Motivación y disposiciones: Enfoques alternativos para explicar el desempeño de habilidades de pensamiento crítico

Translated title of the contribution: Motivation and dispositions: Alternative approaches to explain the performance of critical thinking skills

Jorge Valenzuela, Ana María Nieto, CARLA VIVIANA MUÑOZ VALENZUELA

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Critical thinking depends on the mastery degrees of some skills and on the will to activate them when reasoning. Traditionally, this second aspect has been focused from a disposition approach (Facione, 1990). However, this perspective demonstrates problems in theoretical as in practical level to explain and to develop critical thinking. For this, it is proposed to approach the problem from the Motivation perspective (Eccles and Wigfield, 2002). In this context, our research deals with the evaluation of the convenience to choose one perspective or another to explain the performance of critical thinking, both theoretically and in its predictive capacity. Thus, along with theoretically analyze the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches and it was compared measures of dispositions (CCTDI), motivation (EMPC) and critical thinking (CCTST) in a sample of Spanish university students. The results show that the variability in critical thinking performance is better explained by the motivation than by dispositional approach. Finally, the theoretical and practical convenience of motivational approach in this matter is discussed.

Translated title of the contributionMotivation and dispositions: Alternative approaches to explain the performance of critical thinking skills
Original languageSpanish
Pages (from-to)16-32
Number of pages17
JournalRevista Electronica de Investigacion Educativa
Volume16
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2014

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Motivation and dispositions: Alternative approaches to explain the performance of critical thinking skills'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this