The 6 Core Critical Thinking Skills Explained: Facione's 1990 Framework

Table of Contents

1. Where the 6 elements come from
2. Element 1 — Interpretation
3. Element 2 — Analysis
4. Element 3 — Evaluation
5. Element 4 — Inference
6. Element 5 — Explanation
7. Element 6 — Self-Regulation
8. How the 6 elements work together
9. Benefits of developing all 6
10. How to practise each one
11. Frequently asked questions
12. Full references

Most people have heard the term "critical thinking." It shows up in job descriptions, university syllabuses, parenting books, and self-help podcasts. Yet if you asked ten people to explain exactly what it means — really explain it, down to the specific skills involved — most would struggle.

That is not their fault. Critical thinking is often taught as a vague idea: "think more carefully," "question things," "don't accept everything at face value." Useful advice, sure. But vague advice does not turn into real skill. Skill comes from understanding the specific, concrete components that make something up.

Fortunately, the hard work of identifying those components was done decades ago. In 1990, the American Philosophical Association (APA) brought together a panel of 46 experts — philosophers, psychologists, educators, and researchers — in a two-year collaborative process known as the Delphi Project. Their goal was simple and ambitious: reach a consensus on exactly what critical thinking is, and precisely which mental skills it requires.

The result was the landmark Delphi Report, authored by Dr. Peter A. Facione (California Academic Press, 1990). It identified six core cognitive skills that sit at the very heart of critical thinking. These are not theories — they are the result of expert consensus, and they have been validated, cited, and built upon by researchers in education, psychology, and cognitive science for more than three decades.

In this guide, you will get a complete, plain-language breakdown of all six elements — what they mean, why they matter, how they look in everyday life, and how you can start developing each one today.

Background Where the 6 Elements Come From

The six core elements did not emerge from one person's opinion. They came out of a rigorous, multi-year Delphi consensus process — a research methodology where experts are surveyed repeatedly until strong agreement is reached across the group.

The APA panel's conclusion — now known as the "Delphi Report" — defined critical thinking as:

Official APA Definition (Facione, 1990 — The Delphi Report)

"Purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based."

Buried inside that definition are the six skills themselves. The panel found near-unanimous agreement (above 95%) that analysis, evaluation, and inference are the three most central skills. Interpretation, explanation, and self-regulation rounded out the six-part framework that has since become the global standard for understanding critical thinking (Facione, 1990; PMC, 2025).

It is worth noting: today there is broad acceptance that critical thinking is an acquired, teachable capacity rather than an innate ability — a point made explicitly by both Facione (1990) and Halpern (2014), and reaffirmed by the OECD in its Learning Compass 2030 framework. You are not born with these skills. You build them.

1Interpretation → 2Analysis → 3Evaluation → 4Inference → 5Explanation → 6Self-Regulation Element 01 of 06 Interpretation — Making Sense of What You Encounter Core Skill · Element 1 Interpretation "To comprehend and express the meaning or significance of a wide variety of experiences, situations, data, events, judgments, conventions, beliefs, rules, procedures, or criteria." — Facione, 1990, Delphi Report

Interpretation is the starting point of all critical thinking. Before you can analyse, evaluate, or draw conclusions from anything, you first need to correctly understand what it is actually saying. Sounds obvious — and yet this is where a remarkable amount of thinking goes wrong.

Misinterpretation happens constantly. We read a headline and misunderstand the study it describes. We hear a comment and take it out of context. We encounter data and fail to understand what it actually measures. Interpretation is the skill that guards against all of this.

According to the Delphi Report, interpretation involves three sub-skills: categorisation (placing what you encounter into the right type or class), decoding significance (understanding what something actually means and why it matters), and clarifying meaning (making sure you have understood a claim precisely before accepting or rejecting it).

Categorisation Decoding significance Clarifying meaning Everyday example You see a news headline: "Coffee linked to cancer risk." Before reacting, a good interpreter asks: what does "linked" actually mean here? Is this causation or correlation? What kind of cancer? What dose? How large was the study? Only after clarifying these things do you really know what the headline is saying.

