Critical thinking and analysis

You instinctively undertake critical evaluations of the information you have. You even change your mind in light of new/convincing evidence. For university study, do the same, but taking a more systematic approach. And show your tutors that we've done it.

Questions to ask yourself:

• Who is saying it?
• What exactly are they saying?
• How do they say it?
• What evidence are they basing it on?
• Are other people saying the same things?
• Why are they saying it?
• What qualifications to they have?

To become a critical thinker while studying at Abertay, you should ask yourself questions about what you read. To help you with this, the Leeds University model below can be used effectively for:

• Interpreting assignment briefs
• Developing arguments and data
• Evaluating sources
• Analysing data
• Formulating your own questions

When forming your questions, the objective is to consider each part of the model and to make connections.

‘A critical thinking model’ (University of Leeds/FutureLearn) 

Description 

Here, we firstly ask questions to develop understanding of the topic or situation we are studying. Questions with Who? / What? / Where? / When? are useful for gaining insight into background and context; however, please note that description alone is not critical writing. 

Analysis and evaluation 

Questions with How? / Why? / What if? are useful to examine: 

• Methods and processes 
• Reasons and causes 
• Alternative options  

Questions with So what? / What next? Are useful to consider: 

• Judgment 
• Relevance 
• Significance 
• Implication 
• Value 

It is important to get the balance right between description/explanation and analysis/evaluation. Description shows you have understood ideas, but you should only explain as much as is necessary for a reader to understand your analysis and your overall evaluation. Similarly, although analysis and evaluation are the areas that are likely to get you the top grades, they are useless without the description of evidence that supports them. 

Look at these two examples: descriptive writing and critical writing:

Descriptive writing 

Theory of Mind is defined by an individual’s ability to input mental states such as thoughts, knowledge, feelings and wants onto others and themselves (Perner, 1999). The standard false belief task known as the Sally Anne Test aims to test a child’s ability to differentiate between their own thoughts and feelings from another individual’s perspective (Symons 2011). This is done so by presenting the child with a scenario in which they are asked to predict how a deceptive object will appear to another (Reber, Reber and Allen 2009). Typically, children around the age of four will pass a standard false belief task whilst slightly older children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) will fail; this being the basis of which Theory of Mind is measured (German and Leslie 2000).  

Critical writing 

Dennet (1978) focused his research on the aspect of the task that required the participants to predict the behaviour of each character. Dennet (1978) challenges the concept that to pass the standard false belief task the participant must place themselves in the character’s position whilst understanding their mental state to correctly predict behaviour. He proposes participants are capable of predicting behaviour correctly using other means unrelated to theory of mind such as understanding and observing their situational surroundings (Dennet 1978). Suggesting the standard false belief task is an inefficient tool for testing theory of mind as it could be measuring the ability to which a child can make sense of their environment instead. Although this is an understudied domain of psychology Dennet’s (1978) claims open up a discussion about whether the test itself is reliable and whether it measures what it claims to.  

As can be seen in the table above the descriptive text is characterised by setting the scene for the reader, defining key terms and explaining the components of a particular theory. In contrast, critical writing challenges the mechanisms of the theory by reporting evidence from research carried out by other scientists in the fields. 

The following example is an abstract from a journal research article. Although an abstract typically summarises all (or most) of the key elements of an article, you would need to read the article in full to answer the suggested questions below. 

Abstract 

Objective: Use of electronic cigarettes has increased across the world in the last decade with heavy investment from the tobacco industry targeting a younger population through well-designed marketing campaigns portraying e-cigarettes as harmless, less addictive and effective in smoking cessation while delivering higher nicotine concentration. The safety profile of e-cigarettes is reviewed in this paper.  

Conclusions: The safety of e-cigarettes and the chemicals they contain have not been evaluated rigorously. Emerging data suggests e-cigarette use could do severe harm. Furthermore, people with serious mental illness, already the highest nicotine consumers, could be exploited by the tobacco industry.  

Keywords: e-cigarettes, vaping, nicotine, aerosol flavours 

Source: Kanniah, G., Kumar, S., Prasad, S. (2021) E-cigarettes and vaping – a panacea or a bane to smoking in current times? Australasian Psychiatry Vol 29(1) 7–9 © The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists 2020 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/1039856220950095 journals.sagepub.com/home/apy 

Description

• What is the issue being investigated?
• Where is the issue most prevalent?
• Who is most affected?
• Why is this issue important?

Analysis

• How was the research conducted?
• Who were the participants?
• What are the alternative methods and theories?
• What if the data is biased or incomplete?

Evaluation

• How valid and reliable are the conclusions?
• What potential solutions could be found?
• What are the possible next steps for research?

• Have you used a systematic approach to your critical thinking? 
• Have you formulated questions in line with the model provided? 
• Have you made connections between a) background and context b) reasons, relationships and alternatives? 
• Have you considered your own conclusions, potential solutions and recommendations? 
• Have you thought deeply about their relevance, implications and significance? 
• Have you effectively balanced description with analysis and evaluation? 

• A short FutureLearn course on critical thinking (University of Leeds), 
• A guide to writing critically for postgrad students (University of Birmingham),
• A checklist for checking your writing is critical (University of Leeds).

Resources in the Abertay library 

• Cottrell, S. (2011) Critical Thinking Skills: Developing effective analysis and argument. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.  
• Van den Brink-Budgen, R. (2015) Critical Thinking for Students: learn the skills of analysing, evaluating and producing arguments. 4th ed. Oxford: How to Books.