critical thinking layman terms

What is critical thinking and how can it be improved?

Helen lee bouygues.

updated Feb. 6, 2023

The term “critical thinking” is used a lot: by educators, politicians, journalists, and the general public. But what is critical thinking? When it comes to defining what critical thinking is – and is not – vagueness and confusion ensue.

What is critical thinking?

Although it’s complicated and multi-faceted, critical thinking can be defined. As cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham writes, critical thinking can be divided into three areas: reasoning, making judgments, and problem-solving. Critical thinking means becoming skilled in all three areas. In layman’s terms, it means thinking well.

So how can we think better? What does improved critical thinking look like? Because good thinking is so entwined in our daily lives, acquiring critical thinking skills is not as straightforward as becoming better at math or tennis. The exact skills depend on the stage of development as well as the domain in which the thinking skills are applied.

Moreover, critical thinking involves certain dispositions – curiosity, humility, independence – and values – openness, fairness, diversity – that make it more complicated than a more straightforward area of study.

All that said, there are some general components of critical thinking that will help clarify what exactly it means to become a critical thinker.

How To Improve Critical Thinking Skills

Below we expand on the definition of critical thinking by outlining three areas where we can all improve our critical thinking:

Reflective thinking or what’s sometimes called “ metacognition; ”
Objective thinking, which requires an ability to manage emotions and recognize biases;
Analytical thinking, which involves skills in logic and argumentation.

You can also check out our SHARP Thinking method .

What Is Reflective Thinking and How Does It Relate To Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking starts with reflection. Indeed, the American philosopher John Dewey often referred to critical thinking as “reflective thinking .” He contrasted reflective thinking, in which thoughts are consciously ordered and follow each other in a sequence, from idle thinking where our thoughts meander from point to point without any structure.

Put differently, reflective thinking involves thinking about our own thoughts in such a way that we can intentionally improve, order, and regulate them. This practice is often referred to as “metacognition.”

Metacognition involves seeing our thinking from the outside. The approach includes observing our own thought processes and thinking habits. It requires us to evaluate and employ different thinking strategies reflectively, and to notice when we are thinking irrationally or unproductively.

Reflective thinking involves thinking about our own thoughts in such a way that we can intentionally improve, order, and regulate them. Tweet

Metacognition is also crucial for learning. Some research suggests that metacognitive or reflective skills can be as important as raw intelligence in predicting student success. Children become capable of reflecting on their thinking in this way at around four, and metacognitive awareness increases with age up until early early adulthood.

Metacognition also depends on education and practice. There’s a lot of evidence that much like riding a bike, metacognition can be learned. One way metacognitive skills can be nurtured is by writing. For example, journaling about thinking can be extraordinarily useful.

Asking a lot of “why” questions can also promote metacognition: Why am I doing this? Why am I thinking this? These sorts of practices pull us outside of ourselves and give us the perspective from which we can reflect on and improve our thinking.

What is Objective Thinking?

When people think of “objectivity,” they usually imagine cold-blooded and perfectly rational thinking, almost like a computer processing data. But the truth is that being objective requires a great deal of emotional intelligence, and honesty about our own biases.

First of all, a balanced emotional foundation is necessary for sound reasoning. Critical thinking requires both confidence and humility— the confidence to think independently of group pressures and the humility to acknowledge that we might be wrong or biased. If we’re either too susceptible to a need for peer approval or too arrogant to consider others’ opinions, we are bound to fail at being objective.

It is therefore crucial that emotional management skills be developed at a young age, and renewed continually throughout our lives. Trying new activities and taking on new challenges — like learning a new language, for example — may seem far removed from critical thinking. But they are crucial to developing feelings of competence, openness to challenges, and the ability to cope with failure which is crucial to high-level reasoning across all domains.

Another substantial barrier to objectivity is bias. We are all inherently limited by our own experiences and backgrounds. But these subjective biases do not need to determine how we think. To be more objective, we must learn to identify particular thought patterns that lead us into error or misinterpretation.

Biases include not just those derived from our personal experience, but general cognitive biases we all suffer from. For example, it is easy to think that past events were easily predictable all along (hindsight bias) or that if a coin turns heads five times in a row, it’s more likely to be tails next time (Gambler’s fallacy). The only way to overcome cognitive biases is to be educated about them , and strive for objectivity.

Objective thinking builds on reflective thinking. We have to be able to see our thinking from the outside, if we are to learn to control biases or emotions that can distort our reasoning. With practice, we can learn to adjust our thought processes and see the world more as it is. We are all inherently limited by our own experiences and backgrounds. But these subjective biases do not need to determine how we think. To be more objective, we must learn to identify particular thought patterns that lead us into error or misinterpretation.

We are all limited by our own experiences and backgrounds. To be more objective, we must learn to identify particular thought patterns that lead us into error or misinterpretation. Tweet

What Is Analytical Thinking?

The ability to plan and regulate one’s thinking and to manage emotions and biases are necessary preconditions for higher-level logical analysis. These skills allow critical thinkers to build and evaluate information and arguments step-by-step so they can persuade others of their positions and criticize mistaken arguments. This is known as analytical thinking.

Young children, of course, usually aren’t ready to tackle formal logic, but there are plenty of ways that parents and other adults can help stimulate their analytical thinking. They can ask them to give reasons for their opinions or how they might criticize someone else’s argument.

Later on – in high school, college, and beyond – training in formal logic can help adults think more about how arguments are structured, whether conclusions follow from premises, and how to use logic to evaluate others’ arguments.

Learning the logic of conditional (if-then) statements, for instance, can help students think more precisely. To take one example, the logical rule known as modus tollens states that if a conditional statement (“if p then q”) is true, and we know that the consequent (q) is false, then we can infer that the antecedent is false, too.

So if it’s true that “If there is smoke, there is fire” and there is no fire, we can conclude that there is no smoke either. By contrast, we cannot conclude from the statement that just because there is fire, there must also be smoke.

This close attention to the logical connections between statements is necessary for students to be able to reason well about complex issues like climate change or the size of government.

Logic and Critical Thinking

However, it’s important to keep in mind that, while logic is a crucial part of critical thinking, there is more to critical thinking than mere logic. Critical thinking also requires argumentative skills that go beyond logic.

In a political debate, for example, two opponents may both have perfectly logical arguments but differing relative values as starting points – leading to vastly different conclusions. Similarly, if an airtight logical argument is not advanced with any rhetorical skill, it is unlikely to be persuasive.

In other words, just as objectivity requires skills in both reasoning and emotional management, analytical or argumentative thinking requires both logical skill and an ability to understand and empathize with one’s audience.

Keep in mind that, while logic is a crucial part of critical thinking, there is more to critical thinking than mere logic. Tweet

Parting Thoughts

Critical thinking is, therefore, never a mere intellectual exercise, but requires an all-around ability to put reasoning into practice. It goes well beyond raw intelligence or logical skill, and involves the virtues of practical reasoning like self-awareness, humility, independence, and empathy that are cultivated and deepened throughout a lifetime. It is not a stretch, then, to say that learning to think critically can make you a better person.

To sum up, critical thinkers can reflect on and correct their thought processes, remain objective even in overheated or deceptive circumstances, and cogently analyze the information as well as the structure and logic of arguments. These skills require commitment and dedication, but the rewards — sounder judgments, better decisions, more productive work, and even healthier relationships — are well worth it.

Helen Lee Bouygues is the president of the Reboot Foundation

Privacy Overview

Programs & Services
Delphi Center

Ideas to Action (i2a)

What is Critical Thinking?

The ability to think critically calls for a higher-order thinking than simply the ability to recall information.

Definitions of critical thinking, its elements, and its associated activities fill the educational literature of the past forty years. Critical thinking has been described as an ability to question; to acknowledge and test previously held assumptions; to recognize ambiguity; to examine, interpret, evaluate, reason, and reflect; to make informed judgments and decisions; and to clarify, articulate, and justify positions (Hullfish & Smith, 1961; Ennis, 1962; Ruggiero, 1975; Scriven, 1976; Hallet, 1984; Kitchener, 1986; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991; Mines et al., 1990; Halpern, 1996; Paul & Elder, 2001; Petress, 2004; Holyoak & Morrison, 2005; among others).

After a careful review of the mountainous body of literature defining critical thinking and its elements, UofL has chosen to adopt the language of Michael Scriven and Richard Paul (2003) as a comprehensive, concise operating definition:

Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.