Research confirms that poor interpretation is one of the primary drivers of misinformation spread — people share content they have not actually understood. Developing this skill first creates a more solid foundation for everything else that follows (OECD Learning Compass, 2019).

Element 02 of 06 Analysis — Breaking Ideas into Their Parts Core Skill · Element 2 Analysis "To identify the intended and actual inferential relationships among statements, questions, concepts, descriptions, or other forms of representation intended to express belief, judgment, experiences, reasons, information, or opinions." — Facione, 1990

If interpretation is about understanding what something says, analysis is about understanding how it holds together. You take an argument, a piece of writing, a claim, a proposal — and you pull it apart to see what supports what, what follows from what, and where the reasoning is sound or shaky.

Analysis means you are no longer passively receiving information. You become an active investigator. You are looking at the structure of an argument — identifying the premises, spotting hidden assumptions, tracing logical chains, and noticing where the reasoning breaks down.

The Delphi Report identifies three analytical sub-skills: examining ideas (breaking down complex concepts), detecting arguments (identifying what is actually being argued), and analysing arguments (mapping out the reasoning structure to expose strengths and weaknesses).

Examining ideas Detecting arguments Analysing arguments Everyday example A salesperson tells you: "Everyone is switching to this product — you should too." An analytical thinker immediately spots this as an appeal to popularity (a logical fallacy), identifies the hidden assumption that widespread adoption equals quality, and asks for actual evidence of the product's performance before deciding.

The Decision Lab (2025) notes that analysis is foundational to effective problem-solving in business: organisations that embed analytical thinking see fewer costly errors, more efficient decision-making, and more innovative solutions. At an individual level, it is what separates people who get fooled by bad reasoning from those who do not.

Element 03 of 06 Evaluation — Judging the Quality of Evidence and Arguments Core Skill · Element 3 Evaluation "To assess the credibility of statements or other representations which are accounts or descriptions of a person's perception, experience, situation, judgment, belief, or opinion; and to assess the logical strength of the actual or intended inferential relationships among statements." — Facione, 1990

Evaluation takes the work of analysis a step further: it asks not just what the argument is, but how good it is. It is the process of judging credibility, quality, and logical strength — deciding how much weight to give any particular piece of evidence or reasoning.

This is where you ask: Is this source trustworthy? Does this conclusion logically follow from the evidence? Is this study well designed? Is this expert speaking within their area of expertise? Not all claims deserve equal weight, and evaluation is the skill that allows you to proportion your belief to the quality of the evidence.

According to Cogn-IQ (2025), evaluation includes applying Paul and Elder's intellectual standards: clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance, and fairness — using these as criteria to judge whether reasoning is truly rigorous or merely superficially convincing.

Assessing credibility Judging logical strength Weighing evidence Everyday example A friend sends you an article claiming a new supplement cures anxiety, citing "10 years of research." An evaluative thinker asks: who funded the study? Was it peer-reviewed? How many participants? What was the control group? A dramatic claim with weak methodology earns weak belief — no matter how confident the headline sounds.

The APA Delphi panel found evaluation to be one of the three most central skills (Facione, 1990). Research by Facione and Facione (2001) shows that people with stronger evaluation skills engage less in cognitive bias and heuristic thinking — they are less likely to be fooled by misleading framing and more likely to spot manipulation before acting on it.

Element 04 of 06 Inference — Drawing the Right Conclusions Core Skill · Element 4 Inference "To identify and secure elements needed to draw reasonable conclusions; to form conjectures and hypotheses; to consider relevant information and to educe the consequences flowing from data, statements, principles, evidence, judgments, beliefs, opinions, concepts, descriptions, questions, or other forms of representation." — Facione, 1990

Once you have interpreted information, analysed its structure, and evaluated its quality, you need to actually conclude something from it. Inference is the skill of drawing reasonable conclusions — the bridge between evidence and decision, between data and action.

