skills appropriately, without prompting, and usually with conscious intent in a variety of settings.

One of the key concepts in this model is that CT skills transfer in appropriate situations. Thus, assessments using situational judgments are needed to assess whether particular skills have transferred to a novel situation where it is appropriate. In an assessment created by the first author ( Halpern 2018 ), short paragraphs provide information about 20 different everyday scenarios (e.g., A speaker at the meeting of your local school board reported that when drug use rises, grades decline; so schools need to enforce a “war on drugs” to improve student grades); participants provide two response formats for every scenario: (a) constructed responses where they respond with short written responses, followed by (b) forced choice responses (e.g., multiple choice, rating or ranking of alternatives) for the same situations.

There is a large and growing empirical literature to support the assertion that CT skills can be learned and will transfer (when taught for transfer). See for example, Holmes et al. ( 2015 ), who wrote in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , that there was “significant and sustained improvement in students’ critical thinking behavior” (p. 11,199) for students who received CT instruction. Abrami et al. ( 2015, para. 1 ) concluded from a meta-analysis that “there are effective strategies for teaching CT skills, both generic and content specific, and CT dispositions, at all educational levels and across all disciplinary areas.” Abrami et al. ( 2008, para. 1 ), included 341 effect sizes in a meta-analysis. They wrote: “findings make it clear that improvement in students’ CT skills and dispositions cannot be a matter of implicit expectation.” A strong test of whether CT skills can be used for real-word problems comes from research by Butler et al. ( 2017 ). Community adults and college students (N = 244) completed several scales including an assessment of CT, an intelligence test, and an inventory of real-life events. Both CT scores and intelligence scores predicted individual outcomes on the inventory of real-life events, but CT was a stronger predictor.

Heijltjes et al. ( 2015, p. 487 ) randomly assigned participants to either a CT instruction group or one of six other control conditions. They found that “only participants assigned to CT instruction improved their reasoning skills.” Similarly, when Halpern et al. ( 2012 ) used random assignment of participants to either a learning group where they were taught scientific reasoning skills using a game format or a control condition (which also used computerized learning and was similar in length), participants in the scientific skills learning group showed higher proportional learning gains than students who did not play the game. As the body of additional supportive research is too large to report here, interested readers can find additional lists of CT skills and support for the assertion that these skills can be learned and will transfer in Halpern and Dunn ( Forthcoming ). There is a clear need for more high-quality research on the application and transfer of CT and its relationship to IQ.

5. Pandemics: COVID-19 as a Consequential Real-World Problem

A pandemic occurs when a disease runs rampant over an entire country or even the world. Pandemics have occurred throughout history: At the time of writing this article, COVID-19 is a world-wide pandemic whose actual death rate is unknown but estimated with projections of several million over the course of 2021 and beyond ( Mega 2020 ). Although vaccines are available, it will take some time to inoculate most or much of the world’s population. Since March 2020, national and international health agencies have created a list of actions that can slow and hopefully stop the spread of COVID (e.g., wearing face masks, practicing social distancing, avoiding group gatherings), yet many people in the United States and other countries have resisted their advice.

Could instruction in CT encourage more people to accept and comply with simple life-saving measures? There are many possible reasons to believe that by increasing citizens’ CT abilities, this problematic trend can be reversed for, at least, some unknown percentage of the population. We recognize the long history of social and cognitive research showing that changing attitudes and behaviors is difficult, and it would be unrealistic to expect that individuals with extreme beliefs supported by their social group and consistent with their political ideologies are likely to change. For example, an Iranian cleric and an orthodox rabbi both claimed (separately) that the COVID-19 vaccine can make people gay ( Marr 2021 ). These unfounded opinions are based on deeply held prejudicial beliefs that we expect to be resistant to CT. We are targeting those individuals who beliefs are less extreme and may be based on reasonable reservations, such as concern about the hasty development of the vaccine and the lack of long-term data on its effects. There should be some unknown proportion of individuals who can change their COVID-19-related beliefs and actions with appropriate instruction in CT. CT can be a (partial) antidote for the chaos of the modern world with armies of bots creating content on social media, political and other forces deliberately attempting to confuse issues, and almost all media labeled “fake news” by social influencers (i.e., people with followers that sometimes run to millions on various social media). Here, are some CT skills that could be helpful in getting more people to think more critically about pandemic-related issues.

Reasoning by Analogy and Judging the Credibility of the Source of Information

Early communications about the ability of masks to prevent the spread of COVID from national health agencies were not consistent. In many regions of the world, the benefits of wearing masks incited prolonged and acrimonious debates ( Tang 2020 ). However, after the initial confusion, virtually all of the global and national health organizations (e.g., WHO, National Health Service in the U. K., U. S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) endorse masks as a way to slow the spread of COVID ( Cheng et al. 2020 ; Chu et al. 2020 ). However, as we know, some people do not trust governmental agencies and often cite the conflicting information that was originally given as a reason for not wearing a mask. There are varied reasons for refusing to wear a mask, but the one most often cited is that it is against civil liberties ( Smith 2020 ). Reasoning by analogy is an appropriate CT skill for evaluating this belief (and a key skill in legal thinking). It might be useful to cite some of the many laws that already regulate our behavior such as, requiring health inspections for restaurants, setting speed limits, mandating seat belts when riding in a car, and establishing the age at which someone can consume alcohol. Individuals would be asked to consider how the mandate to wear a mask compares to these and other regulatory laws.

Another reason why some people resist the measures suggested by virtually every health agency concerns questions about whom to believe. Could training in CT change the beliefs and actions of even a small percentage of those opposed to wearing masks? Such training would include considering the following questions with practice across a wide domain of knowledge: (a) Does the source have sufficient expertise? (b) Is the expertise recent and relevant? (c) Is there a potential for gain by the information source, such as financial gain? (d) What would the ideal information source be and how close is the current source to the ideal? (e) Does the information source offer evidence that what they are recommending is likely to be correct? (f) Have you traced URLs to determine if the information in front of you really came from the alleged source?, etc. Of course, not everyone will respond in the same way to each question, so there is little likelihood that we would all think alike, but these questions provide a framework for evaluating credibility. Donovan et al. ( 2015 ) were successful using a similar approach to improve dynamic decision-making by asking participants to reflect on questions that relate to the decision. Imagine the effect of rigorous large-scale education in CT from elementary through secondary schools, as well as at the university-level. As stated above, empirical evidence has shown that people can become better thinkers with appropriate instruction in CT. With training, could we encourage some portion of the population to become more astute at judging the credibility of a source of information? It is an experiment worth trying.

6. Making Cost—Benefit Assessments for Actions That Would Slow the Spread of COVID-19

Historical records show that refusal to wear a mask during a pandemic is not a new reaction. The epidemic of 1918 also included mandates to wear masks, which drew public backlash. Then, as now, many people refused, even when they were told that it was a symbol of “wartime patriotism” because the 1918 pandemic occurred during World War I ( Lovelace 2020 ). CT instruction would include instruction in why and how to compute cost–benefit analyses. Estimates of “lives saved” by wearing a mask can be made meaningful with graphical displays that allow more people to understand large numbers. Gigerenzer ( 2020 ) found that people can understand risk ratios in medicine when the numbers are presented as frequencies instead of probabilities. If this information were used when presenting the likelihood of illness and death from COVID-19, could we increase the numbers of people who understand the severity of this disease? Small scale studies by Gigerenzer have shown that it is possible.