Paul and Scriven go on to suggest that critical thinking is based on: "universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem, or question-at-issue, assumptions, concepts, empirical grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions, implication and consequences, objections from alternative viewpoints, and frame of reference. Critical thinking - in being responsive to variable subject matter, issues, and purposes - is incorporated in a family of interwoven modes of thinking, among them: scientific thinking, mathematical thinking, historical thinking, anthropological thinking, economic thinking, moral thinking, and philosophical thinking."

This conceptualization of critical thinking has been refined and developed further by Richard Paul and Linder Elder into the Paul-Elder framework of critical thinking. Currently, this approach is one of the most widely published and cited frameworks in the critical thinking literature. According to the Paul-Elder framework, critical thinking is the:

Analysis of thinking by focusing on the parts or structures of thinking ("the Elements of Thought")
Evaluation of thinking by focusing on the quality ("the Universal Intellectual Standards")
Improvement of thinking by using what you have learned ("the Intellectual Traits")

Selection of a Critical Thinking Framework

The University of Louisville chose the Paul-Elder model of Critical Thinking as the approach to guide our efforts in developing and enhancing our critical thinking curriculum. The Paul-Elder framework was selected based on criteria adapted from the characteristics of a good model of critical thinking developed at Surry Community College. The Paul-Elder critical thinking framework is comprehensive, uses discipline-neutral terminology, is applicable to all disciplines, defines specific cognitive skills including metacognition, and offers high quality resources.

Why the selection of a single critical thinking framework?

The use of a single critical thinking framework is an important aspect of institution-wide critical thinking initiatives (Paul and Nosich, 1993; Paul, 2004). According to this view, critical thinking instruction should not be relegated to one or two disciplines or departments with discipline specific language and conceptualizations. Rather, critical thinking instruction should be explicitly infused in all courses so that critical thinking skills can be developed and reinforced in student learning across the curriculum. The use of a common approach with a common language allows for a central organizer and for the development of critical thinking skill sets in all courses.

SACS & QEP
Planning and Implementation
Why Focus on Critical Thinking?
Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework
Culminating Undergraduate Experience
Community Engagement
Frequently Asked Questions
What is i2a?

Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life, Second Edition by Linda Elder, Richard Paul

Get full access to Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life, Second Edition and 60K+ other titles, with a free 10-day trial of O'Reilly.

There are also live events, courses curated by job role, and more.

A Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms and Concepts: The Critical Analytic Vocabulary of the English Language

This compendium of terms is testament to the fact that critical thinking entails a body of concepts and principles that, when internalized and practiced, enable people to raise their thinking to a higher level.

Critical thinking concepts encompass a large network of interrelated ideas. Understanding one such idea often entails understanding other ideas. As such, critical thinking concepts are best understood in relationship to each other and in contrast to their opposites.

The concept of critical thinking, comprehensively viewed, is a rich, variegated, and, to some extent, open-ended concept. There is no way to encompass it “completely” ...

Get Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life, Second Edition now with the O’Reilly learning platform.

O’Reilly members experience books, live events, courses curated by job role, and more from O’Reilly and nearly 200 top publishers.

Don’t leave empty-handed

Get Mark Richards’s Software Architecture Patterns ebook to better understand how to design components—and how they should interact.

It’s yours, free.

Check it out now on O’Reilly

Dive in for free with a 10-day trial of the O’Reilly learning platform—then explore all the other resources our members count on to build skills and solve problems every day.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

16 Definition

Robert h. ennis, 1. introduction [1] , [2].

Definition, though often neglected, plays an important role in critical thinking by helping us make our positions, inquiries, and reasoning clear.

Every definition has three dimensions: form, action, and content . The form of a definition is essentially the structure of the definition. An example of form is definition by synonym, a simple form of definition in which the word being defined is equal in meaning to one other word.

Three definitional actions that can be performed with any form of definition are reporting a meaning, stipulating a meaning, and adv o cating a meaning that incorporates a position on an issue.

This chapter focuses on these first two dimensions, form and action.

The third dimension, content , deals with the meaning conveyed by the definition. The content dimension is enormous because it involves the definitional content of all subject matter areas, as well as all other areas of human life. Attention to the content dimension will here be exemplified only in a discussion of a case of probable equivocation with the term ‘reliability’.

To the extent possible, a definition should be clear, brief, efficient, informative, responsive to background information, and easy to remember and understand. It should be at an appropriate level of sophistication and difficulty for the situation. It should employ an appropriate form and have a reasonable amount of vagueness and specificity. Because so much depends on the situation, and because these general criteria overlap to some extent, informed cautious judgment is required.

There has been little recent work with practical application in the area of definition. I hope that in the future there will be more explicit attention given to this topic than has been afforded it so far.

2. Common forms of definition

Full-definition forms to be presented are: (1 ) classification, (2) equi v alent-expression, (3) range, (4) synonym, (5) extended-synonym, (6) antonym, and (7) operational. Partial-definition forms to be considered are (8) giving examples, non-examples, and borderline cases (all three either verbally or ostensively), as well as using the term in a sentence . [3] There is much to consider in a given context in choosing what form is more successful in specifying the meaning of a term. It is often helpful to compare a definition with another definition of the same word in the same form or in a different form.

2.1 Classification definition

Classification definition is a very common form of definition of nouns. Here is one of a number of possible classification definitions of the noun, ‘argument’ (Example 1):

E1 An argument is a reason-based attempt to justify a conclusion.

I have called this popular type of definition “classification definition” because things labeled by the term being defined (in this case, ‘argument’) are classified as the members of a general class (e.g., reason-based attempts ) and then further classified under one or more distinguishing features (e.g., to justify a conclusion ).

In definition lore, classification definition is often called “genus-differentia definition”, with the word ‘genus’ referring to the general class and the word ‘differentia’ referring to the distinguishing fe a tures . [4] I prefer the label “classification definition” over the label “genus-differentia definition” primarily because the words ‘classification definition’ are more user-friendly for beginners than ‘genus-differentia’. Another reason is that in ‘genus-differentia’ terminology the differentia must be treated as one thing because the word, ‘differentia’ is singular. Even though there are ways around this, I usually find it easier to develop and work with definitions that make it easy to treat multiple distinguishing features separately.

In logical terms the components mentioned in the defining part of a simple classification definition (the general class and the distinguis h ing features ) are each necessary and jointly sufficient for something to be what is labeled by the term being defined. Most other definition forms do not have the strictness of ‘necessary’ and ‘sufficient’.

2.1.1 Flexibility in offering and selecting the general class

In this classification definition of ‘stapler’, ‘a device for fastening two or more pieces of paper together’, device is the general class. In this classification definition of ‘automobile’ (adapted from Dictio n ary.c om , accessed Sept. 5, 2017) , ‘ a vehicle designed for operation on ordinary roads, able to carry passengers, and typically having four wheels and a gasoline or diesel internal-combustion en gine’ , vehicle is the general class. In a classification definition, there must be a general class.

However there is often more than one legitimate choice of the general class for any given meaning of a term. One way to look at Example 1 (above) is to consider reason-based attempt as the general class and to justify a conclusion as a distinguishing feature. A different way to analyze this meaning of ‘argument’ is to treat attempt as the general class and the rest ( based on reasons and to justify a conclusion ) as the distinguishing features, as is explicitly exemplified in Example 2.

E2 An argument is an attempt based on reasons to justify a concl u sion.

Such variations in general class and accompanying variations among the distinguishing features often are possible without changing the meaning of the term being defined. Note that in Example 3 (below), the same meaning of ‘argument’ is captured, though there is a considerably different general class, set of reasons and a conclusion offered by the arguer, and different distinguishing features, in an attempt and to justify a conclusion :

E3 An argument is a set of reasons and a conclusion offered by the arguer in an attempt to justify a conclusion.

One should be flexible in choosing the general class because one choice is often better than the others, so we should not hastily accept the first to occur to us. This flexibility calls for paying attention to the general criteria for a definition mentioned earlier.

Of the three general classes so far considered (each of which introduces what is basically the same meaning of ‘argument’), the one that I prefer is reason-based attempt. I choose it over attempt because attempt seems to be too broad a category; it does not rule out enough things; that is, it does not give much guidance. Furthermore, I prefer reason-based attempt over set of reasons and a conclusion offered by an arguer as the general class, because the definition in Example 1 using reason-based attempt seems to satisfy more of the above-mentioned criteria for a definition than Example 3. Example 1 seems clear, brief, efficient, easy to remember, and easy to understand.

