Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
http://asm.sagepub.com/
Personality Traits and Critical Thinking Skills in College Students: Empirical Tests of a Two-Factor Theory
Jennifer S. Clifford, Magdalen M. Boufal and John E. Kurtz
Assessment 2004 11: 169
DOI: 10.1177/1073191104263250
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://asm.sagepub.com/content/11/2/169
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
ASSESSMENT
10.1177/1073191104263250
Clifford
et al. / TWO FACTORS OF CRITICAL THINKING
The two-factor theory defines critical thinking skills as a combined effect of cognitive abilities and personality dispositions. Although the available research supports the association
between critical thinking and measures of cognitive ability, the specific traits contained in
the dispositional factor have not been clearly identified through empirical research. In Study
1, 101 undergraduate students completed the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal
(WGCTA), three subtests of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleThird Edition, and the
revised NEO Personality Inventory. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that
Openness to Experience scores accounted for significant incremental variance in WGCTA
scores beyond that accounted for by Similarities subtest scores. In Study 2, similar analyses
of data from 105 students also showed significant incremental effects for Openness to Experience, even after more variance in the cognitive factor was accounted for by the Verbal
Comprehension Index. Implications of these findings for the enhancement of critical
thinking skills in college students are discussed.
Keywords: critical thinking; intelligence; personality; five factor model; openness
The development of critical thinking (CT) skills among
college students is increasingly considered a fundamental
goal of higher education. Educational research has demonstrated that CT skills, such as evaluating reasons, evidence, or conclusions, can predict college grade point
average (Behrens, 1996; Taube, 1997; Watson & Glaser,
1980), course grades (Watson & Glaser, 1980; Wilson &
Wagner, 1981), and graduate student success (Garett &
Wulf, 1978). The necessity to develop CT skills across the
curriculum in higher education has become a primary goal
for educators nationwide (Facione, Sanchez, Facione, &
Gainen, 1995). To reach this goal, educational researchers
from many colleges and universities have designed vari-
Studies 1 and 2 are based on masters theses by the first and second authors, respectively, under the supervision of the third author.
The authors are grateful to the Psychology Department of Villanova University for financial support of this research and to Corinne
Leach for providing independent ratings for the rater reliability analyses. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
John E. Kurtz, Psychology Department, Villanova University, 800 Lancaster Avenue, Villanova, PA 19085-1699; e-mail: John.Kurtz@
Villanova.edu.
Assessment, Volume 11, No. 2, June 2004 169-176
DOI: 10.1177/1073191104263250
2004 Sage Publications
170
ASSESSMENT
Two other measures that were evaluated, the Cornell Critical Thinking Test (Ennis, Millman, & Tomko, 1985) and
the California Critical Thing Skills Test (Facione, 1990),
were not selected due to reliability estimates below .70 in
several of the field-testing samples.
Wechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleThird Edition
(WAIS-III, 1997). The structure of the WAIS-III has been
strengthened by the organization of intellectual functioning into four discrete cognitive domains labeled verbal
comprehension, perceptual organization, working memory, and processing speed. Recent factor analytic studies
(Ward, Ryan, & Axelrod, 2000) have suggested that threefactor models may provide the best balance of parsimony
and goodness of fit to the standardization data. Thus, the
present study provides a broad assessment of cognitive
ability using one representative subtest from each of
the first three cognitive domains: Similarities (verbal comprehension), Matrix Reasoning (perceptual organization),
and Letter-Number Sequencing (working memory).
Similarities is a measure of verbal reasoning in which
the examinee is orally presented two common objects or
concepts and asked to state how they are alike. Because
some degree of examiner judgment is required to score this
subtest, interrater reliability was calculated by randomly
selecting 30 protocols to be scored independently by a second rater trained in the administration and scoring of the
WAIS-III. The intraclass correlation coefficient of the total Similarities scores across judges was .90. Raw scores
from all three WAIS-III subtests were standardized to
scaled scores using the age norms appropriate to each case.
Similarities scaled scores ranged from 6 to 17 (M = 10.9,
SD = 2.0). Matrix-Reasoning is a new subtest in the WAISIII battery that requires an examinee to look at a matrix
from which a section is missing and choose one of five response options that completes the matrix. Scaled scores
on this subtest ranged from 6 to 16 (M = 12.3, SD = 2.1).
Letter-Number Sequencing is another new WAIS-III
subtest in which the examiner reads a sequence of letters
and numbers and the examinee is asked to recall the numbers first in ascending order and then the letters in alphabetical order. Performances on this subtest were especially
high relative to the standardization sample, ranging from 7
to 18 (M = 13.6, SD = 2.8). IQ estimates for each participant were computed by converting the average of the
three scaled scores to an IQ score equivalent; the resulting
estimated IQ scores ranged from 95 to 127 (M = 110.7,
SD = 7.7).