Analyzing Arguments to Determine Degree of Support for a Conclusion

The process of analyzing arguments requires that individuals rate the strength of support for and against a conclusion. By engaging in this practice, they must consider evidence and reasoning that may run counter to a preferred outcome. Kozyreva et al. ( 2020 ) call the deliberate failure to consider both supporting and conflicting data “deliberate ignorance”—avoiding or failing to consider information that could be useful in decision-making because it may collide with an existing belief. When applied to COVID-19, people would have to decide if the evidence for and against wearing a face mask is a reasonable way to stop the spread of this disease, and if they conclude that it is not, what are the costs and benefits of not wearing masks at a time when governmental health organizations are making them mandatory in public spaces? Again, we wonder if rigorous and systematic instruction in argument analysis would result in more positive attitudes and behaviors that relate to wearing a mask or other real-world problems. We believe that it is an experiment worth doing.

7. Conclusions

We believe that teaching CT is a worthwhile approach for educating the general public in order to improve reasoning and motivate actions to address, avert, or ameliorate real-world problems like the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence suggests that CT can guide intelligent responses to societal and global problems. We are NOT claiming that CT skills will be a universal solution for the many real-world problems that we confront in contemporary society, or that everyone will substitute CT for other decision-making practices, but we do believe that systematic education in CT can help many people become better thinkers, and we believe that this is an important step toward creating a society that values and practices routine CT. The challenges are great, but the tools to tackle them are available, if we are willing to use them.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.F.H. and D.S.D.; resources, D.F.H.; data curation, writing—original draft preparation, D.F.H.; writing—review and editing, D.F.H. and D.S.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

No IRB Review.

Informed Consent Statement

No Informed Consent.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Abrami Philip C., Bernard Robert M., Borokhovski Evgueni, Wade C. Anne, Surkes Michael A., Tamim Rana, Zhang Dai. Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A Stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2008; 78 :1102–34. doi: 10.3102/0034654308326084. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Abrami Philip C., Bernard Robert M., Borokhovski Evgueni, Waddington David I., Wade C. Anne. Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2015; 85 :275–341. doi: 10.3102/0034654314551063. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burhan Nik Ahmad Sufian, Kurniawan Yohan, Sidek Abdul Halim, Mohamad Mohd Rosli. Crimes and the Bell curve: Th e role of people with high, average, and low intelligence. Intelligence. 2014; 47 :12–22. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.08.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Butler Heather A., Pentoney Christopher, Bong Maebelle P. Predicting real-world outcomes: Critical thinking ability is a better predictor of life decisions than intelligence. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2017; 25 :38–46. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.06.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheng Vincent Chi-Chung, Wong Shuk-Ching, Chuang Vivien Wai-Man, So Simon Yung-Chun, Chen Jonathan Hon-Kwan, Sridhar Sidharth, To Kelvin Kai-Wwang, Chan Jasper Fuk-Wu, Hung Ivan Fan-Ngai, Ho Pak-Leung, et al. The role of community-wide wearing of face mask for control of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic due to SARS-CoV-2. Journal of Infectious Disease. 2020; 81 :107–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.024. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chu Derek K., Aki Elie A., Duda Stephanie, Solo Karla, Yaacoub Sally, Schunemann Holger J. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: A system atic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2020; 395 :1973–87. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31142-9. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Donovan Sarah J., Guss C. Dominick, Naslund Dag. Improving dynamic decision-making through training and self-re flection. Judgment and Decision Making. 2015; 10 :284–95. [ Google Scholar ]
• Drozdick Lisa Whipple, Wahlstrom Dustin, Zhu Jianjun, Weiss Lawrence G. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition and the Wechsler Memory Scale—Fourth Edition. In: Flanagan Dawn P., Harrison Patti L., editors. Contemporary Intellectual as Sessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues. The Guilford Press; New York: 2012. pp. 197–223. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gigerenzer Gerd. When all is just a click away: Is critical thinking obsolete in the digital age? In: Sternberg Robert J., Halpern Diane F., editors. Critical Thinking IN Psychology. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 197–223. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gottfredson Linda S. Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence. 1997; 24 :79–132. doi: 10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90014-3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grossmann Igor, Varnum Michael E. W., Na Jinkyung, Kitayama Shinobu, Nisbett Richard E. A route to well-being: Intelligence ver sus wise reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2013; 142 :944–53. doi: 10.1037/a0029560. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern Diane F. Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment. Schuhfried Test Publishers; Modling: 2018. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]. Available online: www.schuhfried.com [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern Diane F., Butler Heather A. Is critical thinking a better model of intelligence? In: Sternberg Robert J., editor. The nature of Intelligence. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 183–96. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern Diane F., Dunn Dana S. Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. 6th ed. Taylor & Francis; New York: Forthcoming. in press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern Diane F., Millis Keith, Graesser Arthur, Butler Heather, Forsyth Carol, Cai Zhiqiang. Operation ARA: A computerized learn ing game that teaches critical thinking and scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2012; 7 :93–100. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.03.006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hart Research Associates [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Employers Express Confidence in Colleges and Universities: See College as Worth the Investment, New Research Finds. 2018 Aug 29; Available online: https://hartresearch.com/employers-express-confidence-in-colleges-and-universities-see-college-as-worth-the-investment-new-research-finds/
• Heijltjes Anita, Gog Tamara van, Lippink Jimmie, Paas Fred. Unraveling the effects of critical thinking instructions, practice, and self-explanation on students’ reasoning performance. Instructional Science. 2015; 43 :487–506. doi: 10.1007/s11251-015-9347-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Holmes Natasha G., Wieman Carl E., Bonn DougA. Teaching critical thinking. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015; 112 :11199–204. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1505329112. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hunter John E., Schmidt Frank L. Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 1996; 2 :447–72. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.2.3-4.447. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kozyreva Anastasia, Lewandowsky Stephan, Hertwig Ralph. Citizens versus the internet: Confronting digital challenges with cognitive tools. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2020 21 doi: 10.1177/1529100620946707. Available online: https://www.psychologi calscience.org/publications/confronting-digital-challenges-with-cognitive-tools.html [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kretzschmar Andre, Neubert Jonas C., Wusternberg Sascha, Greiff Samuel. Construct validity of complex problem- solv ing: A comprehensive view on different facts of intelligence and school grades. Intelligence. 2016; 54 :55–69. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2015.11.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lang Jonas W.B., Kell Harrison J. General mental ability and specific abilities: Their relative importance for extrinsic career success. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2020; 105 :1047–61. doi: 10.1037/apl0000472. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lovelace Berkeley., Jr. Medical Historians Compare the Coronavirus to the 1918 Flu Pandemic: Both Were Highly Political. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; CNBC. 2020 Available online: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/28/comparing-1918-flu-vs-corona virus.html?fbclid=IwAR1RAVRUOIdN9qqvNnMPimf5Q4XfV-pn_qdC3DwcfnPu9kavwumDI2zq9Xs
• Marr Rhuaridh. Iranian Cleric Claims COVID-19 Vaccine Can Make People Gay. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Metro Weekly. 2021 Available online: https://www.metroweekly.com/2021/02/iranian-cleric-claims-covid-19-vaccine-can-make-people-gay/
• McCabe Kira O., Lubinski David, Benbow Camilla P. Who shines most among the brightest?: A 25-year longitudinal study of elite STEM graduate students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2020; 119 :390–416. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000239. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mega Emiliano R. COVID Has Killed more than One Million People. How Many more will Die? [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Nature. 2020 Available online: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02762-y [ PubMed ]
• Nickerson Raymond S. Developing intelligence through instruction. In: Sternberg Robert J., editor. The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 205–37. [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD . The Survey of Adult Skills: Reader’s Companion. 3rd ed. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2019. OECD Skills Studies. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith Matthew. Why won’t Britons Wear Face Masks? [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; YouGov. 2020 Available online: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/health/articles-reports/2020/07/15/why-wont-britons-wear-face-masks
• Stanovich Keith E. What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought. Yale University Press; New Haven: 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stanovich Keith E., West Richard F. On the failure of cognitive ability to predict my-side bias and one-sided thinking biases. Thinking & Reasoning. 2008; 14 :129–67. doi: 10.1080/13546780701679764. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stanovich Keith E., West Richard F. What intelligence tests miss. The Psychologist. 2014; 27 :80–83. doi: 10.5840/inquiryctnews201126216. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg Robert J. A theory of adaptive intelligence and its relation to general intelligence. Journal of Intelligence. 2019; 7 :23. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence7040023. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tang Julian W. COVID-19: Interpreting scientific evidence—Uncertainty, confusion, and delays. BMC Infectious Diseases. 2020; 20 :653. doi: 10.1186/s12879-020-05387-8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wirthwein Linda, Rost Detlef H. Giftedness and subjective well-being: A study with adults. Learning and Individuals Differences. 2011; 21 :182–86. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• 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  - Decision-Making Strategies