One important thing to be learned from these examples is that there can be explicitly different definitions of a term, each of which defines the term adequately without changing the basic meaning. Elsewhere (2016), I have gathered fourteen definitions of ‘critical thinking’ by leaders in the field, starting with John Dewey (1933, first ed., 1910), who inspired the current critical thinking movement under the label “critical thinking”. Most of these fourteen definitions are classification definitions They are essentially in agreement with each other about the meaning of ‘critical thinking’, even though they use different words and cite different features. Each one seems essentially right. This sort of occurrence is an interesting content-dimension fact about a number of concepts and definitions. Many concepts have more than enough necessary and/or sufficient conditions to identify them uniquely. And different definitions have different amounts of informative but not logically necessary material.

2.1.2 Imprecision

Ordinary language being what it is, we often must accept some imprecision, which often depends on the context. For instance, Example 3 does not tell us whether a pair of people working together can constitute an arguer . But specifics like that might not matter at all, given the context in which the term is being defined. Also the first three examples above do not specify what kind of justification is involved (for example, deductive validity, or validity in its non-technical sense, meaning roughly ‘correctness’), but the context might settle that. If the context were a course in deductive logic, the “necessary-follows” sense of ‘validity’ would probably be appropriate.

In these cases, given that the context is the field of critical thinking, the three definitions are concerned with all kinds of justification, and are not limited to deductive validity.

The range definition form, which is soon to be considered, explicitly makes imprecision evident when defining obviously imprecise terms. But at some level of elaboration, most everyday terms have a degree of possible imprecision, and the definer must decide how much precision is available and desirable, given the context and the ordinary meaning of the term in the context, and implement that decision with appropriate wording.

2.1.3 Nouns and Non-nouns

Classification definition and genus-differentia definition require that the term being defined be a noun. If some other part of speech, for example, a verb (an example being ‘argue’) is to be defined using the classification form, perhaps because of familiarity with classification definition, or its completeness, the term ‘argue’ can be converted to a noun (possibly ‘argument’) and defined as a noun. From this definition the receiver must infer what the original word (‘argue’) means. If an expected audience can infer the meaning of ‘argue’ from Examples 1, 2, and/or 3, then these examples of classification definition might well be used to define ‘argue’ in this manner, that is, indirectly. But there are other definition forms, especially the equivalent-expression form, which might work as well or better in some cases.

2.2 Equivalent-expression definition

When the term we want to define is not a noun, another form, equivalent-expression definition might be appropriate. Equivalent-expression definition does not require that we convert the term to be defined to a noun, which can make problems, as I shall later show. Instead the term to be defined remains unchanged and is put in a larger expression that is equated with an equivalent expression. This type of definition, which I call “equivalent-expression definition”, is called “contextual definition” by Hempel (1952, p. 5), and Dictionary.com (August, 2017). Example 4 is an equivalent-expression definition of the verb, ‘argue’:

E4 ‘ To a rgue in support of a conclusion’ is ‘ to attempt to justi fy it’ . [5]

The expressions on each side of the word ‘is’ are claimed to be equal in meaning to each other, giving us a good idea of the meaning of ‘argue’ in the sense in which I believe it is usually used in the field of critical thinking.

The adjective ‘biased’ can be handled the same way, as shown in an equivalent-expression definition in Example 5:

E5 To say “a person is biased” is to say “the person lets his or her prejudices influence his or her judgment”.

However, if we try to convert the non-noun (‘biased’ for example) to a noun, such as ‘bias’, as we might in trying to make a classification definition for ‘biased’, the task might become difficult. I invite you to ask yourself, “What general class could one use to give a classification definition of the noun, ‘bias’?” After rejecting a number of candidates that occurred to me, I chose ‘disposition’ , resulting in Example 6:

E6 A bias is a persistent prejudiced disposition toward issues and/or people.

But it took me a while to come up with that. I considered ‘quality’, which is a common, but often not very informative, general class term, and feel it is too general to be of much help. The result in Example 6 is usable, but I prefer Example 5, the equivalent-expression definition. It seems more informative. Some readers might prefer Example 6. The important thing is that there are generally different alternatives in defining terms, and a definer should consider the alternatives and apply the general criteria for definitions. No one form is always best. Sometimes the classification form seems best, sometimes the equivalent-expression form, sometimes another form. This is a matter about which reasonable people can differ.

Another instructive example is the term, ‘valid’, as used by logicians. Although not a noun, its companion noun, ‘validity’ can be given a classification definition as a noun by introducing the very general noun, ‘quality’, followed by a user’s inference back to the meaning of the adjective, ‘valid’ (assuming a logician’s context). Here is such a classification definition:

E7 Validity is the quality of an argument in which the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises.

Here is an equivalent-expression definition of ‘valid’:

E8 ‘ An argument is v alid ’ means the same as ‘ The conclusion fo l lows necessarily from the premises.’

The equivalent-expression form obviates the need to find a workable noun for a general class term, and generally provides a convenient definition, as noted in dealing with ‘bias’ (Examples 5 and 6), and ‘valid’ (Examples 7 and 8).

But the equivalent-expression form does not provide the general class and distinguishing features characteristic of the classification form, and so is not so clearly bounded as a classification definition of the term. For example, it does not necessarily provide an interpretation when the term being defined is not in the chosen context, and is in other contexts, or no context. Furthermore it does not require the necessary and sufficient condition guarantee provided by a classification definition.

One must decide, and not only between these two forms. There are other forms as well. In any case one must consider the definition criteria, the situation, and one’s personal theoretically-motivated or pedagogically-motivated preferences.

2.3 Range definition

Range definition , a deliberately-vague form named by Max Black (1954), can be roughly a classification definition in form, specifying a general class and roughly distinguishing the term being defined from other members of the class. But it deliberately introduces explicit vagueness. Black likened the vagueness to that of a mountain range (hence the term “range”). The following range definition of ‘scientific method’, based on Black (1954), exhibits deliberate vagueness:

E9 Scientific method is a method of investigation characteristically involving a substantial number, but rarely all, of the following characteristics: observation, generalization, experimentation, measurement, calculation, use of instruments, formulating and testing hypotheses that get support from their being able to e x plain the facts and their competitors’ being inconsistent with the facts, and being more or less tentative when concluding.

The general class is method of investigation . The vagueness is deliberately introduced by the terms ‘characteristically’, ‘substantial number’, ‘rarely all’, ‘more or less’ , and ‘tentative’. The definer should use such qualifiers as these to indicate when defining a term that is clearly vague in the situation. Although this particular definition of ‘scientific method’ is close to being in a classification form, range definitions need not approximate the classification form. They can be similar to other forms. But of course they should satisfy definition criteria, as is feasible, given their vagueness.

2.4 Synonym definition

The synonym form uses one word to define another word. One advantage of the synonym form is that it is suitable for non-nouns. Another advantage is its brevity. Here is an example:

E10 ‘Biased’ means the same as ‘prejudiced’.

Although convenient when time is short, synonym definitions often do not capture the full meaning of the word being defined, sometimes because they are made in a hurry, but often because there is no single word that is equivalent. Synonym form may not be the best way to define a term in a given situation because, although convenience and understandability are important, accuracy is often more important.

2.5 Extended-synonym definition

Instead of being limited to a one-word meaning as we are with a synonym definition, it is often helpful to add clarification to the defining component, producing an extended-synonym definition. This form does not embed the term being defined in a context, and thus is not the equivalent-expression form. Furthermore the extended-synonym form is useful for those terms that do not work well with the rigid necessary-and-sufficient-condition structure of a classification definition.

I think that ‘objective’ is such a term and suggest the following extended-synonym definition of ‘objective’ from Dictionary.com (2017):

E11 ‘Objective’ means not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased.

The term ‘objective’ I believe loosely fits each part of the array of terms in Example 11. But it fits no one of these terms exactly, although as a group, they do a fairly good job, making the extended-synonym form appropriate for this term. Adding a use-in-a-sentence partial definition ( see Example 17 below) to Example 11 provides what I believe is an even better grasp of the term, ‘objective’.

I realize this is a somewhat subjective appraisal. But th e principal goal of this chapter is to provide a choice of alternative forms that one can use. This requires using one’s judgment (which often will be somewhat subjective) in each situation with due respect to the criteria for a good definition.

Example 12 is an unsuccessful attempt to convert Example 11 into a classification definition:

E12 Objectivity is the quality of not being influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; being based on facts; being unbiased.

