Céline Schöpfer

This study investigates how the expression ‘critical thinking’ (CT) is understood and used by the general public in the United States, using the tools of experimental philosophy. Based on responses from 288 non‐philosopher participants, our findings suggest that CT is commonly associated with problem solving, decision making and logical analysis. This folk conception aligns more closely with psychological definitions than with philosophical accounts of CT. When compared with results from a parallel study conducted among French‐speaking participants, notable cultural differences emerged, particularly regarding the emphasis placed on scepticism and metacognition. Furthermore, our analysis reveals that conceptual issues long identified in the academic literature—such as the conflation of CT with other notions (e.g., intelligence or rationality), and the reduction of CT to a single component—are also prevalent in lay conceptions. These findings underscore the need for a more coherent conceptual framework and for increased attention to the ways in which CT is understood and appropriated outside academic contexts.

This paper addresses the complexity of critical thinking, a multifaceted concept that includes cognitive skills, knowledge, and dispositions. We argue that existing literature has largely overlooked the vital role of dispositions, which are essential for understanding why individuals engage in critical thinking. Therefore, at the heart of our research is the challenge of motivation: how can we best encourage individuals to engage in critical thinking? To answer this question, we begin by conceptualizing critical thinking as a five-steps temporal process, thereby refining and clarifying its definition. Then, drawing on Self-Determination Theory, we argue that intrinsic regulation not only boosts engagement but also cultivates a long-term commitment to critical thinking. This insight establishes a direct link between intrinsic motivation and intellectual virtues, prompting us to propose a pedagogy focused on developing these virtues. Furthermore, we explore the challenges of initiating, sustaining, and completing the critical thinking process. We suggest that a virtue-centered pedagogy offers a holistic solution, promoting enduring intellectual engagement and completion of the critical thinking process. This approach promises to deepen intellectual inquiry and foster more robust analytical skills in educational contexts.

We sometimes say about certain things (such as philosophical questions) that they are ‘deep’ or ‘profound’. But what does it mean exactly? Surprisingly, philosophers have been quite silent on this topic and there is neither consensual nor prominent conceptual analysis of ‘depth’. After surveying different proposals that have tried to capture depth in terms of explanatory depth, subject matter, emotional impact, understanding or complexity, we present the results of three studies in which we combine qualitative and quantitative methods to investigate the everyday concept of ‘depth’. Our results suggest that depth and profundity are generally characterized as (i) something with a meaning, (ii) that stimulates cognitive activity, to (iii) promote epistemic progress about (iv) important issues, thus (v) having an emotional impact. Based on these findings, we propose a first characterization of the ordinary concepts of depth and profundity.

What leads people to believe in conspiracy theories? In this paper, we explore the possibility that people might be drawn towards conspiracy theories because believing in them might satisfy certain existential needs and help people find meaning in their life. Through two studies (N = 289 and 287 after exclusion), we found that par­ ticipants higher in the need and search for meaning were more likely to believe in conspiracy theories. This relationship was not moderated by participants' feelings of control. We also found that believing in conspiracy theories was associated with more presence of meaning (Study 1), and more precisely with a heightened feeling of mattering in the grand scheme of things (Study 2). Additionally, we found that participants were more likely to endorse conspiracy theories that left them more agency and allowed them the possibility to make a difference. Overall, we argue that our results suggest that people might sometimes be drawn towards conspiracy theories because they allow them to feel as if they can make a difference and have a positive impact on the world, and thus that conspiracy theories can be used as tools to satisfy existential needs.

Good academic practice is more than the avoidance of clear-cut cheating. It also involves navigation of the gray zones between cheating and good practice. The existing literature has left students’ understanding of gray zone practices largely unexplored. To begin filling in this gap, we present results from a questionnaire study involving N = 1639 undergraduate students from seven European countries representing all major disciplines. We show that large numbers of these students are unable to identify gray area issues and lack sensitivity to the context dependence of these. We also show that a considerable proportion of students have a poor understanding of concepts like plagiarism and falsification, not only in gray zone scenarios, but also in cases of relatively clear-cut cheating. Our results are similar across the faculties and countries of study, and even for students who have attended academic integrity training. We discuss the implications of this for academic integrity training.

Plagiarism and other transgressions of the norms of academic integrity appear to be a persistent problem among upper secondary students. Numerous surveys have revealed high levels of infringement of what appear to be clearly stated rules. Less attention has been given to students’ understanding of academic integrity, and to the potential misconceptions and false beliefs that may make it difficult for them to comply with existing rules and handle complex real-life situations.In this paper we report findings from a survey of European upper secondary students’ views on issues relating to academic integrity. We relate these findings to the students’ training about academic integrity, self-reported level of questionable behavior and country of study.A total of 1654 students at 51 institutions located in 6 European countries participated in the study. The participants generally believed they had a good understanding of the rules applying to them and knew how to behave in compliance with norms of academic integrity. The results indicate, however, that often, in practice, this belief was mistaken. Many students had an inadequate understanding of core elements of academic integrity. They were uncertain about how to act, and they struggled in the handling of complex situations that require context-sensitive judgement. While some differences between countries were identified, they were modest and exhibited no clear pattern. Our results also suggest that reducing students’ level of uncertainty and, to a lesser degree, improving their level of knowledge could lead them to engage less in certain types of questionable behaviours. Surprisingly, the effect of academic training is modest and ambiguous. The study also confirms that perception of peer behaviour has the strongest association with student engagement in questionable behaviours. Thus, academic integrity at the upper secondary level cannot be explained simply in terms of individual ethics or knowledge.