International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2022, Vol. 18(3) 205-225

University Students' Cognitive Bias in the Context of Their Analytical Thinking Skills: A Reliability and Validity Study

Emine Akkaş Baysal & Gürbüz Ocak

pp. 205 - 225   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2022.439.14   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2110-16-0003

Published online: June 01, 2022  |   Number of Views: 35  |  Number of Download: 124


Abstract

This study aimed to develop a reliable and valid scale to reveal the cognitive biases of university students in context of analytical thinking skills. During scale development process, firstly, a 5-point Likert type scale pre-trial form consisting of 60 items was created. The pre-trial form was applied to 450 students in Afyon Kocatepe University. Both exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used. According to analyzes, the scale consists of 5 sub-dimensions and 25 items. In the exploratory factor analysis, it was seen that the items had a factor load of .55 to .81. It was determined as 51.818% of the variance value determined for the whole scale. CFA result χ²=614; RMSEA=0.0540; SRMR=0.0540; CFI=0.885 and TLI=0.870 has reached acceptable compliance values with. Cronbach's alpha was calculated as 0.76. Approximately 30 days after developing the scale, test-retest reliability analysis was performed with 40 participants (r=0.869;p<.05). The findings show that a valid and reliable measurement tool has emerged. The scale was named as “The Scale of Cognitive Bias in the Context of Analytical Thinking Skills”.

Keywords: Analytical Thinking, Cognitive Bias, Scale, University


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Baysal, E.A. & Ocak, G. (2022). University Students' Cognitive Bias in the Context of Their Analytical Thinking Skills: A Reliability and Validity Study . International Journal of Progressive Education, 18(3), 205-225. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2022.439.14

Harvard
Baysal, E. and Ocak, G. (2022). University Students' Cognitive Bias in the Context of Their Analytical Thinking Skills: A Reliability and Validity Study . International Journal of Progressive Education, 18(3), pp. 205-225.

Chicago 16th edition
Baysal, Emine Akkas and Gurbuz Ocak (2022). "University Students' Cognitive Bias in the Context of Their Analytical Thinking Skills: A Reliability and Validity Study ". International Journal of Progressive Education 18 (3):205-225. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2022.439.14.