Using quality as the general class does help in this case by somewhat narrowing down the alternatives. However, the rest of Example 12 does not provide a set of necessary-and-sufficient condition distinguishing features. So Example 12 is not a classification definition. It is basically another extended-synonym definition and, as such, is a helpful conveyor of the meaning of ‘objective’ and ‘objectivity’. As I noted earlier for Example 11, it can helpfully be supplemented by Example 17, yet to be presented, which adds concreteness to this definition.

2.6 Antonym definition

In the antonym form the defining term is one that means the opposite of the term being defined, an antonym being the opposite of a synonym. According to The Random House Dictionary of the English Language, College Edition (1968) and Dictionary.com (August, 2017):

E13 ‘F ast’ is an antonym of ‘slow’.

When the antonym is clear, well understood, and accurate (as it is in this case), the antonym form is quite useful.

2.7 Operational definition

The idea of operational definitions is often attributed to Percy Bridgman (1927) working in theoretical physics, where he suggested that the value of the term being defined is the reading on an instrument, assuming that the appropriate operation has been performed. An example in everyday life is the use of the basic fever thermometer to determine one’s temperature, when the appropriate operation (including placing the tip of the thermometer under one’s tongue for two minutes) has been performed. Using an operational definition, the operation and the reading on the instrument operationally define the meaning of the word ‘temperature’, by providing helpful concrete interpretation.

Roughly speaking there are two different directions of emphasis in implementing this basic operational idea: strict and loose . In the strict approach, the language does not leave room for human judgment. Here is an example of the strict approach:

E14 If student X is given the “ Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children”, X has an IQ of Y if and only if X gets a score of Y.

Note that there are no qualifications in this strict version. This definition does not allow for exceptions and unforeseen situations. If a person had been up all night with the flu and could hardly concentrate when taking the test, there is no leeway. The person’s IQ is the score on the test, if the test is given and scored.

Strict operational definition was adopted by participants in the reductionist, behaviorist, logical-positivist tradition of the early part of the Twentieth Century, which equated the meaning of a theoretical concept (for example, IQ) with the use of a particular measuring instrument and the resulting score, as in Example 14 above. Especially in testing humans, precision is claimed at the cost of ignoring the obvious problems.

In the loose approach (Ennis, 1964), qualifying words are inserted in anticipation of possible problems. Human judgment is needed and accepted in order to apply the words of the loose operational definition of Example 15, which contains qualifying words like ‘probably’, ‘roughly’, and ‘under standard conditions’:

E15 If a native-English-speaking college student is given the “Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level Z” under standard conditions; then, if and only if that person gets a score of X, that person has probably mastered critical thinking roughly to the degree of X.

Actually in my experience there never has been a complete precise list of standard conditions for any test, presumably because it is impossible to know everything that can go wrong. There is always some variation in conditions. Many people do not realize the looseness introduced by “standard conditions”. Furthermore the causal relationships between a student’s characteristics and a test score are a matter of continuing controversy. All this justifies the use of such terms as ‘probably’, and ‘roughly’ when the defined term applies to a human mental characteristic, such as “critical thinking” does in Example 15.

Operational definitions provide a basis for some of the current extensive school testing emphasis in United States schools, but so used should be of the loose interpretation form of operational definition because of reasons given in the previous paragraph.

Both Examples 14 and 15 apply to human mental characteristics. When the definitions apply to characteristics of physical objects (like the fever thermometer), at least a somewhat strict approach is generally appropriate. But watchfulness and care are still required.

Some people have totally abandoned both the strict and the loose interpretations of the original spirit of operational definition, and think of operational definitions as just examples, or alternatively, as criteria for good things like “walkable neighborhoods” (Moudon, et al. , 2006). I urge us not to abandon the loose spirit of operational definitions, because holding at least a loose connection among the meaning of a term, a test, and a test result is insightful. It is politically important in dealing with the current testing movement at all levels of education.

2.8 Partial-definition forms

Strictly speaking, examples, non-examples, and borderline cases, as well as the use-in-a-sentence form of definition, do not approximate being full definitions. So I call them ‘partial-definition forms’ .

2.8.1 Examples, non-examples, and borderline cases

Examples, non-examples, and borderline cases are partial forms of definition that can sometimes be especially helpful in providing meaning because they indicate crucial limits and provide helpful concrete elaboration. Often they can convey meaning to an extent that is sufficient for the situation, and can often do so even more effectively than, say, a classification definition that lacks concreteness. However, combining examples, non-examples, and borderline cases with full classification definitions can sometimes be even better.

The example, borderline-case, and non-example passages in Examples 16a and 16b below were useful to me elsewhere in introducing and clarifying a new meaning of the term ‘ subject-specific critical thinking ability ’ (Ennis, 2018, p. 169):

E16a An example of a subject-specific critical thinking ability is the ability to plan, perform, and judge the results and relevance of analysis of covariance (used in several social and psychological sciences in order to judge the practical and statistical significance of a difference) with an understanding of the limitations involved. However, just understanding the concept of statistical significance , including sensitivity to its major strengths and weaknesses, is arguably a general abil ity.

Analysis of covariance is not used in most fields and is totally unfamiliar to most educated people I know. So the example of doing analysis of covariance as a subject-specific critical thinking ability, which is specific to certain subjects or fields, should I believe help make this new meaning of the term ‘subject-specific critical thinking ability’ clear.

Statistical significance on the other hand is a borderline case. It is arguably general because most people have some sense of what it means. But most educated people I know do not really know what statistical significance is (in the social sciences), so it is arguably also subject-specific. It is thus a borderline case, and helps further to clarify ‘subject-specific critical thinking ability’.

Example 16b, from a list of critical thinking abilities (Ennis, 2011, 2017), is a striking non-example of subject-specific critical thinking ability :

E16b Make and judge inductive inferences and arg uments Enumerative induction Argument an d inference to best explanation

‘Inductive inferences and arguments’, including the subctegories ‘Enumerative induction’ and ‘Argument and inference to best explanation’, are widely used in almost all fields (although perhaps not by those names), including such widely disparate fields as courtroom trials and Shakespearean criticism (Ennis, 1996, pp. 221-228). So they are helpful non-example s of ‘subject-specific critical thinking ability’.

So because of their immediacy and concreteness, the example and the borderline case in Example 16a and the non-example in Example 16b can be helpful in introducing and clarifying a new and useful term, ‘subject-specific critical thinking ability’, a term that I have found helpful in advocating critical thinking across the curriculum (2018).

Examples, non-examples, and borderline cases need not be only verbally presented. They can be presented in part by physically pointing, as in for example pointing at an almost-leafless formerly-healthy grapefruit tree to show someone an example of citrus greening (a serious citrus tree disease). Such pointing is called “ostensive definition”. Like most ostensive definitions, it usually requires some verbal supplementation as well as background experience on the part of the learner. In this example the learner must have some grasp of the appearance of a healthy grapefruit tree. Together the pointing and the background knowledge are helpful in understanding the ostensive act. This example shows that ostensive definitions can be quick and effective in the right conditions. Incidentally they are also helpful in teaching words to children.

2.8.2 Using the term in a sentence

Here is a helpful example of the use-in-a-sentence form of partial definition for the term ‘objective’, provided by Cambridge Dictionaries Online (October, 2016):

E17 I can’t really be objective when I’m judging my daughter’s work .

Example 17 recognizes the prohibition against being influenced by personal feelings when trying to be objective, and makes use of well-known strong feelings most people have about their offspring. By itself, the use-in-a-sentence form is often not sufficient to convey fully the meaning of a term. However, as noted earlier in discussing Examples 11 and 12, combining the use-in-a-sentence partial-definition form with some of the other definition forms I have described can contribute to a fuller understanding of the meaning of a term.

3. Three basic actions that definers perform: reporting a meaning, stipulating a meaning, and advocating a meaning that incorporates a position

The form of a definition is one basic dimension of defining. A second basic dimension is the action the definer is performing when offering a meaning of a term. When the definition’s form and content are combined with the action, the result is part of an act of human communication.

There are three basic definitional actions: (1) the definer’s reporting what the definer claims to be a meaning, (2) the definer’s stipulating a meaning, and (3) the definer’s advocating a particular meaning that incorporates a position on an issue. A definition such as Example 4, an equivalent-expression definition of ‘argue’ , can be used to introduce the distinctions among these three actions.

Example 18 uses Example 4 in a reporting action, Example 19 uses it in a stipulatin g action, and Example 20 uses it in a positional action. The exact same words (Example 4) are used as the definition in all three contexts, but a different action is being performed in each case.

