How does it change critical thinking: new Microsoft research findings

With him now flows into business, a critical question appears: are we still thinking critically when he makes a heavy rise? This is not only academic – it affects the fulfillment of jobs and challenges if we are employed to do or to think.

Researchers from Carnegie Mellon and Microsoft Research University surveyed knowledge workers who regularly use tools, analyzing about 1,000 real -world examples. Their findings reveal how our patterns of thinking at work are already being transformed.

Researchers focused on two main areas:

• When and how do the knowledge workers use with critical thinking with the generating one?
• When and why do these professionals increase or reduce their critical thinking because of these tools?

When do we think critically with him?

The study revealed a trust relationship: The more you trust in the abilities, the less likely to think critically about its results. In contrast, professionals with higher self -esteem in their most critical engaged abilities with the content created by Him, despite what requires more effort.

This creates a possible trap. As the means of it improve and gain our trust, our natural tendency to examine their results decreases – exactly when maintaining critical supervision becomes more important.

Researchers identified motivating and specific obstacles that affect critical thinking with him. Knowledge workers were motivated to think critically when they wanted to improve the quality of work, avoid mistakes, or develop professional skills.

However, some obstacles prevented critical engagement: The barriers of awareness Not asking if he was competent for simple tasks, motivation barriers including lack of time or perception of critical thinking as out of their own work responsibilities, and Skill barriers due to the inability to verify the results of it or improve the answers.

Lev Tanklevitch, an old researcher in Microsoft Research and one of the authors of the paper commented that “Our survey based study suggests that when people see a task as low shares, they may not review the results as critically. Critical thinking in everyday scenarios, this could leave them unprepared for high -action situations where these skills become essential.

Is he making it easier for critical or more difficult?

For most cognitive activities (knowledge, understanding, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation), knowledge workers reported that the generating had reduced the effort.

Beyond just reducing efforts, the nature of critical thinking is changing in three basic ways:

1. From information collection to information verification: It excels in obtaining and organizing information, but professionals now need to invest more energy to ensure that the information is correct.
2. From solving problems in integrating the response: While it efficiently generates solutions, knowledge workers must adapt these results to specific contexts.
3. From the execution of duties to the administration of duties: Knowledge workers are being moved from performing tasks themselves to lead and oversee the conclusion of these tasks.

The next work design

These shifts in critical thinking models will deeply affect the future of work in several ways.

Firstly Organizational structures are likely to evolve to emphasize supervision roles. We will continue to see new positions specially concentrated in the rapid engineering of it, exit verification and quality control.

Secondly, Performance rating metrics will need recalibration. Traditional meters often measure the speed and quality of the execution of tasks, but in a cheerful job, the ability to run and evaluate the results can become more valuable than personal execution skills.

Third, Workplaces will need to address the issue of automation of routine cognitive tasks, which inadvertently erodes the possibilities of daily practice that develop critical thinking skills. Just as calculators changed the way we approach mental mathematics, tools can change fundamentally how we develop analysis and evaluation skills. This creates an irony of the problem of automation, where the greater the automation, the greater the need for supervision and yet the lack of experience to provide this supervision.

Prior thought organizations will develop intentional opportunities for critical thinking, including incorporating verification steps in the course of work to maintain critical engagement.

Irritating as it may be, the next interfaces of it can promote critical reflection rather than encourage the passive acceptance of the results. This can cause binding cognitive functions that require users to actively engage with the answers before they continue.

Future ability

The most valued skills in knowledge workers are evolving as a result. Domain expertise remains essential – you cannot effectively verify the results of it – but this expertise now pairs with new powers in the direction, evaluation and integration of it.

The transformation of critical thinking into the age of it does not signal the end of this essential ability, but rather its evolution. While knowledge work increasingly involves cooperation with artificial intelligence, our ability to supervise, verify and integrate integration will determine success in the workplace.

Tanklevitch adds “to all our research, there is a common thread: it works better as a thoughtful partner, completing the work people do. When it challenges us, it does not only increase productivity; it directs better decisions and stronger results.”

Those who flourish will not be the ones who embrace the most enthusiasm or refuse, but those who develop a balanced approach that uses the abilities of it while maintaining the critical thinking skills that remain unique human.