Critical thinking and decision-making  -, decision-making strategies, critical thinking and decision-making decision-making strategies.

Critical Thinking and Decision-Making: Decision-Making Strategies

Lesson 3: decision-making strategies.

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

How do you usually make decisions?

There are lots of ways to make a decision . For example, you could flip a coin. You could trust your gut and do what you think is right. Or you could avoid thinking about it at all, and just make a choice at random—for better or for worse.

That's probably OK for small decisions, but what about more important ones? It's better to think carefully about your options and consider the many paths you could take.

With the right tools, you can learn to do this objectively , so you can make decisions you feel good about. We're going to cover several strategies that can help.

Watch the video below to learn more about decision-making strategies.

Making decisions objectively

The first step to making any decision is simple: Identify the problem . As an example, say you're trying to choose between two apartments. One is cheaper but farther away from work. The other is closer—and nicer!—but much more expensive.

Which one would you choose? Depending on what you value, you probably have some idea. This initial response, the one tied to your instincts and emotions , is perfectly valid; however, you should also try to look at your options rationally .

Comparing your options

Start by comparing them. There are several ways to do this. For example, you could list all the factors that you're considering—things like price, location, and other amenities—then choose the one thing that's most important to you. With that in mind, which option comes out on top?

Creating a points system

You could go one step further and create a points system . Take that same list and turn it into a scorecard for each option.

In this example, it means the first apartment would score high on affordable rent (let's say a 10), but much lower on location . The other apartment would score about the opposite in the same categories.

Keep going down the list until you've scored every item, being as objective as you can. Then add up the totals, and see if you have a winner.

Identifying pros and cons

Looking at it another way, you could evaluate one option at a time using a list of pros and cons. It sounds simple, but sometimes it helps to write these things down.

This time, it's OK to be subjective —certain factors can and should carry more weight than others. It's how you feel about them that counts, so be honest about what these things mean to you.

Thinking about the consequences

Imagining possible outcomes might give you some perspective on the decision. Say you're thinking about adopting a dog. What do you think the consequences might be in a month? In a year? How about several years from now?

Making decisions can be a roller coaster ride, especially when there are long-term consequences to think about. We can't see into the future, but we can try to be prepared.

Other mental tricks

At this point, it's normal to feel overwhelmed, even stuck. With so much to consider, how do you know you're making the right choice? There are a couple more techniques that can help you fire up your brain and trick it into thinking differently . Try these the next time you need a mental reset.

The two-minute diversion

Distract yourself with a two-minute activity that you find moderately difficult . Maybe you like playing mobile games, or solving math problems for fun—whatever works for you (we won't judge).

Believe it or not, you'll continue to process the decision unconsciously , according to brain imaging research by Carnegie Mellon University. This brief window of time helps you internalize important details, so you can make better, more insightful decisions.

Thinking in third person

Sometimes it helps to step outside yourself and pretend you're helping someone else . Studies show we're able to think more objectively in third person —that's why it's easier to give advice than it is to receive it.

If a friend or family member were struggling with the same decision, what questions would you ask them? What compromises would you suggest?

Really think about it. Adopting a different point of view might help you see the situation in an entirely new way.

Making decisions with confidence

Making decisions isn't like taking a test. There are no right or wrong answers, per se—it just depends on the situation.

Focus on taking the time to think about your options and what you hope to achieve so you can feel confident about the choices you make. It's not as easy as flipping a coin, but it's worth the extra effort.

/en/problem-solving-and-decision-making/using-brain-teasers-to-build-critical-thinking-skills/content/

Decision Making vs. Problem Solving

What's the difference.

Decision making and problem solving are two closely related concepts that are essential in both personal and professional settings. While decision making refers to the process of selecting the best course of action among various alternatives, problem solving involves identifying and resolving issues or obstacles that hinder progress towards a desired outcome. Decision making often involves evaluating different options based on their potential outcomes and consequences, while problem solving requires analyzing the root causes of a problem and developing effective strategies to overcome it. Both skills require critical thinking, creativity, and the ability to weigh pros and cons. Ultimately, decision making and problem solving are interconnected and complementary processes that enable individuals to navigate complex situations and achieve desired goals.

Further Detail

Introduction.

Decision making and problem solving are two essential cognitive processes that individuals and organizations engage in to navigate through various challenges and achieve desired outcomes. While they are distinct processes, decision making and problem solving share several attributes and are often interconnected. In this article, we will explore the similarities and differences between decision making and problem solving, highlighting their key attributes and how they contribute to effective problem-solving and decision-making processes.

Definition and Purpose

Decision making involves selecting a course of action from multiple alternatives based on available information, preferences, and goals. It is a cognitive process that individuals use to make choices and reach conclusions. On the other hand, problem solving refers to the process of finding solutions to specific issues or challenges. It involves identifying, analyzing, and resolving problems to achieve desired outcomes.

Both decision making and problem solving share the purpose of achieving a desired outcome or resolving a particular situation. They require individuals to think critically, evaluate options, and consider potential consequences. While decision making focuses on choosing the best course of action, problem solving emphasizes finding effective solutions to specific problems or challenges.

Attributes of Decision Making

Decision making involves several key attributes that contribute to its effectiveness:

• Rationality: Decision making is often based on rational thinking, where individuals evaluate available information, weigh pros and cons, and make logical choices.
• Subjectivity: Decision making is influenced by personal preferences, values, and biases. Individuals may prioritize certain factors or options based on their subjective judgment.
• Uncertainty: Many decisions are made under conditions of uncertainty, where individuals lack complete information or face unpredictable outcomes. Decision makers must assess risks and make informed judgments.
• Time Constraints: Decision making often occurs within time constraints, requiring individuals to make choices efficiently and effectively.
• Trade-offs: Decision making involves considering trade-offs between different options, as individuals must prioritize certain factors or outcomes over others.

