Cited by 416Education and Critical Thinking DevelopmentDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions.

West, Richard F., Toplak, Maggie E., Stanovich, Keith E.·2008·Journal of Educational Psychology

Abstract

In this article, the authors argue that there are a range of effects usually studied within cognitive psychology that are legitimately thought of as aspects of critical thinking: the cognitive biases studied in the heuristics and biases literature. In a study of 793 student participants, the authors found that the ability to avoid these biases was moderately correlated with a more traditional laboratory measure of critical thinking—the ability to reason logically when logic conflicts with prior belief. The correlation between these two classes of critical thinking skills was not due to a joint connection with general cognitive ability because it remained statistically significant after the variance due to cognitive ability was partialed out. Measures of thinking dispositions (actively open-minded thinking and need for cognition) predicted unique variance in both classes of critical thinking skills after general cognitive ability had been controlled.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0012842

Cites

131 of 131 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is reliable variance in rational thinking independent of intelligence.

    “That there is reliable variance in rational thinking independent of intelligence has been suggested before (Stanovich & West, 1998c, 2008b;West et al., 2008), but the properties of this intelligence-partialed variance are largely unexplored.”
  • The mobilization of cognitive resources such as those involved in critical reasoning on logical bases usually makes it possible to overcome cognitive biases and adjust one's reasoning.

    “Though some cognitive biases can even be seen as normal ways of thinking and feeling, sometimes shaping human beliefs and ideologies in ways that make it completely normal—and even definitely human—not to be objective (see Thornhill-Miller and Millican 2015), the mobilization of cognitive resources such as those involved in critical reasoning on logical bases usually makes it possible to overcome”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E.
Affiliations
  • James Madison University (US)
  • York University (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
Journal of Educational Psychology
Published
2008-11
Volume
100
Issue
4
Pages
930-941
ISSN
  • 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2176
OpenAlex
W1975783365
Cited by
416
References
131
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 16
FWCI
43.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
  • Canada Research Chairs program
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
heuristics and biases, cognitive biases, critical thinking, cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, open-mindedness, need for cognition, logical reasoning, prior beliefs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review