E18 On the basis of my experience communicating with critical thinking experts, I report that the following definition states what the experts generally mean by ‘argue’ in the field of critical thinking: ‘ To a rgue in support of a conclusion’ is ‘ to at tempt to justify it ’. ( reportin g a meaning)

E19 As the instructor of this critical thinking course in this institution, I stipulate that in this course we shall mean the follow ing by the word ‘argue’: ‘ To argue in support of a conclu sion’ is ‘ to attempt to justify it ’ . ( stipulating a meaning)

E20 As long-time members of this department, we advocate the following definition of ‘argue’ for use in the critical think ing course we are developing: ‘ To argue in support of a conclu sion’ is ‘to attempt to justify it.’ We believe that this sense of ‘argue’ is the appropriate one for a course in critical thinking, because (their position) the major concern in a critical thinking course is how to tell whether the conclusion of an argument is justified . ( advocating a particular meaning that incorporates a position )

3.1 Reporting a meaning

In reporting a meaning, the reporter (the definer) claims that the reported meaning is a meaning of the term. [6] The definer in Example 18 claims the meaning in Example 4 to be a meaning of the term ‘argue’. Such a report can be true or false, and thus requires critical thinking (including inference to best explanation, as well as observation and other data gathering) to judge its acceptability.

Note that Example 18 is a special case of reporting a meaning. It is also reporting the meaning held by a certain group of people. So it requires more information for its support than simply reporting a meaning.

The definition that results from reporting a (or the) meaning shall here be called a “ reportive definition” a term suggested by David Hitchcock (personal communication). [7] If I used the label ‘ reported definition’ instead of ‘ reportive definition’, then according to the ordinary meaning of ‘ reported ’, a reported definition could be a definition that the definer tells us about (reports) but does not claim to be a meaning of a term. This means that it would not necessarily be a product that the reporter (the definer) claims to be a (or the) meaning. I stipulate that a ‘reportive definition’ is one in which the definer claims that the meaning reported is a (or the) meaning of the term.

Although ordinarily we report a meaning that is widely used or at least used by a group, a specific person’s meaning could be claimed in a reportive definition, as in Example 21:

E21 By ‘silly ’, she mean s good .

3.2 Stipulating a meaning

Stipulating a meaning of a term is deeming that the meaning given is what the term shall be taken to mean in a given situation. Grammatically, the definer expresses the stipulation in the imperative mood, rather than the indicative mood. A stipulation of a meaning is neither true nor false.

In stipulating a meaning, a definer assumes that she or he has the right to determine what the term shall mean in the situation. As author, I have the right to stipulate the meaning of ‘reportive’ in this chapter. If the would-be stipulator does not have the right, then the stipulation fails, and the definition ordinarily would be considered a positional definition that incorporates a position on an issue (see next section), if the author desires to perform that action. A definer can choose both actions if the definer does have the right to stipulate. I treat my definition of ‘reportive’ not only as a stipulative definition, but also as a positional definition, because I advocate the theory of, and approach to, definition in which it is embedded.

In 2006, the International Astronomical Union reached a decision about Pluto that was implied by the following apparently stipulative classification definition of ‘planet’ (International Astronomical Union, 2006):

E 22 Planet: A celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.

An implication of this apparently stipulative definition is that Pluto is not a planet, because it does not meet criterion (c). There is a nearby large mass called Eris.

Stipulating a meaning as part of a theory is a common occurrence. The International Astronomical Union, I suspect, has a right to stipulate a definition of a key term (‘planet’) that plays an important role in a theory it is advancing, but in this case the extent of this right, or its existence at all, is a matter of some controversy.

Former NASA scientist Phil Metzger provided conflicting usage rejecting the apparent stipulation: “We are free to call it a planet right now. The planetary science community has never stopped calling bodies like Pluto ‘planets’” (Wiener-Bronner, 2015). So, given this description of the situation, it is not clear that the International Astronomical Union has the authority to stipulate the meaning for ‘planet’ in Example 22. If it does not have the right, the definition cannot be considered a stipulative definition, and in this case would be considered a positional and reportive definition that conflicts with Metzger’s positional and reportive definition, and so must be defended by critical thinking evidence and argument.

3 .3 Advocating a m eaning of a term i ncorporating a p osition on an i ssue (p ositional d efinition )

Sometimes definers advocate a meaning for a term that incorporates a position on an issue. Scheffler (1960) has given this topic a thorough treatment under the label, “programmatic definition”. I will use the topics of segregation and marriage to exemplify definitions that take a position.

3.3.1 Segregation

School segregation was judged unconstitutional (but was not defined) by the United States Supreme Court (1954). Since it was not defined, it was too vague to provide specific guidance to a school system, which was needed. Then a possible result was that a superintendent in a large school system would propose to the governing board the following equivalent-expression positional definition of ‘segregated’:

E 23 To say ‘ a school is segregated ’ is to say ‘ it has a population more than 80% of which is of a given minority race .

Example 23 advocates the position that a school with more than 80% of its students of a given minority race, but not a school with 80% or fewer of its students of a minority race, is in violation of the segregation law. Thus it is a definition that expresses a position on an issue. Argument is needed to support that position in the ensuing discussion.

A desirable condition for success of a positional definition is that the position being taken be a clear position, the clearer the better. A further condition for its success is that the position be justified. Critical thinking is called for in making this judgment.

3.3.2 Marriage

Here is a positional definition of ‘marriage’:

E 24 Marriage is a legal, committed union of a woman and a man .

Inherent in this classification definition, assuming the ‘is’ is the ‘is’ of equality, when it was presented, was the position that two people of the same sex cannot and should not be married, currently a controversial issue. In this case the position of the definer was opposition to same-sex marriage. So it was a positional definition.

Example 24 was also a reportive definition because the definer claimed that this was a common meaning of the word ‘marriage’, which it was. The definition of ‘marriage’ in Example 24 thus is another instance of a definer’s performing more than one definitional action with the same definition, in this case, positional and reportive.

4. A glimpse of the content dimension: equivocation and impact equivocation with the term, ‘reliability’

Because words in virtually any subject matter or area of interest are subject to definition, and all definitions have content, any fully-exemplified discussion of definition content would be huge in scope. So, at least to give the flavor of dealing with a content issue, I shall present one example, which deals with the ambiguity of a term, ‘reliability’, and its possible exploitation.

Exploitation of the ambiguity of a term is equivocation and is a significant critical thinking concern. When such equivocation is inadvertent, I call it “impact equivocation”, because it has the impact of equivocation, though it is unintentional. Equivocation is a topic within the area of the third dimension of definition, content.

In what follows, I shall describe an occurrence of impact equivocation, explain why I think it occurred, and hold that such impact equivocation occurrences are likely to happen often if the field of psychometrics retains its meaning of ‘reliability’, given the ordinary-language meaning of ‘reliability’.

Impact equivocation faced me when, inquiring of a school principal about the validity of the academic aptitude test taken by my then 5 th -grade son, I was told that the test was quite valid because it had a “reliability” of 0.94. This rating was thought by the principal to be a high validity rating. This was a case of impact equivocation. The principal believed that this “reliability” meant validity , which it did not.

The psychometric definition of ‘reliability’ does not specify anything about the quality of a performance; it only indicates consistency and patterns of consistency. Psychometric ‘reliability’ is defined as follows in the fourth edition of Educational Measurement (Haertel, 2006, p.65): Reliability is “concerned solely with how the scores resulting from a measurement procedure would be expected to vary across replications of that procedure”. In simpler terms, ‘reliability’ in psychometrics basically means ‘consistency’.

On the other hand, the ordinary meaning of ‘reliability’ incorporates consistency, but also requires good quality performance. Here are the two definitions of ‘reliability’ in Oxforddictionaries.com (accessed September 8, 2017):

The quality of being trustworthy or of performing consistently well.
The degree to which the result of a measurement, calculation, or specification can be depended on to be accurate.

Here is the definition of ‘reliability’ in Dictionary.com (accessed August 22, 2017):

the ability to be relied on or depended on, as for accuracy, honesty, or achievement.

These dictionary definitions of ‘reliability’ are in accord with the ordinary meaning of ‘reliability’: ‘dependability in getting things right’; more briefly, ‘consistency plus quality’.

Furthermore, correlations of aptitude tests with later grades or other indicators of success (validity correlations) are only “modest” (Thorndike, 1971; Linn, 1982, p. 287, two major leaders in psychometrics over the years). For example, an analysis of the validity of the Graduate Record Exam (GRE) in predicting graduate school success found correlations of .30 to .45 between the GRE and both first year and overall graduate GPA. Correlations with faculty ratings ranged from .35 to .50 (Kunzel & Hazlett, 2001). Because validity correlations are generally “modest”, and because the correlation of 0.94 on my son’s test was called “reliability” in a psychometric publication, the 0.94 correlation clearly was not a validity correlation.