Attributes of Problem Solving

Problem solving also encompasses several key attributes that contribute to its effectiveness:

• Analytical Thinking: Problem solving requires individuals to analyze and break down complex problems into smaller components, facilitating a deeper understanding of the issue at hand.
• Creativity: Effective problem solving often involves thinking outside the box and generating innovative solutions. It requires individuals to explore alternative perspectives and consider unconventional approaches.
• Collaboration: Problem solving can benefit from collaboration and teamwork, as diverse perspectives and expertise can contribute to more comprehensive and effective solutions.
• Iterative Process: Problem solving is often an iterative process, where individuals continuously evaluate and refine their solutions based on feedback and new information.
• Implementation: Problem solving is not complete without implementing the chosen solution. Individuals must take action and monitor the outcomes to ensure the problem is effectively resolved.

Interconnection and Overlap

While decision making and problem solving are distinct processes, they are interconnected and often overlap. Decision making is frequently a part of the problem-solving process, as individuals must make choices and select the most appropriate solution to address a specific problem. Similarly, problem solving is inherent in decision making, as individuals must identify and analyze problems or challenges before making informed choices.

Moreover, both decision making and problem solving require critical thinking skills, the ability to evaluate information, and the consideration of potential consequences. They both involve a systematic approach to gather and analyze relevant data, explore alternatives, and assess the potential risks and benefits of different options.

Decision making and problem solving are fundamental cognitive processes that individuals and organizations engage in to navigate through challenges and achieve desired outcomes. While decision making focuses on selecting the best course of action, problem solving emphasizes finding effective solutions to specific problems or challenges. Both processes share attributes such as rationality, subjectivity, uncertainty, time constraints, and trade-offs (in decision making), as well as analytical thinking, creativity, collaboration, iterative process, and implementation (in problem solving).

Understanding the similarities and differences between decision making and problem solving can enhance our ability to approach complex situations effectively. By leveraging the attributes of both processes, individuals and organizations can make informed choices, address challenges, and achieve desired outcomes.

Comparisons may contain inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. Please report any issues.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 11 January 2023

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

• Enwei Xu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6424-8169 1 ,
• Wei Wang 1 &
• Qingxia Wang 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  16 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

19k Accesses

22 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education as well as a key competence for learners in the 21st century. However, the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking remains uncertain. This current research presents the major findings of a meta-analysis of 36 pieces of the literature revealed in worldwide educational periodicals during the 21st century to identify the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and to determine, based on evidence, whether and to what extent collaborative problem solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]); (2) in respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem solving can significantly and successfully enhance students’ attitudinal tendencies (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.58, 0.82]); and (3) the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have an impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. On the basis of these results, recommendations are made for further study and instruction to better support students’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Similar content being viewed by others

A meta-analysis of the effects of design thinking on student learning

Fostering twenty-first century skills among primary school students through math project-based learning

A meta-analysis to gauge the impact of pedagogies employed in mixed-ability high school biology classrooms

Introduction.

Although critical thinking has a long history in research, the concept of critical thinking, which is regarded as an essential competence for learners in the 21st century, has recently attracted more attention from researchers and teaching practitioners (National Research Council, 2012 ). Critical thinking should be the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education (Peng and Deng, 2017 ) because students with critical thinking can not only understand the meaning of knowledge but also effectively solve practical problems in real life even after knowledge is forgotten (Kek and Huijser, 2011 ). The definition of critical thinking is not universal (Ennis, 1989 ; Castle, 2009 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). In general, the definition of critical thinking is a self-aware and self-regulated thought process (Facione, 1990 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). It refers to the cognitive skills needed to interpret, analyze, synthesize, reason, and evaluate information as well as the attitudinal tendency to apply these abilities (Halpern, 2001 ). The view that critical thinking can be taught and learned through curriculum teaching has been widely supported by many researchers (e.g., Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), leading to educators’ efforts to foster it among students. In the field of teaching practice, there are three types of courses for teaching critical thinking (Ennis, 1989 ). The first is an independent curriculum in which critical thinking is taught and cultivated without involving the knowledge of specific disciplines; the second is an integrated curriculum in which critical thinking is integrated into the teaching of other disciplines as a clear teaching goal; and the third is a mixed curriculum in which critical thinking is taught in parallel to the teaching of other disciplines for mixed teaching training. Furthermore, numerous measuring tools have been developed by researchers and educators to measure critical thinking in the context of teaching practice. These include standardized measurement tools, such as WGCTA, CCTST, CCTT, and CCTDI, which have been verified by repeated experiments and are considered effective and reliable by international scholars (Facione and Facione, 1992 ). In short, descriptions of critical thinking, including its two dimensions of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, different types of teaching courses, and standardized measurement tools provide a complex normative framework for understanding, teaching, and evaluating critical thinking.

Cultivating critical thinking in curriculum teaching can start with a problem, and one of the most popular critical thinking instructional approaches is problem-based learning (Liu et al., 2020 ). Duch et al. ( 2001 ) noted that problem-based learning in group collaboration is progressive active learning, which can improve students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Collaborative problem-solving is the organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning, which takes learners as the center of the learning process and uses problems with poor structure in real-world situations as the starting point for the learning process (Liang et al., 2017 ). Students learn the knowledge needed to solve problems in a collaborative group, reach a consensus on problems in the field, and form solutions through social cooperation methods, such as dialogue, interpretation, questioning, debate, negotiation, and reflection, thus promoting the development of learners’ domain knowledge and critical thinking (Cindy, 2004 ; Liang et al., 2017 ).

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely used in the teaching practice of critical thinking, and several studies have attempted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature on critical thinking from various perspectives. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking. Therefore, the best approach for developing and enhancing critical thinking throughout collaborative problem-solving is to examine how to implement critical thinking instruction; however, this issue is still unexplored, which means that many teachers are incapable of better instructing critical thinking (Leng and Lu, 2020 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, Huber ( 2016 ) provided the meta-analysis findings of 71 publications on gaining critical thinking over various time frames in college with the aim of determining whether critical thinking was truly teachable. These authors found that learners significantly improve their critical thinking while in college and that critical thinking differs with factors such as teaching strategies, intervention duration, subject area, and teaching type. The usefulness of collaborative problem-solving in fostering students’ critical thinking, however, was not determined by this study, nor did it reveal whether there existed significant variations among the different elements. A meta-analysis of 31 pieces of educational literature was conducted by Liu et al. ( 2020 ) to assess the impact of problem-solving on college students’ critical thinking. These authors found that problem-solving could promote the development of critical thinking among college students and proposed establishing a reasonable group structure for problem-solving in a follow-up study to improve students’ critical thinking. Additionally, previous empirical studies have reached inconclusive and even contradictory conclusions about whether and to what extent collaborative problem-solving increases or decreases critical thinking levels. As an illustration, Yang et al. ( 2008 ) carried out an experiment on the integrated curriculum teaching of college students based on a web bulletin board with the goal of fostering participants’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These authors’ research revealed that through sharing, debating, examining, and reflecting on various experiences and ideas, collaborative problem-solving can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking in real-life problem situations. In contrast, collaborative problem-solving had a positive impact on learners’ interaction and could improve learning interest and motivation but could not significantly improve students’ critical thinking when compared to traditional classroom teaching, according to research by Naber and Wyatt ( 2014 ) and Sendag and Odabasi ( 2009 ) on undergraduate and high school students, respectively.

The above studies show that there is inconsistency regarding the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a thorough and trustworthy review to detect and decide whether and to what degree collaborative problem-solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. Meta-analysis is a quantitative analysis approach that is utilized to examine quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. This approach characterizes the effectiveness of its impact by averaging the effect sizes of numerous qualitative studies in an effort to reduce the uncertainty brought on by independent research and produce more conclusive findings (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ).

