Learning to Call Bullsh*t via Induction: Categorization Training Improves Critical Thinking Performance.

Participants performed a categorization training task, where each trial presented a claim based on an observation, and participants marked which fallacy or bias, if any, applied to the claim. In two studies, we measure the effect of this training task on critical thinking, measured using an open-ended critical thinking assessment. In Study 1, we pilot these materials in an online college course and observe credible improvements in critical thinking performance. In Study 2, we conduct a randomized controlled experiment and observe credible improvements in critical thinking relative to no training, and relative to comparable learning activities focused on conventional curricular content. We infer that the categorization training task facilitated inductive learning of patterns of biased and flawed reasoning, which improved participants' ability to identify such patterns in a delayed critical thinking assessment. Such categorization training shows promise as an effective and practical method for improving learners' resistance to online misinformation. General Audience Summary: Helping students learn to think critically is an important priority across education levels, but there is currently no clear consensus on how to teach critical thinking. Many proposed teaching strategies are very elaborate and involve extensive discussion and analysis, which makes it difficult for teachers to incorporate critical thinking instruction into their existing curriculum. In our current research, we explore whether a more focused approach might improve students' critical thinking performance. Specifically, we examine an inductive approach to critical thinking instruction. Inductive learning, commonly known as learning by example, happens when a person learns a general pattern from multiple examples of the pattern. In this case, we ask whether participants can learn to identify illogical or biased claims, a common measure of critical thinking ability, by presenting them with multiple examples of different kinds of fallacies and biases. We presented participants with sets of example scenarios in which an individual makes a claim based on an observation, and participants categorized which fallacy or bias, if any, the individual in the scenario was committing. In two studies, we find that this critical thinking categorization practice improves performance on a delayed open-ended critical thinking assessment. These exciting results show that critical thinking skills can be taught using a well established, specific, psychologically grounded method, and these results come at a critical juncture in our society. In a time of fake news, misinformation and a lack of critical thinking skills among the populace can have dire consequences. We believe our current results are of broad interest to educators and applied cognitive psychologists, and show promise for improving peoples' defenses against misinformation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]