Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
A sample of 349 college students completed an argument evaluation test (AET) in which they evaluated arguments concerning real-life situations. A separate regression analysis was conducted for each student predicting his or her evaluations of argument quality from an objective indicator of argument quality and the strength of his or her prior beliefs about the target propositions. The beta weight for objective argument quality was interpreted in this analysis as an indicator of the ability to evaluate objective argument quality independent of prior belief. Individual differences in this index were reliably linked to individual differences in cognitive ability and actively open-minded thinking dispositions. Further, actively openminded thinking predicted variance in AET performance even after individual differences in cognitive ability had been partialled out. Discussions of critical thinking in the educational and psychological literature consistently point to the importance of decontextualized reasoning styles that foster the tendency to evaluate arguments and evidence in a way that is not
Stanovich et al. (Sun,) studied this question.