View in EDS

Can ChatGPT outperform college students in critical thinking skills during argumentation activities? A case study.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Can ChatGPT outperform college students in critical thinking skills during argumentation activities? A case study.
Authors: Chen, Xinya1 (AUTHOR), Liu, Jingge1 (AUTHOR), Liu, Yi'ao1 (AUTHOR), Xiang, Haibing1 (AUTHOR), Guo, Xiaoding2 (AUTHOR), Cai, Xiaobo3 (AUTHOR), Wang, Xiaowei1,3 (AUTHOR) wxw910928@sina.com
Source: Thinking Skills & Creativity. Sep2026, Vol. 61, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Subject Terms: *Critical thinking, *College students, *Discourse, *Collaborative learning, *Educational technology, Argument, ChatGPT, Generative pre-trained transformers
Abstract: • Colleges students' critical thinking skills was compared with ChatGPT in the debate. • ChatGPT provided more information at the beginning of the debate. • Students showed higher level of critical thinking skills as the debate progressed. • ChatGPT showed more evaluation and rebuttals under the guidance of instructions. • Students generated a marginally greater number of new ideas than ChatGPT. Although ChatGPT has emerged as a promising educational tool that offers suitable scaffolding, its abilities regarding critical thinking skills remain unclear. Given that argumentation activities can cultivate critical thinking skills, this study compared the critical thinking skills of ChatGPT (GPT-4) with those of college students engaged in debates on specific topics. Students assigned to debate teams (pro and con) performed argumentation using the collaborative online platform "ShiMo"; ChatGPT was also tasked with generating a debate scenario, including both pro and con sides. Content analysis was used to evaluate the critical thinking skills of ChatGPT and the students. The findings indicated that ChatGPT outperformed college students in recognition, evaluation, and analysis during the early stage of debate, when a substantial amount of information was required. However, as the debate progressed, college students demonstrated higher levels of critical thinking skills, as reflected in their recognition, understanding, and analysis. Moreover, they generated slightly more new knowledge, perspectives, and strategies. By contrast, ChatGPT more extensively evaluated opposing viewpoints under instructional guidance throughout the process. These findings have several implications for research. ChatGPT can provide sufficient information for critical use, offer customized evaluations when given specific instructions, and generate new ideas by enhancing its affective elements. Meanwhile, both teachers and students should receive training to use ChatGPT effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Thinking Skills & Creativity is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: ehh
DbLabel: Education Research Complete
An: 194423868
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Can ChatGPT outperform college students in critical thinking skills during argumentation activities? A case study.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chen%2C+Xinya%22">Chen, Xinya</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Liu%2C+Jingge%22">Liu, Jingge</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Liu%2C+Yi'ao%22">Liu, Yi'ao</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Xiang%2C+Haibing%22">Xiang, Haibing</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Guo%2C+Xiaoding%22">Guo, Xiaoding</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cai%2C+Xiaobo%22">Cai, Xiaobo</searchLink><relatesTo>3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wang%2C+Xiaowei%22">Wang, Xiaowei</searchLink><relatesTo>1,3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> wxw910928@sina.com</i>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Thinking+Skills+%26+Creativity%22">Thinking Skills & Creativity</searchLink>. Sep2026, Vol. 61, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subject Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Critical+thinking%22">Critical thinking</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+students%22">College students</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Discourse%22">Discourse</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Collaborative+learning%22">Collaborative learning</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+technology%22">Educational technology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Argument%22">Argument</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22ChatGPT%22">ChatGPT</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Generative+pre-trained+transformers%22">Generative pre-trained transformers</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: • Colleges students' critical thinking skills was compared with ChatGPT in the debate. • ChatGPT provided more information at the beginning of the debate. • Students showed higher level of critical thinking skills as the debate progressed. • ChatGPT showed more evaluation and rebuttals under the guidance of instructions. • Students generated a marginally greater number of new ideas than ChatGPT. Although ChatGPT has emerged as a promising educational tool that offers suitable scaffolding, its abilities regarding critical thinking skills remain unclear. Given that argumentation activities can cultivate critical thinking skills, this study compared the critical thinking skills of ChatGPT (GPT-4) with those of college students engaged in debates on specific topics. Students assigned to debate teams (pro and con) performed argumentation using the collaborative online platform "ShiMo"; ChatGPT was also tasked with generating a debate scenario, including both pro and con sides. Content analysis was used to evaluate the critical thinking skills of ChatGPT and the students. The findings indicated that ChatGPT outperformed college students in recognition, evaluation, and analysis during the early stage of debate, when a substantial amount of information was required. However, as the debate progressed, college students demonstrated higher levels of critical thinking skills, as reflected in their recognition, understanding, and analysis. Moreover, they generated slightly more new knowledge, perspectives, and strategies. By contrast, ChatGPT more extensively evaluated opposing viewpoints under instructional guidance throughout the process. These findings have several implications for research. ChatGPT can provide sufficient information for critical use, offer customized evaluations when given specific instructions, and generate new ideas by enhancing its affective elements. Meanwhile, both teachers and students should receive training to use ChatGPT effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Thinking Skills & Creativity is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=194423868
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1016/j.tsc.2026.102166
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 1
        StartPage: N.PAG
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Critical thinking
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Discourse
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Collaborative learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational technology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Argument
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: ChatGPT
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Generative pre-trained transformers
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Can ChatGPT outperform college students in critical thinking skills during argumentation activities? A case study.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chen, Xinya
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Liu, Jingge
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Liu, Yi'ao
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Xiang, Haibing
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Guo, Xiaoding
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cai, Xiaobo
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wang, Xiaowei
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Text: Sep2026
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 18711871
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 61
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Thinking Skills & Creativity
              Type: main
ResultId 1