This paper used a meta-analytic approach and carried out a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking in order to make a contribution to both research and practice. The following research questions were addressed by this meta-analysis:

What is the overall effect size of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills)?

How are the disparities between the study conclusions impacted by various moderating variables if the impacts of various experimental designs in the included studies are heterogeneous?

This research followed the strict procedures (e.g., database searching, identification, screening, eligibility, merging, duplicate removal, and analysis of included studies) of Cooper’s ( 2010 ) proposed meta-analysis approach for examining quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. The relevant empirical research that appeared in worldwide educational periodicals within the 21st century was subjected to this meta-analysis using Rev-Man 5.4. The consistency of the data extracted separately by two researchers was tested using Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and a publication bias test and a heterogeneity test were run on the sample data to ascertain the quality of this meta-analysis.

Data sources and search strategies

There were three stages to the data collection process for this meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 1 , which shows the number of articles included and eliminated during the selection process based on the statement and study eligibility criteria.

This flowchart shows the number of records identified, included and excluded in the article.

First, the databases used to systematically search for relevant articles were the journal papers of the Web of Science Core Collection and the Chinese Core source journal, as well as the Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) source journal papers included in CNKI. These databases were selected because they are credible platforms that are sources of scholarly and peer-reviewed information with advanced search tools and contain literature relevant to the subject of our topic from reliable researchers and experts. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the Web of Science was “TS = (((“critical thinking” or “ct” and “pretest” or “posttest”) or (“critical thinking” or “ct” and “control group” or “quasi experiment” or “experiment”)) and (“collaboration” or “collaborative learning” or “CSCL”) and (“problem solving” or “problem-based learning” or “PBL”))”. The research area was “Education Educational Research”, and the search period was “January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2021”. A total of 412 papers were obtained. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the CNKI was “SU = (‘critical thinking’*‘collaboration’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘collaborative learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘CSCL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem solving’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem-based learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘PBL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem oriented’) AND FT = (‘experiment’ + ‘quasi experiment’ + ‘pretest’ + ‘posttest’ + ‘empirical study’)” (translated into Chinese when searching). A total of 56 studies were found throughout the search period of “January 2000 to December 2021”. From the databases, all duplicates and retractions were eliminated before exporting the references into Endnote, a program for managing bibliographic references. In all, 466 studies were found.

Second, the studies that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were chosen by two researchers after they had reviewed the abstracts and titles of the gathered articles, yielding a total of 126 studies.

Third, two researchers thoroughly reviewed each included article’s whole text in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meanwhile, a snowball search was performed using the references and citations of the included articles to ensure complete coverage of the articles. Ultimately, 36 articles were kept.

Two researchers worked together to carry out this entire process, and a consensus rate of almost 94.7% was reached after discussion and negotiation to clarify any emerging differences.

Eligibility criteria

Since not all the retrieved studies matched the criteria for this meta-analysis, eligibility criteria for both inclusion and exclusion were developed as follows:

The publication language of the included studies was limited to English and Chinese, and the full text could be obtained. Articles that did not meet the publication language and articles not published between 2000 and 2021 were excluded.

The research design of the included studies must be empirical and quantitative studies that can assess the effect of collaborative problem-solving on the development of critical thinking. Articles that could not identify the causal mechanisms by which collaborative problem-solving affects critical thinking, such as review articles and theoretical articles, were excluded.

The research method of the included studies must feature a randomized control experiment or a quasi-experiment, or a natural experiment, which have a higher degree of internal validity with strong experimental designs and can all plausibly provide evidence that critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving are causally related. Articles with non-experimental research methods, such as purely correlational or observational studies, were excluded.

The participants of the included studies were only students in school, including K-12 students and college students. Articles in which the participants were non-school students, such as social workers or adult learners, were excluded.

The research results of the included studies must mention definite signs that may be utilized to gauge critical thinking’s impact (e.g., sample size, mean value, or standard deviation). Articles that lacked specific measurement indicators for critical thinking and could not calculate the effect size were excluded.

Data coding design

In order to perform a meta-analysis, it is necessary to collect the most important information from the articles, codify that information’s properties, and convert descriptive data into quantitative data. Therefore, this study designed a data coding template (see Table 1 ). Ultimately, 16 coding fields were retained.

The designed data-coding template consisted of three pieces of information. Basic information about the papers was included in the descriptive information: the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper.

The variable information for the experimental design had three variables: the independent variable (instruction method), the dependent variable (critical thinking), and the moderating variable (learning stage, teaching type, intervention duration, learning scaffold, group size, measuring tool, and subject area). Depending on the topic of this study, the intervention strategy, as the independent variable, was coded into collaborative and non-collaborative problem-solving. The dependent variable, critical thinking, was coded as a cognitive skill and an attitudinal tendency. And seven moderating variables were created by grouping and combining the experimental design variables discovered within the 36 studies (see Table 1 ), where learning stages were encoded as higher education, high school, middle school, and primary school or lower; teaching types were encoded as mixed courses, integrated courses, and independent courses; intervention durations were encoded as 0–1 weeks, 1–4 weeks, 4–12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks; group sizes were encoded as 2–3 persons, 4–6 persons, 7–10 persons, and more than 10 persons; learning scaffolds were encoded as teacher-supported learning scaffold, technique-supported learning scaffold, and resource-supported learning scaffold; measuring tools were encoded as standardized measurement tools (e.g., WGCTA, CCTT, CCTST, and CCTDI) and self-adapting measurement tools (e.g., modified or made by researchers); and subject areas were encoded according to the specific subjects used in the 36 included studies.

The data information contained three metrics for measuring critical thinking: sample size, average value, and standard deviation. It is vital to remember that studies with various experimental designs frequently adopt various formulas to determine the effect size. And this paper used Morris’ proposed standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation formula ( 2008 , p. 369; see Supplementary Table S3 ).

Procedure for extracting and coding data

According to the data coding template (see Table 1 ), the 36 papers’ information was retrieved by two researchers, who then entered them into Excel (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The results of each study were extracted separately in the data extraction procedure if an article contained numerous studies on critical thinking, or if a study assessed different critical thinking dimensions. For instance, Tiwari et al. ( 2010 ) used four time points, which were viewed as numerous different studies, to examine the outcomes of critical thinking, and Chen ( 2013 ) included the two outcome variables of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, which were regarded as two studies. After discussion and negotiation during data extraction, the two researchers’ consistency test coefficients were roughly 93.27%. Supplementary Table S2 details the key characteristics of the 36 included articles with 79 effect quantities, including descriptive information (e.g., the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper), variable information (e.g., independent variables, dependent variables, and moderating variables), and data information (e.g., mean values, standard deviations, and sample size). Following that, testing for publication bias and heterogeneity was done on the sample data using the Rev-Man 5.4 software, and then the test results were used to conduct a meta-analysis.

Publication bias test

When the sample of studies included in a meta-analysis does not accurately reflect the general status of research on the relevant subject, publication bias is said to be exhibited in this research. The reliability and accuracy of the meta-analysis may be impacted by publication bias. Due to this, the meta-analysis needs to check the sample data for publication bias (Stewart et al., 2006 ). A popular method to check for publication bias is the funnel plot; and it is unlikely that there will be publishing bias when the data are equally dispersed on either side of the average effect size and targeted within the higher region. The data are equally dispersed within the higher portion of the efficient zone, consistent with the funnel plot connected with this analysis (see Fig. 2 ), indicating that publication bias is unlikely in this situation.

This funnel plot shows the result of publication bias of 79 effect quantities across 36 studies.

