Importance of Critical Thinking Skills for Law and Criminology - Literature review Example

Running Head: ESSENTIAL SKILLS FOR UNIVERSITY STUDY IN CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW Assessment 7 Essay Plan Name Ahmed Alhammadi ID: 10062171 Title: Importance of critical thinking skills for law, criminology and justice professions. Introduction Critical thinking plays a significant role in criminal justice system, particularly if well applied by criminologists and the justice professions. Most of their work involves probing and therefore, they must ensure that, they ask the permissible questions, come up with evidence sources and a criteria for analysis. As Rudd (2007) argues, the importance of critical thinking determines how the gathered information is acquired and interpreted to reach a favourable conclusion. This is possible through application of critical thinking concepts and principles. However, universal critical thinking principles require reflective contextualization when applied in justice systems. The needs of analysing, evaluation, explanation and restructuring thinking are vital in these professions. This is served by critical thinking skills including; desire for reason and evidence, systematic approach in problem solving, inquisitiveness, confidence in reasoning and even-handedness. Body 1. Decision Making According to Freeley & Steinberg (2008), critical thinking is necessary in decision making. First, it provides professionals with background information through gathering information relevant to its context. The information, theories and facts are then gathered and analysed to make effective decisions. As Siegel & Worrall (2012) observes, the process separates the facts from opinions. It provides divergent options that can be considered before reaching to important solutions. This primarily is realized as they weigh how their decisions would affect them and the people they interact or presides over. Critical thinking allows them to consider the role of opinion and bias which makes sure that ideas are not informed by bias information. Most law, criminology and justice professions are critical thinkers and demonstrate humility, empathy, integrity, courage and fair-mindedness. This enable them make positive decisions, by realizing their limitations and understanding the impacts of their judgements on others. Criminologist and justice professionals follow critical thinking process to arrive at the right answer (Siegel & Worrall, 2012). First, they raise important questions which they formulate precisely and clearly as a way of prioritizing problem solving. Second, they gathers, marshal and assess significant information by means of abstract ideas for effective interpretation of information. In the process they may recognize the unstated values and assumptions. Thirdly, they interpret data, evaluate arguments and appraise evidence. This enables them to come into a well-reasoned solutions and conclusions after recognizing existence or non-existence of logic between propositions by testing information against the relevant standards and criteria. This requires open-mindedness considering alternative system of thinking to recognize and assess their assumptions, implications or practical consequences. Finally, they communicate with other to figure out solutions of complex problems which are not unduly influenced through other thoughts and thus render accurate judgements (Willingham, 2007). There are kinds of skills and factors that inform their decision making. The core critical thinking skills applied are manifest by how they observe, interpret, analyse, infer, evaluate, explain and meta-cognition (Wenglinsky, 2007). Individual and groups which engage strong critical thinking efficiently establish reasonable factors for decision making. The evidence from observation, particularly person behaviour during probing informs a lot. They also separate context to separate factors and avoid generalization. A relevant criterion forms the basis of making a well judgement through the use of applicable techniques and methods of forming the judgement. Wenglinsky (2007) further argues that, critical thinking skills are applicable theoretical constructs to promote understanding of the question at hand and the problem. They are disposed in engaging problems and resolutions through these skills. Therefore, critical thinking uses both logic and extensive intellectual criteria including clarity, accuracy, credibility, relevance, precision, breath, depth, fairness and significance. 2. Reasoning According to Gruskin & Daniels (2008), there are different means of reasoning involved by individuals within the criminal justice system. In most cases, criminal justice system professionals are required to think of cause and effect, good and bad and truth and falsehood. To make sense of things, establish and verify facts in these filed depends on existing or new information available to them. To gain the new information they apply thinking, cognition and intellect as pillars of reasoning (Harman, 2008). Thinking allows them make good judgment of and model cases in multiple approaches to represent and interpret issues in important ways to them. Cognition enables the way they process information, apply knowledge and change preferences. The processes can be analysed from various perspectives in different contexts. Finally, intellect enables them to come to the correct conclusions concerning what is real or true and of how to solve problems. According to Souryal (2010), reason influence what they exclude as true or untrue. Through moral-practical reason they are able to discuss and deliberate issues in the moral realm according to the universalizable procedures. They follow reasoning based on the argument that leads to the best explanation. The conclusion of their cases does not pursue certainty of the grounds and concerns that were observed. Their process of reasoning tries to favour a conclusion above the others through an attempt to fix alternative explanations or demonstrate the probability of a favoured conclusion. This is achieved by coming up with less questionable assumptions. One of the possible arguments is preferred above the others as more probable. By use of logic, induction and deduction they reach conclusions which they think they are true. Conclusions