So given that psychometric reliability does not imply quality, which an inference to validity would require; given that ordinary reliability does require good quality; and given that the correlations for validity run much lower than the 0.94 that was reported, the principal’s reporting the 0.94 as indicating validity depended on a shift from the psychometric meaning of ‘reliability’ to the ordinary meaning of ‘reliability’. So the principal was impact equivocating. I say “impact equivocating” rather than “equivocating” because it appeared that the principal did not realize that she was not answering my question about validity.

In view of the widespread ordinary meaning of ‘reliability’, I suggest that the field of psychometrics consider changing the label ‘reliability’ in their vocabulary to ‘consistency’ in order to minimize such impact equivocations. The ordinary-language meaning of ‘reliability’ is not likely to change.

This suggestion and accompanying discussion fit within the content dimension of definition. The meanings discussed here and their interaction are matters of content.

5. Summary: A three-dimensional theory of definition, encompassing form, action, and content

A variety of possible forms and variations thereof are available for defining terms, form being a first dimension of definition. Three different actions , reporting, stipulating, and advocating a position, comprise the second dimension of defining, action . And the broad area of content provides the third basic dimension of definition. In this chapter I have focused on the two dimensions, form and action, and provided one case of attention to content, a concern about equivocation.

The maker of a definition should be flexible in selecting an appropriate form for defining the term, given the situation. The classification form is used often, because it offers completeness in a simple structure, specifying a set of necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for the use of the term being defined. But it has the disadvantages of needing the term being defined to be a noun, or be convertible into a noun, a process which is not always easy to perform, leading on occasion to the use of the rather broad and often uninformative general class, quality . Furthermore classification definition generally lacks the helpful concreteness of some of the other forms of definition.

The equivalent-expression form puts the term to be defined in a larger expression, which is equated with another expression. It is often easier to construct than a classification definition, and usually provides sufficient coverage of the meaning, although it does not provide the clear necessary-and-sufficient boundaries of a classification definition.

The range form has the advantage of making vagueness quite explicit, a characteristic that we should acknowledge when it exists. Synonym and antonym definitions provide quick equivalence and the opposite when available, but are often overly simple. The extended-synonym definition provides more detail in the defining part of the definition than a pure synonym definition. Although it does not provide the precision of a classification definition, it can be quite useful, especially for terms that seem not to have exact equivalents.

The operational form provides a connection among the meaning of a term, a test, and a test result. Strict operational definition allows no exceptions in application, and is not generally suited to defining human characteristics. Loose-form operational definition loosens the connection among its elements with the use of such terms as ‘generally’ and ‘probably’ and is better suited for use when discussing human characteristics.

While parti al definition s , such as example, non-example, borderline case, and the use-in-a-sentence form, are not full-blown definitions, they are often useful and can sometimes be sufficient to define a term. They can also be helpful as supplements to other forms of definition to provide better understanding of a term.

A definition in a form but not yet offered in an action is inert. The action of the definer transforms an inert definition into part of an act of human communication. The three major definer actions are: (1) reporting a meaning that the definer claims to be a meaning, (2) stipulating a meaning that the definer deems shall be the meaning of the term in some type of circumstance, and (3) advocating a meaning that incorporates a position on an issue. The results of these actions are reportive, stipulative, and positional definitions.

The result for the first action, reporting, can at least in part be judged by critical thinking criteria, including truth. The second action, stipulating a meaning, can be judged by its convenience in dealing with the situation, but not for its correctness, which in pure examples it is not claimed to possess. It is stated in the imperative mood. Stipulating can only be successfully done by someone who has the right to stipulate in the situation. Positional definitions are successful in part to the extent that the position they advocate is clear, and even more successful if their positions are justified. Critical thinking is relevant here. Care and sensitivity to the situation are crucial throughout.

Because many crucial terms have more than one meaning, there is often danger of equivocation and impact equivocation for which we must be on guard. The example used here is ‘reliability’. I thus give some attention to the content dimension, which, because of its immensity, must be treated elsewhere, at greater length.

Language and its meanings are crucial aspects of critical thinking. Defining terms cannot be neglected. I hope that the ideas about definition in this chapter will contribute to more critical thinking.

Black, Max (1954). The definition of scientific method. Definition, presupposition, and assertion. Both in Max Black (ed.), Problems of A nalysis: Philosophical essays (pp. 3-23; pp. 24-45). Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.

Bridgman, Percy (1927). The logic of modern physics . New York: Macmillan.

Cambridge Dictionaries Online (2016). Examined April 2, 2016, at http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/objective

Copi, Irving (1953). Introduction to l ogic. New York: Macmillan.

Cronbach, Lee (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (ed.), Educational measurement , 2 nd ed. (pp. 443-507). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Dewey, John (1933; original edition, 1910). How we think. Boston: D. C. Heath.

Dictionary.com (2016, 2017), http://www.dictionary.com , definition of ‘objective’, April 9, 2016; definition of ‘contextual definition’ Aug.14, 2017).

Ennis, Robert H (2018, online first). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. TOPOI 37(1), 165-184.

Ennis, Robert H (2017). The nature of critical thinking. Viewed April 12, 2017, at http://criticalthinking.net/longdefinition.html .

Ennis, Robert H. (2016). Definition: A three-dimensional analysis with bearing on key concepts. OSSA Conference Archive. http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papers andcommentaries/105

Ennis, Robert H (2011). Critical thinking: Reflection and perspective—Part I. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 26 (1), 4-18.

Ennis, Robert H (1996). Critical t hinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Ennis, Robert H. (1964). Operational definitions. American Educational Research Journal, 1, 183-201. (Reprinted in L. I. Krimerman (ed.), (1969), The nature and scope of social science: A critical anthology . New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts (pp. 431-444). (Title as reprinted: Operationism can and should be divorced from covering law assumptions.)

Haertel, Edward H. (2006). Reliability. In Robert L. Brennan (ed.), Educational M easurement , 4 th ed. (pp. 65-110). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Hempel, Carl (1952). Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science . Founda tions of the unity of science , II 7. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

International Astronomical Union (2006). Pluto and the developing landscape of our solar system. Downloaded April 4, 2016, from http://www.iau.org/static/resolutions/Resolution_GA26-5-6.pdf

Kane, Michael (2006), Validation. In Robert Brennan (ed.), Educational measurement , 4 th ed. (pp.17-64). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Kelley, Truman (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. Yonkers-on-Hudson, NY: World Book.

Kuncel, N. R.; Hezlett, S. A.; Ones, D. S. (2001). “A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Record Examination: Implications for graduate student selection and performance” (PDF). Psychological Bulletin. 127 (1), 162–181. doi : 10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.162 . ( https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki//GraduateRecoredExamination#Validity ).

Linn, Robert (1982). Admission testing on trial. American Psychlogist, 37 (3), 279-291.

Moudun, Anne, et al . (2006). Operational definitions of walkable neighborhood: theoretical and empirical insights. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 3, Suppl 1, S99-S117.

Scheffler, Israel (1960). The language of education . Springfield, IL: Charles Thomas.

Thorndike, R. L. (1971). Concepts of cultural fairness. Jour nal of Educational Measurement ( 8 ) , 63-70.

United States Supreme Court (1954) . Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka . 347 US 483.

Urdan g, Laurence (1968). The Random H ouse dictionary of the English language . New York: Random House.

Weiner-Bronner, Danielle (2015). Is Pluto a planet? The answer may surprise you. Examined March 28, 2016, at http://fusion.net/story/158379/is-pluto-a-planet-the-answer-may-surprise-you/ .

I deeply appreciate the help and advice of Jennie Berg, David Hitchcock, and Kevin Possin in the development of this chapter. ↵
Recursive definition is not included because it is used too rarely by expected readers to warrant explaining its complexities. Those who need it will have good sources for it. ↵
Copi (1953 and later editions), in a popular book, used the label “genus-difference” definition (rather than “genus differentia”). He stated that by “difference” he meant “differentia”. ↵
Notes about punctuation of definitions: Equivalent-expression definitions equate expressions, so the things equated are in quotes. Classification definitions are about classes, so the items in the definition are not in quotes. Similar ideas apply to other definitions in this chapter. If the verb in the definition is ‘means’, the subject of the definition sentence is a word and is in quotes, and the part after ‘means’ is not in quotes. If the equating verbal phrase in the definition is ‘means the same as’, both sides of it are in quotes. The basic idea is that references to words are in quotes; other references are not. ↵
By “a meaning” I mean a way the term has been used. ↵
Something like it is called “lexical definition” or “descriptive definition” by some other authors. I do not feel that these names are sufficiently descriptive of what this type of definition does. ↵

Share This Book

Link to facebook
Link to linkedin
Link to twitter
Link to youtube
Writing Tips

What Are Layman’s Terms? A Guide to Plain English

4-minute read

26th October 2019

When people refer to expressing something in layman’s terms, they mean plain or simple language. But what exactly is a layman? And how can you simplify your writing to make it easier to read? In this post, we offer a few tips on how to express yourself in plain English.