Heterogeneity test

To select the appropriate effect models for the meta-analysis, one might use the results of a heterogeneity test on the data effect sizes. In a meta-analysis, it is common practice to gauge the degree of data heterogeneity using the I 2 value, and I 2  ≥ 50% is typically understood to denote medium-high heterogeneity, which calls for the adoption of a random effect model; if not, a fixed effect model ought to be applied (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ). The findings of the heterogeneity test in this paper (see Table 2 ) revealed that I 2 was 86% and displayed significant heterogeneity ( P  < 0.01). To ensure accuracy and reliability, the overall effect size ought to be calculated utilizing the random effect model.

The analysis of the overall effect size

This meta-analysis utilized a random effect model to examine 79 effect quantities from 36 studies after eliminating heterogeneity. In accordance with Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1992 ), it is abundantly clear from the analysis results, which are shown in the forest plot of the overall effect (see Fig. 3 ), that the cumulative impact size of cooperative problem-solving is 0.82, which is statistically significant ( z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]), and can encourage learners to practice critical thinking.

This forest plot shows the analysis result of the overall effect size across 36 studies.

In addition, this study examined two distinct dimensions of critical thinking to better understand the precise contributions that collaborative problem-solving makes to the growth of critical thinking. The findings (see Table 3 ) indicate that collaborative problem-solving improves cognitive skills (ES = 0.70) and attitudinal tendency (ES = 1.17), with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.95, P  < 0.01). Although collaborative problem-solving improves both dimensions of critical thinking, it is essential to point out that the improvements in students’ attitudinal tendency are much more pronounced and have a significant comprehensive effect (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]), whereas gains in learners’ cognitive skill are slightly improved and are just above average. (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

The analysis of moderator effect size

The whole forest plot’s 79 effect quantities underwent a two-tailed test, which revealed significant heterogeneity ( I 2  = 86%, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01), indicating differences between various effect sizes that may have been influenced by moderating factors other than sampling error. Therefore, exploring possible moderating factors that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis, such as the learning stage, learning scaffold, teaching type, group size, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, in order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking. The findings (see Table 4 ) indicate that various moderating factors have advantageous effects on critical thinking. In this situation, the subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01), and teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05) are all significant moderators that can be applied to support the cultivation of critical thinking. However, since the learning stage and the measuring tools did not significantly differ among intergroup (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05, and chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05), we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These are the precise outcomes, as follows:

Various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively, without significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05). High school was first on the list of effect sizes (ES = 1.36, P  < 0.01), then higher education (ES = 0.78, P  < 0.01), and middle school (ES = 0.73, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the learning stage’s beneficial influence on cultivating learners’ critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is essential for cultivating critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Different teaching types had varying degrees of positive impact on critical thinking, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05). The effect size was ranked as follows: mixed courses (ES = 1.34, P  < 0.01), integrated courses (ES = 0.81, P  < 0.01), and independent courses (ES = 0.27, P  < 0.01). These results indicate that the most effective approach to cultivate critical thinking utilizing collaborative problem solving is through the teaching type of mixed courses.

Various intervention durations significantly improved critical thinking, and there were significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01). The effect sizes related to this variable showed a tendency to increase with longer intervention durations. The improvement in critical thinking reached a significant level (ES = 0.85, P  < 0.01) after more than 12 weeks of training. These findings indicate that the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated, with a longer intervention duration having a greater effect.

Different learning scaffolds influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01). The resource-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.69, P  < 0.01) acquired a medium-to-higher level of impact, the technique-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.63, P  < 0.01) also attained a medium-to-higher level of impact, and the teacher-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.92, P  < 0.01) displayed a high level of significant impact. These results show that the learning scaffold with teacher support has the greatest impact on cultivating critical thinking.

Various group sizes influenced critical thinking positively, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05). Critical thinking showed a general declining trend with increasing group size. The overall effect size of 2–3 people in this situation was the biggest (ES = 0.99, P  < 0.01), and when the group size was greater than 7 people, the improvement in critical thinking was at the lower-middle level (ES < 0.5, P  < 0.01). These results show that the impact on critical thinking is positively connected with group size, and as group size grows, so does the overall impact.

Various measuring tools influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05). In this situation, the self-adapting measurement tools obtained an upper-medium level of effect (ES = 0.78), whereas the complete effect size of the standardized measurement tools was the largest, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 0.84, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the beneficial influence of the measuring tool on cultivating critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Different subject areas had a greater impact on critical thinking, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05). Mathematics had the greatest overall impact, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 1.68, P  < 0.01), followed by science (ES = 1.25, P  < 0.01) and medical science (ES = 0.87, P  < 0.01), both of which also achieved a significant level of effect. Programming technology was the least effective (ES = 0.39, P  < 0.01), only having a medium-low degree of effect compared to education (ES = 0.72, P  < 0.01) and other fields (such as language, art, and social sciences) (ES = 0.58, P  < 0.01). These results suggest that scientific fields (e.g., mathematics, science) may be the most effective subject areas for cultivating critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

According to this meta-analysis, using collaborative problem-solving as an intervention strategy in critical thinking teaching has a considerable amount of impact on cultivating learners’ critical thinking as a whole and has a favorable promotional effect on the two dimensions of critical thinking. According to certain studies, collaborative problem solving, the most frequently used critical thinking teaching strategy in curriculum instruction can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking (e.g., Liang et al., 2017 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Cindy, 2004 ). This meta-analysis provides convergent data support for the above research views. Thus, the findings of this meta-analysis not only effectively address the first research query regarding the overall effect of cultivating critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills) utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving, but also enhance our confidence in cultivating critical thinking by using collaborative problem-solving intervention approach in the context of classroom teaching.

Furthermore, the associated improvements in attitudinal tendency are much stronger, but the corresponding improvements in cognitive skill are only marginally better. According to certain studies, cognitive skill differs from the attitudinal tendency in classroom instruction; the cultivation and development of the former as a key ability is a process of gradual accumulation, while the latter as an attitude is affected by the context of the teaching situation (e.g., a novel and exciting teaching approach, challenging and rewarding tasks) (Halpern, 2001 ; Wei and Hong, 2022 ). Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting and interesting, as well as rewarding and challenging; because it takes the learners as the focus and examines problems with poor structure in real situations, and it can inspire students to fully realize their potential for problem-solving, which will significantly improve their attitudinal tendency toward solving problems (Liu et al., 2020 ). Similar to how collaborative problem-solving influences attitudinal tendency, attitudinal tendency impacts cognitive skill when attempting to solve a problem (Liu et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ), and stronger attitudinal tendencies are associated with improved learning achievement and cognitive ability in students (Sison, 2008 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). It can be seen that the two specific dimensions of critical thinking as well as critical thinking as a whole are affected by collaborative problem-solving, and this study illuminates the nuanced links between cognitive skills and attitudinal tendencies with regard to these two dimensions of critical thinking. To fully develop students’ capacity for critical thinking, future empirical research should pay closer attention to cognitive skills.

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

In order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking, exploring possible moderating effects that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis. The findings show that the moderating factors, such as the teaching type, learning stage, group size, learning scaffold, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, could all support the cultivation of collaborative problem-solving in critical thinking. Among them, the effect size differences between the learning stage and measuring tool are not significant, which does not explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

In terms of the learning stage, various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively without significant intergroup differences, indicating that we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking.