Good inference means your conclusions are proportionate to the evidence. You do not leap to certainty when the evidence only supports probability. You do not ignore inconvenient data. You consider alternative explanations. And critically, you are honest about the limits of what the evidence allows you to conclude.

The Delphi Report identifies three inference sub-skills: querying evidence (testing the reliability of what you have), conjecturing alternatives (generating and considering different possible conclusions), and drawing conclusions (arriving at the most reasonable position supported by the evidence).

Querying evidence Conjecturing alternatives Drawing conclusions Everyday example Your colleague has been short with you for two days. An uncritical thinker concludes: "They're angry with me." A skilled inferrer considers alternatives: they might be stressed about something unrelated, going through something personal, or simply unwell. The evidence — brief responses — does not rule out multiple explanations. Jumping to one conclusion creates unnecessary conflict.

The Decision Lab (2025) describes inference as the natural successor to evaluation in the critical thinking sequence. Making sound inferences protects against over-confidence and premature conclusions — two of the most common and costly errors in both personal and professional decision-making.

Element 05 of 06 Explanation — Communicating Your Reasoning Clearly Core Skill · Element 5 Explanation "To state and to justify that reasoning in terms of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, and contextual considerations upon which one's results were based; and to present one's reasoning in the form of cogent arguments." — Facione, 1990

Critical thinking is not just an internal process. At some point, you need to communicate your reasoning to someone else — and explanation is the skill that allows you to do that clearly, accurately, and persuasively. It is the ability to present the results of your thinking in a way that others can follow, test, and engage with.

Explanation matters because thinking that cannot be communicated is thinking that cannot be checked. When you articulate your reasoning, you expose it — and that exposure is valuable, because it allows others (and yourself) to identify weaknesses you might have missed internally.

The Delphi Report identifies two key explanation sub-skills: describing methods (being clear about how you reached your conclusion and why you used the approach you did) and justifying procedures (being able to defend the reasoning process itself, not just the conclusion).

Describing results Justifying procedures Presenting arguments Everyday example You decide not to accept a job offer that seems attractive on paper. Explanation means being able to say why — not just "it didn't feel right," but: "The salary is good, but the role lacks long-term growth, the company culture showed red flags in the interview, and my research suggests the industry is contracting. Here's how I weighed those factors." That reasoning can be examined, challenged, and refined.

Research from GWU's Office of Student Life (2020) confirms that explanation is a critical skill across healthcare, business, law, and education: professionals who can clearly articulate their reasoning earn more trust, make fewer unexamined errors, and are significantly more effective in collaborative environments.

"A good explanation is not just communication — it is a quality check on your own thinking."

— Adapted from Facione, P.A., "Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts," Insight Assessment, 2015 Element 06 of 06 Self-Regulation — Thinking About Your Own Thinking Core Skill · Element 6 Self-Regulation "Self-consciously to monitor one's cognitive activities, the elements used in those activities, and the results educed, particularly by applying skills in analysis, and evaluation to one's own inferential judgments with a view toward questioning, confirming, validating, or correcting either one's reasoning or one's results." — Facione, 1990

Self-regulation is the most powerful and most recursive of the six elements. Facione describes it as being "like a recursive function in mathematics" — because it can be applied to anything, including itself. You can self-regulate an interpretation, an inference, or even your self-regulation process itself.

In plain terms, self-regulation means stepping back and asking: how am I doing? Have I missed something? Am I being objective, or am I letting my preferences distort my reasoning? It is the metacognitive layer — thinking about thinking — that turns good ideas into reliable, self-correcting mental habits.

The two sub-skills of self-regulation are self-examination (honestly assessing your own reasoning process: have I been thorough? unbiased? logical?) and self-correction (actually revising your conclusions when your examination reveals a problem — not defensively defending them).