What Is a Layman? And What Are Layman’s Terms?

The words “layman,” “laywoman,” and “layperson” were originally related to religion, referring to someone who belongs to a religious organization but who has no special training . For example:

Both clergy and laypeople have an important role in the Catholic Church.

More generally, though, these terms can now apply to any non-specialist in a particular field. So we could also say:

As a layman , Tim struggled to follow the dense legal language.

The phrase “layman’s terms,” then, refers to using language that could be understood by a layperson (i.e., plain English, free from jargon).

5 Tips to Help You Write in Plain English

But how do you write in layperson’s terms? We have a few guidelines.

1. Avoid Jargon and Explain Technical Terms

Jargon – language used by experts or insiders in a specific field of study or industry – is the enemy of plain English. As such, you should try to avoid jargon when writing for a lay audience, including:

Technical language (e.g., saying “cardialgia” instead of “heartburn”).
Slang terms specific to a profession (e.g., the medical slang “gomer” ).
Undefined acronyms that only specialists would recognize.

All the above rely on insider knowledge, so anyone not already in the know may find your writing difficult to follow if it’s full of jargon.

Instead, try to use everyday language wherever possible. And if you do need to use a technical term, make sure to define it clearly when you introduce it.

2. Use Short Sentences and Paragraphs

Short sentences are easier to follow than long ones. So, while varying sentence length is good, using short simple sentences where possible will help to improve readability. Tips for keeping your sentences short include:

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

Using the active voice to keep your writing clear and direct.
Eliminating unnecessary modifiers, repetition and wordiness .
Breaking longer sentences down into two or more short sentences.

The same applies to paragraph length. Ideally, each paragraph should be around 100 to 200 words and focus on one key point. And while some variation is fine, keeping paragraphs concise will help you avoid intimidating blocks of uninterrupted text, making your work easier to read.

3. Get to the Main Point Quickly

People are busy. They skim read. So unless you can grab their attention as soon as possible, they may get bored and stop reading.

As such, in the first paragraph of your writing, state your main point as clearly and concisely as possible. In this blog post, for example, we could have begun by discussing religious laity. But since that isn’t our main interest, we make it clear that the post is about plain English from the start.

4. Don’t Dumb Down Unnecessarily!

Simplifying your language doesn’t mean dumbing down your ideas. And if your reader feels like you’re talking down to them, they may lose interest.

The key is to find a level that suits your audience. If you’re explaining a scientific theory to children, then you may have to simplify some ideas. But if you’re addressing college-level students, you can assume they are clever people even if they don’t know the technical language involved.

So, when writing something for a lay audience, ask yourself:

Does my target audience already know anything about my chosen topic?
What will readers need to know to understand my point?
How accustomed are my audience to grasping complicated ideas?

You can then tailor the complexity of your writing to suit your target readers.

5. Get Your Documents Proofread

Asking a non-specialist friend or colleague to read a draft of your writing is a great idea. They can give you a different perspective, including pointing out areas that may be hard to understand for a lay audience.

And for an expert opinion, you can even have your work proofread by a professional . Our editors, for instance, can provide feedback on writing in plain English as well as making sure your work is error free.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

2-minute read

How to Cite the CDC in APA

If you’re writing about health issues, you might need to reference the Centers for Disease...

5-minute read

Six Product Description Generator Tools for Your Product Copy

Introduction If you’re involved with ecommerce, you’re likely familiar with the often painstaking process of...

What Is a Content Editor?

Are you interested in learning more about the role of a content editor and the...

The Benefits of Using an Online Proofreading Service

Proofreading is important to ensure your writing is clear and concise for your readers. Whether...

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

Creating presentations can be time-consuming and frustrating. Trying to construct a visually appealing and informative...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Thinker's Guides

A Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms and Concepts, 2nd edition

Normal 0 false false false en-us x-none x-none.

Gain digital access to this and many other resources at the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online !

(Physical copies not available at this time.)

Author: Linda Elder and Richard Paul Publisher: Foundation for Critical Thinking Copyright: 2013 Pages: 80 Dimensions: 51/4" x 8" ISBN (13Digit): 978-0-944583-40-1

This compendium of terms is testament to the fact that critical thinking entails a body of concepts and principles which, when internalized and practiced, enable people to raise their thinking to a higher level. It entails the primary terms in critical thinking as well as many secondary terms, and illuminates these terms as a network of interrelated meanings. The authors have also included a significant number of terms that illuminate the barriers to the development of critical thought — for example those terms which center around the problems of sociocentric and egocentric thought. For most entries the authors provide a brief definition followed by elaboration and exemplification of the concept. In a number of cases the authors link the terms to instruction, for the benefit of readers who are educators or students.

Additional Information About: A Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms and Concepts, 2nd edition

Critical thinking concepts encompass a large network of interrelated ideas. To understand one such idea often entails understanding other ideas. As such, critical thinking concepts are best understood in relationship to each other and in contrast to their opposites. We have focused on concepts which are non-technical (and are thus available in any well-researched dictionary of the English language). Furthermore, we have focused on concepts of use to those interested in an explicit , multi-dimensional , Socratic , and systematic approach to critical thinking, rather than on approaches that are implicit , sophistic , one-dimensional , or episodic . By the way, each of these terms (descriptive of approaches to critical thinking) are included in this glossary, so if you are puzzled by any of them you can put this glossary immediately to use by looking them up.

The concept of critical thinking, comprehensively viewed, is a rich, variegated, and, to some extent, open-ended concept. There is no way to encompass it “completely” and inexhaustibly. There is no way to encompass it in a one-sentence “definition.” Nevertheless, at its base is a foundational set of meanings presupposed in all of its varied uses. Its multiplicity is given by the fact that one can pursue the improvement of thinking by somewhat different studies with somewhat different scope and trained on different foci.

The network of critical thinking terms in this glossary is in no way exhaustive. Many more terms might be added to it. For example, one important concept in critical thinking is captured in the term ‘intellectual standards,’ which is defined as ‘criteria used to evaluate or judge the quality of reasoning.’ There is an array of such standards extant in all modern natural languages, including clarity, accuracy, precision, depth, breadth and fairness . These and a number of other intellectual standard terms are included in this glossary. However, due to space limitations, a great many other intellectual standard words have been excluded.

For most entries we provide a brief definition followed by elaboration and exemplification of the concept. In a number of cases we link the terms to instruction, for the benefit of our readers who are educators or students.

Something went wrong. Wait a moment and try again.

In Layman’s Terms, What Is the Meaning of ‘Layman's Terms’?

We lay it out for you.

By Jake Rossen | Feb 12, 2024

Whenever someone begins rattling off some esoteric or specialized knowledge, someone may speak up to remind them they’re addressing people who aren’t versed in their expertise, whether they’re a plumber explaining why your sewer line is backing up, or a physician who wants to offer an anatomy lesson.

Often, they’ll be told to explain it in “layman’s terms.” A simplified explanation will follow, and everyone will be happy. (Except the guy with the clogged sewer line and an exorbitant bill.) But what exactly are layman’s terms? Who is this layman who needs everything stripped of nuance and tech-speak? Is it a synonym for dumb ?

According to Merriam-Webster, layman was likely first used back in the 15th century. It has roots in French and Late Latin and derives from the Greek word laikos , or “of the people.” The adjective lay meant an entity unrelated to the clergy or of non-ecclesiastical origins; a layman was a non-clerical person unaffiliated with a church.

Westside Toastmasters is located in Los Angeles and Santa Monica, California

Westside toastmasters on meetup.

Communicating with patients in layman’s terms

Patients who are able to clearly understand their physician’s diagnosis and care instructions tend to be more engaged, leading to improved outcomes. Whether the communication is face to face or conducted via a doctor-patient communication app, communicating with patients in layman’s terms is critical to their overall health and well-being.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), told JAMA Editor in Chief Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, PhD, MD, MAS, in a recent interview that physicians should “know exactly what your message is, know who your audience is, and say things in a way that’s concise—not meandering.” Dr. Fauci adds that healthcare professionals should “Make it clear that you are going to communicate and often make recommendations and guidelines because that’s what the public looks to scientists and public health officials to do.”

