Critical Thinking

A researcher has the same critical thinking abilities as a non-researcher.   Before a researcher can begin, they must choose a topic to study. Once the area of interest has been chosen, the researchers begin to conduct a thorough review of the existing literature on the subject. This review provides valuable info about what has already been learned about the topic and what questions remain to be answered.   The researcher will commonly follow the scientific method.   It allows them to study nature based on systematic observation and rules of evidence.   It allows them to think more critically.

    Non researchers think, feel and sense in the same way as a researcher can but they use different methods.   Instead of following the scientific method, they are more likely to address the issue using their own instinct, intuition, personal experiences and knowledge.   They can analyze just as well as a researcher.   Non researchers tend to vibe off of and apply hearsay. Their studies are usually biased and unethical.   They do not do the extensive research of a psychologist and they use studies that do not explain the cause and effect.   Non researchers tend to jump to a conclusion about someone or something while researchers will analyze before jumping to their own conclusions.

In the end, both study and reach comparable conclusions.   The only difference is the method being applied to reach these.   You can have a different experience when discussing issues with both types of researchers.   Although the end result might be similar, the steps taken and the questions asked as well as the thought process of the two will vary.   I personally would prefer the scientific method, if I were to discuss personal issues with a psychologist.   I would see the researcher before the non researcher.   I am not ruling out the non researchers, it’s just that personally; I would like to see more analytical responses and questions.   It gives a clearer sense. [continues]

Read full essay