Although high education accounts for 70.89% of all empirical studies performed by researchers, high school may be the appropriate learning stage to foster students’ critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving since it has the largest overall effect size. This phenomenon may be related to student’s cognitive development, which needs to be further studied in follow-up research.

With regard to teaching type, mixed course teaching may be the best teaching method to cultivate students’ critical thinking. Relevant studies have shown that in the actual teaching process if students are trained in thinking methods alone, the methods they learn are isolated and divorced from subject knowledge, which is not conducive to their transfer of thinking methods; therefore, if students’ thinking is trained only in subject teaching without systematic method training, it is challenging to apply to real-world circumstances (Ruggiero, 2012 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Teaching critical thinking as mixed course teaching in parallel to other subject teachings can achieve the best effect on learners’ critical thinking, and explicit critical thinking instruction is more effective than less explicit critical thinking instruction (Bensley and Spero, 2014 ).

In terms of the intervention duration, with longer intervention times, the overall effect size shows an upward tendency. Thus, the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated. Critical thinking, as a key competency for students in the 21st century, is difficult to get a meaningful improvement in a brief intervention duration. Instead, it could be developed over a lengthy period of time through consistent teaching and the progressive accumulation of knowledge (Halpern, 2001 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Therefore, future empirical studies ought to take these restrictions into account throughout a longer period of critical thinking instruction.

With regard to group size, a group size of 2–3 persons has the highest effect size, and the comprehensive effect size decreases with increasing group size in general. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a group composed of two to four members is most appropriate for collaborative learning (Schellens and Valcke, 2006 ). However, the meta-analysis results also indicate that once the group size exceeds 7 people, small groups cannot produce better interaction and performance than large groups. This may be because the learning scaffolds of technique support, resource support, and teacher support improve the frequency and effectiveness of interaction among group members, and a collaborative group with more members may increase the diversity of views, which is helpful to cultivate critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

With regard to the learning scaffold, the three different kinds of learning scaffolds can all enhance critical thinking. Among them, the teacher-supported learning scaffold has the largest overall effect size, demonstrating the interdependence of effective learning scaffolds and collaborative problem-solving. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a successful strategy is to encourage learners to collaborate, come up with solutions, and develop critical thinking skills by using learning scaffolds (Reiser, 2004 ; Xu et al., 2022 ); learning scaffolds can lower task complexity and unpleasant feelings while also enticing students to engage in learning activities (Wood et al., 2006 ); learning scaffolds are designed to assist students in using learning approaches more successfully to adapt the collaborative problem-solving process, and the teacher-supported learning scaffolds have the greatest influence on critical thinking in this process because they are more targeted, informative, and timely (Xu et al., 2022 ).

With respect to the measuring tool, despite the fact that standardized measurement tools (such as the WGCTA, CCTT, and CCTST) have been acknowledged as trustworthy and effective by worldwide experts, only 54.43% of the research included in this meta-analysis adopted them for assessment, and the results indicated no intergroup differences. These results suggest that not all teaching circumstances are appropriate for measuring critical thinking using standardized measurement tools. “The measuring tools for measuring thinking ability have limits in assessing learners in educational situations and should be adapted appropriately to accurately assess the changes in learners’ critical thinking.”, according to Simpson and Courtney ( 2002 , p. 91). As a result, in order to more fully and precisely gauge how learners’ critical thinking has evolved, we must properly modify standardized measuring tools based on collaborative problem-solving learning contexts.

With regard to the subject area, the comprehensive effect size of science departments (e.g., mathematics, science, medical science) is larger than that of language arts and social sciences. Some recent international education reforms have noted that critical thinking is a basic part of scientific literacy. Students with scientific literacy can prove the rationality of their judgment according to accurate evidence and reasonable standards when they face challenges or poorly structured problems (Kyndt et al., 2013 ), which makes critical thinking crucial for developing scientific understanding and applying this understanding to practical problem solving for problems related to science, technology, and society (Yore et al., 2007 ).

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Other than those stated in the discussion above, the following suggestions are offered for critical thinking instruction utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

First, teachers should put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, to design real problems based on collaborative situations. This meta-analysis provides evidence to support the view that collaborative problem-solving has a strong synergistic effect on promoting students’ critical thinking. Asking questions about real situations and allowing learners to take part in critical discussions on real problems during class instruction are key ways to teach critical thinking rather than simply reading speculative articles without practice (Mulnix, 2012 ). Furthermore, the improvement of students’ critical thinking is realized through cognitive conflict with other learners in the problem situation (Yang et al., 2008 ). Consequently, it is essential for teachers to put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, and design real problems and encourage students to discuss, negotiate, and argue based on collaborative problem-solving situations.

Second, teachers should design and implement mixed courses to cultivate learners’ critical thinking, utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving. Critical thinking can be taught through curriculum instruction (Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), with the goal of cultivating learners’ critical thinking for flexible transfer and application in real problem-solving situations. This meta-analysis shows that mixed course teaching has a highly substantial impact on the cultivation and promotion of learners’ critical thinking. Therefore, teachers should design and implement mixed course teaching with real collaborative problem-solving situations in combination with the knowledge content of specific disciplines in conventional teaching, teach methods and strategies of critical thinking based on poorly structured problems to help students master critical thinking, and provide practical activities in which students can interact with each other to develop knowledge construction and critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Third, teachers should be more trained in critical thinking, particularly preservice teachers, and they also should be conscious of the ways in which teachers’ support for learning scaffolds can promote critical thinking. The learning scaffold supported by teachers had the greatest impact on learners’ critical thinking, in addition to being more directive, targeted, and timely (Wood et al., 2006 ). Critical thinking can only be effectively taught when teachers recognize the significance of critical thinking for students’ growth and use the proper approaches while designing instructional activities (Forawi, 2016 ). Therefore, with the intention of enabling teachers to create learning scaffolds to cultivate learners’ critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem solving, it is essential to concentrate on the teacher-supported learning scaffolds and enhance the instruction for teaching critical thinking to teachers, especially preservice teachers.

Implications and limitations

There are certain limitations in this meta-analysis, but future research can correct them. First, the search languages were restricted to English and Chinese, so it is possible that pertinent studies that were written in other languages were overlooked, resulting in an inadequate number of articles for review. Second, these data provided by the included studies are partially missing, such as whether teachers were trained in the theory and practice of critical thinking, the average age and gender of learners, and the differences in critical thinking among learners of various ages and genders. Third, as is typical for review articles, more studies were released while this meta-analysis was being done; therefore, it had a time limit. With the development of relevant research, future studies focusing on these issues are highly relevant and needed.

Conclusions

The subject of the magnitude of collaborative problem-solving’s impact on fostering students’ critical thinking, which received scant attention from other studies, was successfully addressed by this study. The question of the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking was addressed in this study, which addressed a topic that had gotten little attention in earlier research. The following conclusions can be made:

Regarding the results obtained, collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster learners’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]). With respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving can significantly and effectively improve students’ attitudinal tendency, and the comprehensive effect is significant (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

As demonstrated by both the results and the discussion, there are varying degrees of beneficial effects on students’ critical thinking from all seven moderating factors, which were found across 36 studies. In this context, the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have a positive impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. Since the learning stage (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05) and measuring tools (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05) did not demonstrate any significant intergroup differences, we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included within the article and its supplementary information files, and the supplementary information files are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IPFJO6 .