which are reached in that manner are considered to be more certain and this enable them separate what is true and untrue. Reasoning precedes decision making. Reasoning exhibits the capacity to consciously make sense of things. This then progress to establishing and verifying of facts. The reasoning process enable decision making, as the facts established enable changing and justifying practices and beliefs based on the new information. Reasoning considers, explains and justifies event, behaviour or phenomena. It is an attempt to attain truth through higher reality that lead to true conclusions. Reasoning makes use of divergence techniques of thinking while decision making is influenced by convergence techniques of thinking (Nelken, 2010). Divergence entails brainstorming and bringing together thoughts, unlimited and free flow of ideas. The brainstormed facts, ideas and solutions are accepted through analysis and criticism. Decision making is then influenced by a merger of previously distinct thoughts creating new practices, options and choices. The set of standards established enhance performance of problem solving (Hastie & Dawes, 2009). 3. Bias According to Roberts (2007), there are various kinds of bias that can bar a justice professional or criminologist from getting to the right answer. Bias arises from different processes like information processing shortcuts, social influence and motivational factors. Heuristics entails simple and efficient rules used to form judgement and make decisions. This focuses on an aspect of complex problem and ignores the others leading to an error commonly known as cognitive biases. Bounded rationality may also lead to bias as the professional rationality is limited by information they have. Mental cognitive limititations and finite amount of time in making decision lead to bias. Explanatory attribution may manifest by seeking reasons for particular event. Fundamental attribution error which over-values personality-based explanations and under-value situational explanations may occur. Other forms of bias may be culture, actor/observer difference, dispositional attributions and self-serving bias that they might encounter in practice. Bias hider the use of critical thinking skills in making the right decision and reasoning. This is because; bias tends to incline to the outlook of limited viewpoint at the expense of another in inclination to objects, people and groups. Biased decisions are lacks a neutral point of view and are always one-sided. Cognitive bias lead to a tendency of making systematic decisions for certain situations. The outcome of bias manifests in perceptual distortion, illogical interpretation and inaccurate judgement which shows irrationality and are contrary to critical thinking. Limited information excludes options and possibilities. The tendency of a common viewpoint fails to consider specific contexts and other related factors which may derive new information. This limits divergence and eliminates the possibility of different and conflicting opinions which may be used to arrive at clear solutions and conclusions. Decisions are therefore guided by the past favoured outcomes (Roberts, 2007). Critical thinking enables criminologists and justice professionals to eliminate bias in their reasoning and decision making. Critical thinking can be regarded as essential in these fields because of how it enables practitioners to analyse, evaluate, explain, and regulate their thinking. This decreases the danger of adopting, acting on and thinking with a false belief. The knowledge of the techniques of reasoning and rational inquiry diminish the possibility of mistakes that can happen as a result of the thinker's inability in applying the methods and due to character traits like egocentrism. Critical thinking embraces identification of bias, prejudices, propaganda, distortion, misinformation and self-deception. The skills are applied to many contexts and cases, particularly by reflecting upon their nature and application (Alter, et al, 2007). Conclusion Critical thinking applies techniques to ensure possibilities in overcoming barriers that are related to everyday thinking. Critical thinking is vital in criminal justice system for creative problem solving. Continuous application lead to improved imaginative ability throughout professional practice. While it has been revealed that there is a common tenets of critical thinking with distinct stages which are followed for problem identification, ideas generation and finding solutions, in criminal justice system it is very important to consider their application for different problems and context. The process might appear complex, but it is important in avoiding minimalist approach and considers critical elements that refine the best process and stages for each problem. This can help to avoid detrimental effects of common and collaborative thinking. References Alter, A. L., et al. (2007). Overcoming intuition: metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(4), 569. Freeley, A. J., & Steinberg, D. L. (2008). Argumentation and debate: Critical thinking for reasoned decision making. Wadsworth Publishing Company. Gruskin, S., & Daniels, N. (2008). Process is the point: justice and human rights: priority setting and fair deliberative process. American Journal of Public Health, 98(9), 1573. Harman, G. (2008). Change in view: Principles of reasoning. Cambridge University Press. Hastie, R., & Dawes, R. M. (2009). Rational choice in an uncertain world: The psychology of judgment and decision making. Sage Publications, Incorporated. Nelken, D. (2010). Comparative criminal justice: Making sense of difference (Vol. 1). Sage Publications Limited. Roberts, D. E. (2007). Constructing a Criminal Justice System Free of Racial Bias: An Abolitionist Framework. Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev., 39, 261. Rudd, R. D. (2007). Defining critical thinking. Techniques, 82(7), 46-49. Siegel, L. J., & Worrall, J. L. (2012). Essentials of criminal justice. Wadsworth Publishing Company. Souryal, S. S. (2010). Ethics in criminal justice: In search of the truth. Anderson. Wenglinsky, H. (2007). Facts or Critical Thinking Skills?. Schools and Society: A Sociological Approach to Education, 208. Willingham, D. T. (2007). Critical thinking. American Educator. Read More