References
  1. Aczel, B., Bago, B., Szollosi, A., Foldes, A., & Lukacs, B. (2015). Measuring individual differences in decision biases: methodological considerations. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1170), 1-13. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01770 [Google Scholar]
  2. Akgül, A., & Çevik, O. (2003). İstatistiksel Analiz Teknikleri. Emek Ofset: Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ariely, D. (2009). The end of rational economics. Hardvard Business Review, 87(7), 78–84. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bazerman, M. H., & Moore, D. (2012). Judgment in managerial decision making (8th ed.). John Wiley & Sons Inc. [Google Scholar]
  5. Benson, B. (2016). Cognitive bias cheat sheet. better humans. https://betterhumans.coach.me/cognitive-bias-cheat-sheet-55a472476b18. [Google Scholar]
  6. Billing, D. (2007). Teaching for transfer of core/critical skills in higher education. Higher Education, 53, 483–516. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bilton, H. (2010). Outdoor learning in the early years: Management and innovation (3. Baskı). NY: Routledge.  [Google Scholar]
  8. Blanco, F. (2017). Positive and negative implications of the causal illusion. Consciousness and Cognition, 50, 56–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.08.012. [Google Scholar]
  9. Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2020). Decision-making competence: more than intelligence? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29, 186–192. DOI: 10.1177/0963721420901592. [Google Scholar]
  10. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (17. Baskı). Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  11. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çokluk-Bökeoğlu, Ö., & Köklü, N. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik (7.baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  12. Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modelling with LISREL, PRELIMS and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
  13. Caputo, A. (2013). A literature review of cognitive biases in negotiation processes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 24(4), 374-398. [Google Scholar]
  14. Castro, A. Hernández, Z., Riquelme, E., Ossa, C., Aedo, J., Da Costa, S., & Páez, D. (2019). Level of cognitive biases of representativeness and confirmation in psychology students of three bío-bío universities. Propósitos y Representaciones, 7(2), 210-239. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.20511/pyr2019.v7n2.245 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  15. Celuch, K., & Slama, M. (1999). Teaching critical thinking skills for the 21st century: An Advertising Principles Case Study. Journal of Education for Business, 74(3), 134-139. [Google Scholar]
  16. Cudeck, R., & O'Dell, L. L. (1994). Applications of standard error estimate in unrestricted factor analysis: Significance tests for factor loadings and correlations. Psychological Bulletin, 115(3), 475–487. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.115.3.475 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Cherry, K. (2018). How the availability heuristic affects your decision-making. https://www.verywellmind.com/availability-heuristic-2794824 [Google Scholar]
  18. Croskerry, P. (2003). Cognitive forcing strategies in clinical decision making. Ann emerg med, 41, 110–120. [Google Scholar]
  19. Çapık,  C.  (2014).  Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışmalarında Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizinin Kullanımı. Anadolu Hemşirelik ve Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 17(3), 196-205.  [Google Scholar]
  20. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. PegemA Yayıncılık: Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  21. Dror, I. E., McCormack, B. M., & Epstein, J. (2015). Cognitive bias and its impact on expert witnesses and the court. The Judges' Journal, 54(4), 8-15. [Google Scholar]
  22. Duncan Pierce (n.d.). Nevertheless, that's crazy! Cognitive biases in decision making.  Duncanpierce.org. http://duncanpierce.org/cognitive_bias_workshop  [Google Scholar]
  23. Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Millbrae CA: The California Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  24. Facione, P. A. (2009). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. http://www.insightassessment.com/9articles%20WW.html [Google Scholar]
  25. Gazel, S. (2014). Davranışsal Finans (Psikolojik Eşik ve Önyargılar). Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gorsuch, R. L. (1997). Exploratory factor analysis: Its role in item analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68(3), 532-560. [Google Scholar]
  27. Gorsuch, R. L. (2008). On the limits of scientific investigation: Miracles and intercessory prayer. In J. Harold Ellens (ed), Miracles: God, Science, and Psychology in the Paranormal, Vol. 1 (pp. 280-299), Greenwood-Praeger Publishers of Westport, CT.  [Google Scholar]
  28. Gürbüz, S., & Şahin, F. (2014). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri, felsefe-yöntem-analiz. Seçkin Yayınları, Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  29. Halvorson, H. G., & Rock, D. (2015). Beyond Bias. Strategy + Business (PWC), 80, 1-10. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hamilton, D. L., & Gifford, R. K. (1976). Illusory correlation in interpersonal perception: A cognitive basis of stereotypic judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 392-407. [Google Scholar]
  31. Helsdingen, A. S., Van Gog, T., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2010). The effects of practice schedule on learning a complex judgment task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 1-33. DOI: 10.1037/a0022370 [Google Scholar]
  32. Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 393-416. [Google Scholar]
  33. Hogarty, K. Y., Hines, C.V., Kromrey, J. D., Ferron, J. M., & Mumford, K. R. (2005). The quality of factor solutions in exploratory factor analysis: The influence of sample size, communality, and overdetermination. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 202-222. [Google Scholar]
  34. Heuer, R. J. (2007). Psychology of intelligence analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Central Intelligence Agency. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/critical-thinking?s=t). [Google Scholar]