Bensley DA, Spero RA (2014) Improving critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive monitoring through direct infusion. Think Skills Creat 12:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Castle A (2009) Defining and assessing critical thinking skills for student radiographers. Radiography 15(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2007.10.007

Chen XD (2013) An empirical study on the influence of PBL teaching model on critical thinking ability of non-English majors. J PLA Foreign Lang College 36 (04):68–72

Google Scholar  

Cohen A (1992) Antecedents of organizational commitment across occupational groups: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130602

Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: a step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, London, England

Cindy HS (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 51(1):31–39

Duch BJ, Gron SD, Allen DE (2001) The power of problem-based learning: a practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline. Stylus Educ Sci 2:190–198

Ennis RH (1989) Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res 18(3):4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004

Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Eric document reproduction service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed315423

Facione PA, Facione NC (1992) The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the CCTDI test manual. California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Forawi SA (2016) Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Think Skills Creat 20:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005

Halpern DF (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J Gen Educ 50(4):270–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/27797889

Hu WP, Liu J (2015) Cultivation of pupils’ thinking ability: a five-year follow-up study. Psychol Behav Res 13(05):648–654. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2015.05.010

Huber K (2016) Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 86(2):431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Kek MYCA, Huijser H (2011) The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. High Educ Res Dev 30(3):329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074

Kuncel NR (2011) Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). National Research Council, Washington, DC

Kyndt E, Raes E, Lismont B, Timmers F, Cascallar E, Dochy F (2013) A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educ Res Rev 10(2):133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Leng J, Lu XX (2020) Is critical thinking really teachable?—A meta-analysis based on 79 experimental or quasi experimental studies. Open Educ Res 26(06):110–118. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2020.06.011

Liang YZ, Zhu K, Zhao CL (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ Res 38(10):87–92. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2017.10.014

Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical meta-analysis. International Educational and Professional, London, pp. 92–160

Liu Z, Wu W, Jiang Q (2020) A study on the influence of problem based learning on college students’ critical thinking-based on a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Explor High Educ 03:43–49

Morris SB (2008) Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organ Res Methods 11(2):364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Mulnix JW (2012) Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educ Philos Theory 44(5):464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Naber J, Wyatt TH (2014) The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 34(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002

National Research Council (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Niu L, Behar HLS, Garvan CW (2013) Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 9(12):114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Peng ZM, Deng L (2017) Towards the core of education reform: cultivating critical thinking skills as the core of skills in the 21st century. Res Educ Dev 24:57–63. https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2017.24.011

Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13(3):273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2

Ruggiero VR (2012) The art of thinking: a guide to critical and creative thought, 4th edn. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

Schellens T, Valcke M (2006) Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput Educ 46(4):349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.010

Sendag S, Odabasi HF (2009) Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 53(1):132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008

Sison R (2008) Investigating Pair Programming in a Software Engineering Course in an Asian Setting. 2008 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2008.61

Simpson E, Courtney M (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Mary Courtney 8(2):89–98

Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S (2006) Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? Publication bias in meta-analysis. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, pp. 261–286

Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K (2010) A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med Educ 40(6):547–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x

Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G (2006) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2):89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Wei T, Hong S (2022) The meaning and realization of teachable critical thinking. Educ Theory Practice 10:51–57

Xu EW, Wang W, Wang QX (2022) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2

Yang YC, Newby T, Bill R (2008) Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: a quasi-experimental study on promoting learners’ critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 50(4):1572–1585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.006

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007) The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 5(4):559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Zhang T, Zhang S, Gao QQ, Wang JH (2022) Research on the development of learners’ critical thinking in online peer review. Audio Visual Educ Res 6:53–60. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2022.06.08

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the graduate scientific research and innovation project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region named “Research on in-depth learning of high school information technology courses for the cultivation of computing thinking” (No. XJ2022G190) and the independent innovation fund project for doctoral students of the College of Educational Science of Xinjiang Normal University named “Research on project-based teaching of high school information technology courses from the perspective of discipline core literacy” (No. XJNUJKYA2003).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science, Xinjiang Normal University, 830017, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Enwei Xu, Wei Wang & Qingxia Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Enwei Xu or Wei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary tables, 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 license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license 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 license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Xu, E., Wang, W. & Wang, Q. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Download citation

Received : 07 August 2022

Accepted : 04 January 2023

Published : 11 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

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

This article is cited by

Impacts of online collaborative learning on students’ intercultural communication apprehension and intercultural communicative competence.

• Hoa Thi Hoang Chau
• Hung Phu Bui
• Quynh Thi Huong Dinh

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis

The impacts of computer-supported collaborative learning on students’ critical thinking: a meta-analysis.

• Yoseph Gebrehiwot Tedla
• Hsiu-Ling Chen

Sustainable electricity generation and farm-grid utilization from photovoltaic aquaculture: a bibliometric analysis

• A. A. Amusa
• M. Alhassan

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Your browser is incompatible with this site. Upgrade to a different browser like Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox to experience this site.

Cart ( ) Loading...

or Continue Shopping

• Create an Account

Critical Thinking, Problem Solving & Decision Making

Improve your decision-making capabilities through critical thinking, structured reasoning, and creative problem analysis.

Learn how to be an inventive, logical decision maker by understanding the principles behind critical thinking and the tools used to consistently identify and select the best decision among multiple alternatives. In this course, you'll explore a structured way to approach and dismantle problems with a view toward optimum outcomes.

Applying the techniques of critical thinking allows you to dismantle complex problems and to understand the inputs and implications of your thought processes. By applying problem analysis and good practices you'll be able to develop positions and arrive at decisions that are logical and explicable to others. After completing the course, you'll understand why most decisions are of poor quality and be able to impose quality controls on both your decisions and the decisions of others.

Live Instructor

Experience live expert-led training in person, from your home, office or anywhere with an internet connection.

Group Training

Live expert-led training for your team or entire organization that can be customized to fit your exact needs.

Who Should Attend?

This course provides an introduction to structured decision making. It is intended for any professional who is new to formal problem analysis, including: department managers, directors, supervisors, project managers, IT project managers, project coordinators, project analysts, project leaders, senior project managers, team leaders, product managers, program managers, associate project managers, stakeholders, team members, and all others responsible for resource allocations.

What You'll Learn

•  Natural barriers to sound reasoning
•  Bias and assumptions in problem analysis
•  Thought processes and reasoning
•  Analytical techniques for comparing alternative solutions
•  Structure, standards, and ethics of critical thinking
•  Problem analysis best practices

Hands-On Exercises

• Evaluate the strategic thinking of others
• Assess the reasoning of others
• Problem solving by starting with restatement of the issues
• Problem solving from a number of different perspectives
• Identify decision-making factors
• Creativity and the decision-making process
• Structure the analytical process with a matrix
• Evaluate decision options using probabilities
• Compare options using paired ranking

Course Outline

1. introduction to decision making.

• What's a Decision?
• High Quality vs. Low Quality Decisions
• Becoming a Better Decision-Maker

2. Barriers to Brilliant Decisions

• Instinctive Decision-Making
• Barriers to Sound Reasoning
• Outlook vs. Reality

3. Critical Thinking

• What Is Critical Thinking?
• Structures of Thinking
• Thinking with Standards
• Sophistry and Intellectual Ethics

4. Problem Analysis Guidelines

• Opening the Mind
• 10 Best Practice Guidelines
• Structuring Techniques
• Putting It All Together

5. The Decision

• Who Decides?
• Who Should Decide?
• Take Home Message

This course qualifies you for the following PMI® Professional Development Units (PDUs):

Classroom Live and Virtual Classroom Live

• Leadership = 10
• Strategic and Business Management = 4

Follow-On Courses

• IT Project Management
• Send as a prefilled cart