NEO-Personality InventoryRevised (NEO-PI-R;
Costa & McCrae, 1992). The NEO-PI-R is widely used to
measure FFM personality traits. The inventory contains
240 items, answered on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5). The
172
ASSESSMENT
TABLE 1
Intercorrelation Matrix of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleThird Edition, the NEO-Personality
InventoryRevised, and the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisala Scores: Study 1
1
1. Similarities
2. Matrix Reasoning
3. Letter-Number Sequencing
4. Neuroticism
5. Extraversion
6. Openness
7. Agreeableness
8. Conscientiousness
9. WGCTA
.14
.12
.05
.05
.03
.04
.12
.25*
.17
.07
.05
.13
.13
.02
.11
.02
.01
.17
.03
.04
.11
.12
.00
.06
.22
.10
.06
.02
.07
.07
.16
.10
.28*
.09
.03
.05
Table 1 presents the intercorrelations between the independent variables from the WAIS-III and NEO-PI-R and
the WGCTA score criterion. Among the WAIS-III predictors, only the Similarities subtest was significantly correlated with WGCTA scores. The intercorrelations among
the WAIS-III subtests are lower than those reported for the
standardization sample, but they support these measures
as independent aspects of intellectual functioning in this
sample. Among the NEO-PI-R predictors, only Openness
Method
TABLE 2
Hierarchical Regression Analysis for
Predicting WGCTA Scores: Study 1
Step: Predictor
Part r
1: Gender
Age
2: Similarities
3: Openness
.22
.32
.40
.08
.14
.23
.25
R (%)
4.8
5.2
6.3
Participants
Fchange
2.47
5.64
7.21
.090
.020
.009
174
ASSESSMENT
TABLE 3
Intercorrelation Matrix of Wechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleThird Edition, the NEO-Personality
InventoryRevised, and the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA)a Scores: Study 2
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
.13
.17
.17
.18
.08
.39*
.18
.16
.03
.05
.07
.21
.16
.10
.01
.24
.03
.28*
.05
.19
.23
*p < .01.
TABLE 4
Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Predicting
WGCTA Scores: Study 2
Step: Predictor
Part r
R2 (%)
Fchange
1: Gender
Age
2: Verbal
Comprehension
Index
3: Openness
.29
.22
.11
8.6
4.78
.010
.44
.50
.28
.24
11.0
5.5
13.79
7.38
< .001
.008
TABLE 5
Correlations Between WGCTA and Openness
Facet Scores
Openness Facet
Study 1
Study 2
Combined
O1: Fantasy
O2: Aesthetics
O3: Feelings
O4: Actions
O5: Ideas
O6: Values
.11
.18
.08
.22*
.24*
.21*
.26**
.00
.00
.13
.31**
.18
.17*
.09
.04
.18*
.25**
.19**
176
ASSESSMENT
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory
and NEO Five Factor Inventory: Professional Manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
DeNitto, J., & Strickland, J. (1987). Critical thinking: A skill for all seasons. College Student Journal, 21, 201-204.
Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills.
Educational Leadership, 43, 44-48.
Ennis, R. H. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and
abilities. In J. B. Baron & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking
skills: Theory and practice (pp. 9-26). New York: Freeman.
Ennis, R. H., Millman, J., & Tomko, T. N. (1985). Cornell Critical Thinking Test (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Ennis, R. H., & Weir, E. (1985). The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay
Test. Pacific Grove, CA: Critical Thinking Press.
Facione, P. A. (1990). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test.
Millbrae: California Academic Press.
Facione, N. C., Facione, P. A., & Sanchez, C. A. (1994). Critical thinking
disposition as a measure of competent clinical judgment: The development of the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory.
Journal of Nursing Education, 33, 345-350.
Facione, P. A., Sanchez, C. A., Facione, N. C., & Gainen, J. (1995). The
disposition toward critical thinking. Journal of General Education,
44, 1-25.
Gadzella, B. M., & Penland, E. (1995). Is creativity related to scores on
critical thinking? Psychological Reports, 77, 817-818.
Garett, K., & Wulf, K. (1978). The relationship of a measure of critical
thinking ability to personality variables and to indicators of academic
achievement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38,
1181-1187.
Halonen, J. S. (1995). Demystifying critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22, 75-81.
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive
monitoring. American Psychologist, 53, 449-455.
Hudgins, B. B., Riesenmy, M., Ebel, D., & Edelman, S. (1989). Childrens critical thinking: A model for its analysis and two examples.
Journal of Educational Research, 82, 327-338.
MacDonald, A. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports, 26, 791-798.
McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 12581265.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1985). Updating Normans adequate taxonomy: Intelligence and personality dimensions in natural language
and in questionnaires. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
49, 710-721.
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor
model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175-215.
McMillan, J. (1987). Enhancing college students critical thinking: A review of studies. Research in Higher Education, 26, 3-29.
Pascarella, E. T., Bohr, L., Nora, A., & Terenzini, P. T. (1996). Is differential exposure to college linked to the development of critical thinking?
Research in Higher Education, 37, 159-175.
Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a
rapidly changing world. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical
Thinking and Moral Critique.
Perry, W. G., Sprinthall, N. A., Wideman, J. W., & Jones, F. J. (1968). Patterns of development in thought and values of students in a liberal arts
college: A validation of a scheme. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Health, Education, & Welfare.
Taube, K. T. (1997). Critical thinking ability and disposition as factors of
performance on a written critical thinking test. Journal of General
Education, 46, 129-164.
Ward, L. C., Ryan, J. J., & Axelrod, B. N. (2000). Confirmatory factor
analyses of the WAIS-III standardization data. Psychological Assessment, 12, 341-345.
Watson, G. B., & Glaser, E. M. (1980). Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal Manual, Forms A and B. San Antonio, TX: Psychological
Corporation.
Wechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleThird Edition. (1997). San Antonio,
TX: Psychological Corporation.
Westbrook, B. W., & Sellers, J. R. (1967). Critical thinking, intelligence,
and vocabulary. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 27,
443-446.
Wilson, D. G., & Wagner, E. E. (1981). The Watson-Glaser Critical
Thinking Appraisal as a predictor of performance in a critical thinking course. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 13191322.
Zechmeister, E. B., & Johnson, J. E. (1992). Critical thinking: A functional approach. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.