  35. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 3, 424-453.  [Google Scholar]
  36. Joint Commission (2016). Cognitive biases in health care. Quick Safety, Issue 28, October. https://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/23/Quick_Safety_Issue_28_Oct_2016.pdf   [Google Scholar]
  37. Kalaycı, Ş. (2008). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.  [Google Scholar]
  38. Klebba,  J.  M., & Hamilton,  J. (2007).  Structured case analysis: developing critical thinking skills in a marketing case course. Journal of Marketing Education, 29(2), 132-139. [Google Scholar]
  39. Kliegr, T., Bahník, S., & Fürnkranz, J. (2018). A review of possible effects of cognitive biases on interpretation of rule-based machine learning models. https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.02969v3  [Google Scholar]
  40. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  41. Kruglanski, A. W., & Ajzen, I. (1983). Bias and error in human judgement. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 1-44.  [Google Scholar]
  42. Larrick, R. P. (2004). Debiasing. In D. J. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making. (pp. 316–337). Malden, MA and Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell.  [Google Scholar]
  43. MacCallum, R. C., & Tucker, L. R. (1991). Representing sources of error in the common-factor model: Implications for theory and practice. Psychological Bulletin, 109(3), 502. [Google Scholar]
  44. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECD’s Brief Self-Report Measure of Educational Psychology’s Most Useful Affective Constructs: Cross-Cultural, Psychometric Comparisons across 25 Countries. International Journal of Testing, 6(4), 311-360. [Google Scholar]
  45. McCann, D. (2014, May 22). 10 cognitive biases that can trip up finance.  CFO. http://ww2.cfo.com/forecasting/2014/05/10-cognitive-biases-can-trip-finance/  [Google Scholar]
  46. Niu, L., Behar-Horenstein, L. S., & Garvan, C. W. (2013). Do instructional interventions influence college students' critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9(0),114-128 [Google Scholar]
  47. Özdamar, K. (2004). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi 2. Eskişehir: Kaan.  [Google Scholar]
  48. Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2005). Decision-making competence: external validation through an individual-differences approach. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 1–27. DOI: 10.1002/bdm.481 [Google Scholar]
  49. Paul, R. W. (1990). Critical thinking: What, why and how. In A. J. Binker (Ed.), Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world (pp. 45-56). Rohnert Park CA: Sonoma State University. [Google Scholar]
  50. Paul, R. W. (2005). The State of critical thinking today. New directions for community colleges, 130, 27-38. [Google Scholar]
  51. Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. (eds.) (2012). Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. National Academies Press, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  52. Peters, E. R., Moritz, S., Schwannauer, M., Wiseman, Z., Greenwood, K. E., Scott, J., Beck, A. T., Donaldson, C., Hagen, R., Ross, K., Veckenstedt, R., Ison, R., Williams, S., Kuipers, E., & Garety, P. A. (2013). Cognitive Biases Questionnaire for Psychosis. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 40(2), 300-313. [Google Scholar]
  53. Sklad, M., & Diekstra, R. F. W. (2014). The Development of the Heuristics and Biases Scale (HBS). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112(7), 710-718. [Google Scholar]
  54. Schmutte, J., & Duncan, J. R. (2014). Making independent decisions under the code of professional conduct: understanding and controlling common cognitive biases. The CPA Journal, 10(2), 155-163. [Google Scholar]
  55. Smith, G. F. (2003). Beyond critical thinking and decision making: Teaching business students how to think. Journal of Management Education, 27, 24-51. [Google Scholar]
  56. Smith, J. (2015) Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. Evidence-Based. Nursing, 18(2), 34-35. [Google Scholar]
  57. Stanovich, K. E. (2011). Rationality and the reflective mind. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  58. Tabachnıck, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. MA: Allyn & Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  59. Tavşancıl, E. (2019). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi (3. Baskı). Ankara, Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. [Google Scholar]
  60. Teovanović, P., KneŽević, G., & Stankov, L. (2015). Individual differences in cognitive biases: evidence against one-factor theory of rationality. Intelligence 50, 75–86. DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2015.02.008 [Google Scholar]
  61. Tezbaşaran, A. (1997). Likert tipi ölçek geliştirme kılavuzu. Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları, Ankara.  [Google Scholar]
  62. Tezci, E. (2016). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme (1.Baskı). Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  63. Thompson, D. (2013). The irrational consumer: Why economics is dead wrong about how we make choices. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/01/the-irrational-consumer-why-economics-is-dead-wrong-about-how-we-make-choices/267255/  [Google Scholar]
  64. Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011). The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics and biases tasks. Memory & Cognition, 39, 1275–1289. DOI: 10.3758/s13421-011-0104-1 [Google Scholar]
  65. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458. DOI: 10.1126/science.7455683 [Google Scholar]
  66. Wilke, A., & Mata, R. (2012). Cognitive Bias. In: V.S. Ramachandran (ed.) The Encyclopedia of human behavior, 1, 531-535. Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  67. Worthington, R., & Whittaker, T. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. Counseling Psychologist, 34, 806-838. doi:10.1177/0011000006288127   [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  68. Yaşlıoğlu, M. M. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde faktör analizi ve geçerlilik: Keşfedici ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizlerinin kullanılması. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 46(Özel Sayı), 74-85. [Google Scholar]
  69. Zur, O. (1991). The love of hating: The psychology of enmity. History of European Ideas, 13(4), 345-369. [Google Scholar]