Title
Your name & Brian L. Burke
Psychology Department, Fort Lewis College, Durango, CO
Introduction
This study examined the efficacy of brief modules designed to
encourage critical thinking (CT) in psychology classes as well as a
semester-long critical thinking course.
Prior research has measured changes in critical thinking (CT) in
the classroom in 3 ways:
(1) Content-specific critical thinking
Several studies show that psychology courses designed to
teach CT do improve content-specific CT abilities (rs .31 to .60;
Bensley et al., 2010; McLean & Miller, 2010; Penningroth et al.,
2007).
(2) Critical thinking as a general ability
The most widely used evidence-based measure of CT is the
Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA; Watson &
Glaser, 2006). Overall, teaching can boost students’ WGCTA
scores, but effects are small (i.e., rs below .25; Cohen, 1992),
even after years of problem-based curricula in nursing or
medical schools (Frye et al., 1999; Sandor et al., 1998).
(3) Specific beliefs such as in paranormal phenomena
Paranormal phenomena range from alien encounters and life
after death to psychic powers and the Loch Ness monster (e.g.,
Tobacyk, 2004). Three studies showed reductions in paranormal
beliefs as a result of teaching (rs = .22 to .63; Banziger, 1983;
Manza et al., 2010; McLean & Miller; 2010).
Study Goals
The goal of our study was to see whether we could teach
undergraduate psychology students CT via ten brief modules or a
full-semester course, and to examine whether CT abilities differed
for students across stages of the psychology major.
Our primary aim was to gauge progress in students’ abilities
to apply CT to their lives within and beyond the classroom.
Procedure
We designed weekly 15-minute CT modules for one section each
of Introduction to Psychology, Research Methods, and Senior
Seminar, with a concurrent section of each class serving as a
matched control group. The first author (BLB) designed a standalone full-semester 4-credit course called “Critical Thinking in
Psychology.” Participants completed the WGCTA pre- and postsemester (with CT use inventory added post-test, and Revised
Paranormal Belief Scale, Tobacyk, 2004, added in 4-credit course).
Results
Participants

103 undergraduates (67% female; Age M = 21.28, SD = 5.03;
54% psych majors) in one of 7 psychology sections of
Introduction to Psychology, Research Methods, Senior
Seminar, or a new Critical Thinking in Psychology course
developed for this study.


Figure 1: CT class reported highest CT use post
semester

40
30
26.1
26.2
control
CT modules
30.2

20
10
CT class
Table 1: Neither CT intervention boosted WGCTA
scores for general CT ability pre to post semester
________________________________________________
Condition
n
Pre M (SD)
Post M (SD)
________________________________________________
Controls
44
24.59 (5.59)
25.73 (5.92)
CT Modules
46
25.28 (4.71)
24.22 (5.49)
CT Class
12
25.17 (4.76)
24.33 (5.88)
Total
102 24.97 (5.08)
24.88 (5.72)
________________________________________________
Note. WGCTA max score = 40. Control groups = Intro, Research Methods,
Senior Seminar; CT Modules = Weekly 15-minute sessions on critical
thinking; CT Class = Semester-long course dedicated to critical thinking.
Figure 2: CT class significantly reduced paranormal
beliefs pre to post semester
100
89.97
63.9
50
0
Pre
Post
CT class reported the highest use of CT post-semester
compared to CT module or control groups (Figure 1;
Bonferroni, ps = .007, partial r = .32).
Neither CT intervention significantly boosted students’ CT preto post-semester or versus comparison psychology courses
(Table 1).
CT class significantly decreased paranormal beliefs pre- to
post-test (Figure 2; pre-test M = 89.97, SD = 38.09; post-test
M = 63.9, SD = 21.04; F (1, 9) = 7.24, p = .02, partial r = .67).
On cross-sectional analysis, students’ WGCTA scores were
higher across the curriculum from to junior- to senior-level
required coursework (Senior Seminar M = 27.65, SD = 5.33;
Methods M = 24.08, SD = 4.61; t (42) = 2.38, p = .02, r = .34).
PREDICTORS OF CT: Self-reported political affiliation
accounted for about 9% of the variance in post-test WGCTA
scores; Political Independents scored significantly higher than
Republicans. Self-reported atheists and students with higher
overall GPAs were significantly more likely to have CT gains
throughout the semester than students who reported being
Christians/Other Religions or those with lower GPAs.
Conclusions
Good news:
1. Content-specific & paranormal beliefs can change
2. General CT self-reported use can change
Bad news: It is very hard to change general CT ability!
References
Banziger, G. (1983). Normalizing the Paranormal: Short-term and long-term change in belief in
the paranormal among older learners during a short course. Teaching of Psychology, 10,
212-214.
Bensley, D. A., Crowe, D. S., Bernhardt, P., Buckner, C., & Allman, A. L. (2010). Teaching and
assessing critical thinking skills for argument analysis in psychology. Teaching of
Psychology, 37, 91–96.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.
Frye, B., Alfred, N., & Campbell, M. (1999). Use of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal with BSN students. Nursing and Health Care Perspectives, 20, 253-255.
Manza, L., Hilperts, K., Hindley, L., et al. (2010). Exposure to science is not enough: The
influence of classroom experiences on belief in paranormal phenomena. Teaching of
Psychology, 37, 165-171.
McLean, C. P., & Miller, N. A. (2010). Changes in critical thinking skills following a course on
science and pseudoscience: A quasi-experimental study. Teaching of Psychology, 37,
85-90.
Penningroth, S. L., Despain, L. H., & Gray, M. J. (2007). A course designed to improve
psychological critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 153-157.
Sandor, M. K., Clark, M., Campbell, D., Rains, A. P., & Cascio, R. (1998). Evaluating critical
thinking skills in a scenario-based community health course. Journal of Community
Health Nursing, 15, 21-29.
Tobacyk, J. (2004). A revised paranormal belief scale. International Journal of Transpersonal
Studies, 23, 94-98.
Watson, G., & Glaser, E. M. (2006). Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal: Short form
manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.