The domain specificity and generality of disjunctive reasoning: Searching for a generalizable critical thinking skill
By M. Toplak, K. Stanovich. 2002
122 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b5494a9f5d332beb36f97acb911b7921b95e99c2
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Developmental and Educational Psychology
- M. Toplak
- K. Stanovich
- R. F. West
- Daniel M. Oppenheimer
- K. S. Thomson
- Geoffrey P. Goodwin
- J. Darley
- Nathan C. Hall
In Education
- K. Stanovich
- R. F. West
- M. Toplak
- K. S. Thomson
- Daniel M. Oppenheimer
- Geoffrey P. Goodwin
- J. Darley
- Nathan C. Hall
Citations in the corpus
- Distinguishing the reflective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds: Is it time for a tri-process theory? (2008, background): “This represents a tendency to over-economize during analytic processing—specifically, to fail to engage in the full-blown simulation of alternative worlds or to engage in fully disjunctive reasoning (Shafir, 1994; Toplak and Stanovich, 2002).”
- Achievement goals, emotions, learning, and performance : A process model (2015, background): “…and achievement measures may have masked positive relations previously found in students recruited from social science programs (e.g., Muis & Franco, 2009; Phan, 2008; for more on the domain-specificity of critical thinking, see Ennis, 1989; Sá, West, & Stanovich, 1999; Toplak & Stanovich, 2002).”
- Heuristics and Biases as Measures of Critical Thinking: Associations with Cognitive Ability and Thinking Dispositions (2008, unknown): “This problem was drawn from Levesque (1986, 1989) and is a variant on ones used by Toplak and Stanovich (2002).”
- What stands and develops between creative and critical thinking? Argumentation? (2007, background): “On the other hand, development leads adolescents to rely on heuristic skills and may lead to biases (e.g. evaluating arguments simply by checking whether they are in accordance with their own initial opinions) when they process information and elaborate schemes (Toplak & Stanovich, 2002).”
- Teaching and Assessing Critical Thinking Skills for Argument Analysis in Psychology (2010, background): “…such as the Cornell Test to assess general skills of argumentation might not be sufficient to assess the CT skills of psychology students because research has shown that CT skills might be to some extent discipline-specific (Lehman & Nisbett, 1990) and domain-specific (Toplak & Stanovich, 2002).”
- The psychology of inferring conditionals from disjunctions: A probabilistic study (2012, unknown): “Toplak and Stanovich (2002) have done this.”
- On the failure of cognitive ability to predict myside and one-sided thinking biases (2008, background): “…to take multiple perspectives when thinking about a problem are reasoning skills that are deemed of pre-eminent importance (Baron, 1991, 2000; Evans, 2002, 2007; Kuhn, 1999, 2001; Nickerson, 2004; Norris & Ennis, 1989; Paul, 1984, 1987; Perkins, 1995; Toplak & Stanovich, 2002; Wade & Tavris, 1993).”
- Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test (2014, background): “Because correct responding on nondeontic versions is typically so low, we also scored P-only choosers as correct (see Toplak & Stanovich, 2002), an alternative task construal championed by Margolis (1987).”
- Investigating an alternate form of the cognitive reflection test (2016, methodology): “As in Toplak et al. (2014a), the syllogisms were adapted from Markovits and Nantel (1989; see Appendix C for items).”
- The Perceived Objectivity of Ethical Beliefs: Psychological Findings and Implications for Public Policy (2010, methodology): “A follow-up study presented participants with a wider array of disjunctive reasoning tasks that were drawn from Toplak and Stanovich (2002) .”
- On the distinction between rationality and intelligence: Implications for understanding individual differences in reasoning. (2012, background): “…Klaczynski & Robinson, 2000; Kokis et al., 2002; Macpherson & Stanovich, 2007; Newstead, Handley, Harley, Wright, & Farrelly, 2004; Parker & Fischhoff , 2005; Sá & Stanovich, 2001; Stanovich & West, 1997, 1998c, 2000; Toplak, Liu, Macpherson, Toneatto, & Stanovich, 2007; Toplak & Stanovich, 2002).”