Skills Needed to Be Successful in Life: Power of Critical Thinking

There are many skills needed to be successful in life whether we are talking about academically, professionally at work, or personally. However, being able to think critically is one of the most important. As defined by the textbook, critical thinking is “is the ability and willingness to assess claims and make objective judgments on the basis of well-supported reasons and evidence rather than emotion or anecdote”. Eight critical thinking guidelines that should be evident in published tests or research. To define main skills needed to be successful in life in this essay I will explore the article titled 'Executive Control in Concussed Versus Non-Concussed Individuals' and determine whether or not the authors followed the guidelines.

Tests Structure of the Research Experiment

'Executive Control in Concussed Versus Non-Concussed Individuals' was written by Thanh Phan, Jessica Harsch, Mary Brodowski, Tyler Oakes, and Rachel Boas and performed at Ursinus College in Pennsylvania. The research experiment was conducted to determine if there is a causal relationship between having a concussion and the lessening of one’s executive functioning. The participants included forty-six undergraduate students, forty were collegiate athletes and six were non-athletes. Concussion experience among participants was varied between zero, one, and multiple.

To test executive functioning, five tests were performed:

1. the DelisKaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS),
2. Tower Test with BioPac EEG,
3. Stroop Color-Word Test (SCWT),
4. Barkley Executive Function Questionnaire,
5. the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPCSQ).

There is an existing link between multiple sports-related concussions and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), but an official diagnosis can only occur after death. However, a common symptom in retired football players who later received a CTE diagnosis was emotional impulsivity, one facet of executive functioning. Researchers in this study hoped to establish that damage from as little as one concussion can lead to impulsiveness and emotional changes that are often not included in the assessment athletes receive to be cleared to return to play and that make it more likely that they will be injured again due to the lack of ability to clearly make decisions. The data collected was entered into the data analysis program IBM SPSS Version 22.0. Of the five tests performed, only the Stroop Color Word Test and Section 5 of the Barkley Executive Function Questionnaire were statistically significant and able to predict the concussion status of the participants.

Analysis of Eight Critical Thinking Guidelines

The first critical thinking guideline is Ask Questions. In this article, there is only one time when a question is explicitly written: “Why is this?” which follows the statement, “Deficits in attention processing are amongst the most alarming and crucial for making return to play decisions with athletes”. Following the question, the authors go on to explain how attention processes are an important part of executive functioning and that those who struggle with attention processing, will display problems with impulse control.

The second guideline is Define your Terms, and this article does a very good job of doing so. The research is concerned with the brain and mental processes, so in the beginning of the article, the authors take the time to clearly define key terms such as traumatic brain injury, mild traumatic brain injury, aka a concussion, second impact syndrome, chronic traumatic encephalopathy, post-concussion syndrome, executive function, and what they are referring to when they speak of the executive function test battery or executive control battery. In clearly explaining the above topics, the readers can clearly understand what they should be looking for in terms of patterns of symptoms and how all the test results relate to possible brain damage.

The third critical thinking guideline is Examine the Evidence. Before presenting their evidence and results, the authors discuss what evidence of a possible correlation between head trauma and deficits in executive functioning has already been published so that the reader understands why they have chosen to perform their testing. Specific to their tests, an examination was the most prevalent during data analysis to arrive at specific figures for their study. The article says, “After examining the data and eliminating any outliers or incomplete data, 46 participants were included in the final data set…Statistical significance in this study was set at p

The fourth guideline is Analyze Assumptions and Biases. One way this article combat bias is by including participants that were not athletes which is important because it makes the sample more representative of the population of people who have had concussions and may have the associated brain issues regardless of the setting the injury occurred in. Also, “each individual was assigned a four-digit number to ensure anonymity and non-bias”.

The fifth guideline is Avoid Emotional Reasoning. There was no sign of the authors’ emotions coming through in Executive Control in Concussed Versus Non-Concussed Individuals. The article was fact-based, and it never appeared to go in the direction of opinions.

The sixth critical thinking guideline is Don’t Oversimplify. Similar to avoiding emotional reasoning, there is no trace of oversimplifying in this article. It is very clear that the authors took the time to explain everything they did and why they did it. They present all of the facts and explain why how they fit into what they were testing. They also avoid oversimplifying by clearly defining every aspect of their experiment, as discussed above.

The seventh guideline is Consider other Interpretations. I do not see any incidences in which the authors included other interpretations. However, I do not believe that the lack of other interpretations of their study is bad. How they presented the facts, data, and results does not seem to need other interpretations. In fact, including additional explanations could confuse readers.

And finally, the last critical thinking guideline is Tolerate Uncertainty. Although there were no specific parts of the study that resulted in data that was not clear, the authors address possible ways to improve the study or similar studies in the future. For example, the authors say, “…due to the lack of standardization between test administration, data varied between five administrators because there was no set time to test the participants. Because the tests were administered at a college, testing was completed at all possible hours”. By acknowledging that this piece of their study was flawed, they are acknowledging uncertainty.

Personal Reflection About the Article

I found 'Executive Control in Concussed Versus Non-Concussed Individuals' to be very well put together. I believe that the authors followed the eight critical thinking guidelines and did so in a way that made their research easy to follow for the reader. I genuinely do not think that anything in the article needs to be altered. The first time I read through the article I had a hard time figuring out what exactly the experimenters were looking for or hoping to accomplish, but as I reread the symptoms of head trauma and how they progress as well as what specifically each of the five tests were focused on, I began to understand the about of detail attention to detail that this study required. Before reading this article, I knew about concussions and the trauma that occurs because I have taken several anatomy classes as well as an athletic training course that had a whole chapter dedicated to concussions. However, I gained more knowledge by reading this study.

Whether we are faced with a dilemma or doing research, being able to think critically about the task at hand is extremely important. In doing so, you will be free of biases and emotional reasoning that can distort the truth. Executive Control in Concussed Versus Non-Concussed Individuals, written by Thanh Phan, Jessica Harsch, Mary Brodowski, Tyler Oakes, and Rachel Boas and performed at Ursinus College in Pennsylvania, uses the eight critical thinking guidelines to ensure that their research is accurately portrayed and free of flaws that could undermine the study.

References

1. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical Thinking: The Nature of Critical and Creative Thought. Journal of Developmental Education, 30(2), 34-35.

2. Facione, P. A. (2011). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Insight Assessment.

3. Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Psychology Press.

4. Ennis, R. H. (1996). Critical thinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

5. Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2009). The Thinker's Guide to Critical and Creative Thought. Foundation for Critical Thinking.

6. Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education. Cambridge University Press.

7. Nosich, G. M. (2017). Learning to Think Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum. Pearson.

8. Beyer, B. K. (1995). Critical thinking. Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.

9. Brookfield, S. D. (2012). Teaching for Critical Thinking: Tools and Techniques to Help Students Question Their Assumptions. John Wiley & Sons.

   Keep in mind:
   This is only a sample.

   Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.

   Get custom essay

10. Fisher, A., Scriven, M., & Critical Thinking National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. (1997). Critical thinking: Its definition and assessment. Update, 1(1), 1-11.