Consistency is also critical when communicating with patients, Dr. Fauci advises. He further explains that “You can’t get rattled; just make sure you stick with the science. And you have to do that consistently. Consistency in science is important.” He adds, though, that “Changing when change is warranted is important.”

Learn more about Elation’s doctor patient communication app, enabling easily accessible secure messaging with your patients.

Clear and concise information communicated compassionately and in terms patients can understand is the key to a successful provider-patient relationship as well. A helpful communication strategy, known as AIDET, includes the five fundamentals of patient communication:

Acknowledge: Being attentive and greeting the patient in a positive manner
Introduce: Giving your name, your role, and your skill set
Duration: Giving a reasonable time expectation
Explanation: Making sure the patient is knowledgeable and informed
Thank you: Showing appreciation to the patient for their cooperation.

In addition, many experts recommend the RESPECT Model, which helps to improve the physician’s awareness of potential cultural biases and to enable the physician to develop a rapport with patients who are from different cultural backgrounds. The RESPECT Model can be important for communications in person, on the phone, or through a doctor-patient communication app, and emphasizes:

Partnership
Explanations
Cultural competence

Taking the time to address all of the patient concerns is also a critical part of patient communication and sustainable practice models. Increasing the time allotted for each visit can be crucial to improving patient communication, particularly as it leads to shared decision making.

Many highly qualified healthcare providers who excel in their field are simply not skilled at communicating with patients in layman’s terms. It’s also important to understand that most patients come to the doctor’s office in a state of anxiety or fear over what may or may not be wrong with them. Remember that the patient does not have the same medical training and will probably not understand a lot of the terms that come naturally to the physician’s mind.

Other tips for communicating with patients include:

Speak slowly and clearly in terms they understand.
Be polite and make an effort to understand the patient’s concerns.
Make the patient feel heard and understood, which can make the visits go much more smoothly.
Be completely honest with patients, allowing a line of trust to be built and enabling a more effective provider-patient relationship.

In most cases , the patient’s complaint about their healthcare provider is related to issues of communication rather than clinical competency. Patients simply want physicians who can communicate effectively in addition to being able to diagnose and treat them appropriately. As Dr. Terry Canale stated in an American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons Vice Presidential Address, “The patient will never care how much you know, until they know how much you care.”

IMAGES

6 Main Types of Critical Thinking Skills (With Examples)
"Layman's Terms" Meaning
Critical Thinking Definition, Skills, and Examples
Layman’s Terms
Critical Thinking Skills
ULTIMATE CRITICAL THINKING CHEAT SHEET Published 01/19/2017 Infographic

VIDEO

Does Gina Have A Case? A Normal Guy's Walkthrough Of Carano V Disney
2 Terms -Critical Thinking and Risk Based Approach for Computer System Validation
Introducing My Wife To Critical Theory Sociology 2
Introducing My Wife To Critical Theory Sociology
What is Critical Thinking
Unleashing the Power of Critical Thinking for Kids

COMMENTS

What Is Critical Thinking?
Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment. To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources. Critical thinking skills help you to: Identify credible sources. Evaluate and respond to arguments.
Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms
This is a fundamental problem in human life. To argue in the critical thinking sense is to use logic and reason, and to bring forth facts to support or refute a point. It is done in a spirit of cooperation and good will. argument: A reason or reasons offered for or against something, the offering of such reasons.
Glossary
Glossary: I An Educator's Guide to Critical Thinking Terms and Concepts. idea: Anything existing in the mind as an object of knowledge or thought; concept refers to generalized idea of a class of objects, based on knowledge of particular instances of the class; conception, often equivalent to concept, specifically refers to something conceived in the mind or imagined; thought refers to any ...
What is critical thinking and how can it be improved?
Although it's complicated and multi-faceted, critical thinking can be defined. As cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham writes, critical thinking can be divided into three areas: reasoning, making judgments, and problem-solving. Critical thinking means becoming skilled in all three areas. In layman's terms, it means thinking well.
Our Conception of Critical Thinking
A Definition. Critical thinking is that mode of thinking — about any subject, content, or problem — in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully analyzing, assessing, and reconstructing it. Critical thinking is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking.
What Are Critical Thinking Skills and Why Are They Important?
It makes you a well-rounded individual, one who has looked at all of their options and possible solutions before making a choice. According to the University of the People in California, having critical thinking skills is important because they are [ 1 ]: Universal. Crucial for the economy. Essential for improving language and presentation skills.
What is Critical Thinking?
Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. Paul and Scriven go on to suggest that ...
A Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms and Concepts: The Critical
This compendium of terms is testament to the fact that critical thinking entails a body of concepts and principles that, when internalized and practiced, enable people to raise their thinking to a higher level. Critical thinking concepts encompass a large network of interrelated ideas. Understanding one such idea often entails understanding ...
Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is the process of using evidence and logical reasoning to make informed decisions and arrive at considered judgments. The term has its origins in ancient Greek, and the most ...
Critical thinking
Critical thinking is a smart way of thinking. It means looking carefully at information or problems and deciding if they are good or not. One has to think in a clear and organized way. One also have to ask questions, think about different ideas, and make choices based on proof and good reasons. Thinking ahead and analyzing things for the future ...
WHAT IS THINKING CRITICALLY IN LAYMAN'S TERMS?
In layman's terms, critical thinking can be understood as active, persistent and careful consideration of beliefs and actions in light of evidence that either supports or refutes them. It relies ...
Definition
1. Introduction[1],[2] Definition, though often neglected, plays an important role in critical thinking by helping us make our positions, inquiries, and reasoning clear. Every definition has three dimensions: form, action, and content. The form of a definition is essentially the structure of the definition. An example of form is definition by ...
What Are Layman's Terms? A Guide to Plain English
The words "layman," "laywoman," and "layperson" were originally related to religion, referring to someone who belongs to a religious organization but who has no special training. For example: Both clergy and laypeople have an important role in the Catholic Church. More generally, though, these terms can now apply to any non ...
How to Explain Anything in Layperson's Terms
Test the explanation several times to ensure you're not missing anything. Ask others to test as well, including those who have zero interest in the topic. Lend weight to any concern test ...
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
The best way for me to explain this in layman's terms would be to break down each word in the name, starting with cognitive. According to Merriam-Webster, cognitive means, "of, relating to, being, or involving conscious intellectual activity (such as thinking, reasoning, or remembering) cognitive impairment".
Think Intellectually, Implement in Layman's Language
Benefits of Intellectual Thinking in Layman's Language. Thinking like an intellectual and implementing ideas in layman's language offers numerous benefits: Improved Problem-Solving ...
A Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms and Concepts, 2nd edition
The concept of critical thinking, comprehensively viewed, is a rich, variegated, and, to some extent, open-ended concept. There is no way to encompass it "completely" and inexhaustibly. There is no way to encompass it in a one-sentence "definition.". Nevertheless, at its base is a foundational set of meanings presupposed in all of its ...
Quora
We would like to show you a description here but the site won't allow us.
Layman's Terms: What's the Meaning and Origin?
According to Merriam-Webster, layman was likely first used back in the 15th century. It has roots in French and Late Latin and derives from the Greek word laikos, or "of the people.". The ...
Glossary: Guide to Critical Thinking Terms and Concepts
An objective judging, analysis, or evaluation of something. The purpose of critique is the same as the purpose of critical thinking: to appreciate strengths as well as weaknesses, virtues as well as failings. Critical thinkers critique in order to redesign, remodel, and make better. cultural association:
Layman's Terms
While the original layman's terms definition or layman's terms meaning relates to the clergy, its usage also extends to the fields of law and medicine until eventually applied to all fields as per its modern usage. The word layman comes from the Old English leah, which means a glade. When combined with mann, it (more or less) means a person ...
Why You Should Use "Layman's Terms"
When we say "speak to the layman" it means speak to those people who are not directly related to your area of expertise. Consider how to make your presentation so clear, understandable and ...
Communicating with patients in layman's terms
Speak slowly and clearly in terms they understand. Be polite and make an effort to understand the patient's concerns. Make the patient feel heard and understood, which can make the visits go much more smoothly. Be completely honest with patients, allowing a line of trust to be built and enabling a more effective provider-patient relationship.