Self-examination Self-correction Metacognitive monitoring Everyday example After making a strong argument in a meeting, a colleague offers a counter-point you had not considered. Self-regulation is the skill that lets you genuinely consider whether they are right, update your position if they are, and do this without feeling personally threatened — because you understand that correcting your reasoning is a sign of strength, not weakness.

Research in PMC (Dwyer, 2023) describes self-regulation as an "important aspect of both reflective judgment and critical thinking." Studies show that emotional intelligence and self-regulation are positively associated — people who monitor their own reasoning also tend to manage their emotional responses better, leading to calmer, more effective decision-making under pressure (PMC, 2023).

Why self-regulation is the master skill

Without self-regulation, the other five elements can be applied selectively and dishonestly. You can interpret, analyse, evaluate, infer, and explain — but only in service of conclusions you already wanted to reach. Self-regulation is what keeps the whole system honest. It is what turns critical thinking from a tool of persuasion into a genuine pursuit of truth.

Integration How the 6 Elements Work Together

It would be a mistake to think of the six elements as six separate, independent skills. They are deeply interconnected, and the most effective critical thinkers move fluidly between them — sometimes cycling back, sometimes running several in parallel.

Consider a real-world example: you are deciding whether to invest in a business opportunity a friend has pitched to you.

A single decision, all 6 elements in action

Interpretation: You read the pitch deck carefully, making sure you understand what the business actually does, what the revenue model is, and what "projected returns" actually means in concrete terms.

Analysis: You examine the structure of the pitch — what assumptions underpin the revenue projections? What claims are being made about the market size? Is the competitive analysis complete or selective?

Evaluation: You assess the quality of the evidence offered. Are the market statistics from reliable sources? Has the team executed on similar projects before? Are the financial projections realistic or optimistic?

Inference: Based on your analysis and evaluation, you draw a conclusion: the opportunity has genuine merit in one area, but a critical risk in another. You form a conditional hypothesis: it could work, under specific conditions.

Explanation: You sit down with your friend and articulate your concerns clearly — not just "I'm not sure," but: "Here are the three specific assumptions I'm not confident in, and here's the evidence that makes me cautious."

Self-regulation: You notice you are tempted to invest because of your friendship and your fear of missing out. You consciously apply your evaluation skills to your own reasoning — asking whether your optimism is evidence-based or emotionally driven.

This is critical thinking as a complete process — not as a checklist, but as a fluid, integrated set of mental habits working together toward a clear-eyed, honest conclusion.

46

The number of international experts — philosophers, psychologists, and educators — who reached consensus on the 6 core elements in the APA Delphi Report (Facione, 1990), making it one of the most authoritative frameworks in cognitive education.

Benefits Benefits of Developing All 6 Core Elements

Research on the benefits of critical thinking spans decades and crosses disciplines — from education to medicine, business to public policy. When you develop all six elements into genuine habits of mind, the effects are wide-ranging and significant.

🎯 Sharper decision-making

Critical thinkers weigh evidence more carefully and are less susceptible to cognitive bias — leading to consistently better decisions in work and life. (Facione & Facione, 2001)

🛡️ Resistance to manipulation

All six elements equip you to spot misleading framing, propaganda, emotional manipulation, and misinformation before they influence your behaviour.

🧩 Stronger problem-solving

Skilled critical thinkers identify root causes rather than symptoms, generate creative alternatives, and evaluate solutions more systematically. (GWU, 2020)

🎓 Academic performance

A study of over 1,100 college students found that critical thinking scores significantly correlated with GPA — confirming that these skills directly improve learning. (Facione, 1998)

💼 Career advancement

The World Economic Forum's Future of Jobs Report lists critical thinking as a top skill for the workforce. Employers rank it above innovation and digital literacy. (WEF, 2016)

🤝 Better relationships

Research confirms that critical thinking — especially evaluation and self-regulation — reduces interpersonal conflict and improves empathy and communication. (OECD, 2019)

💡 Enhanced creativity

Critical thinking and creative thinking are synergistic. Research with students showed that combining both significantly strengthened the ability to understand complex problems. (Alghafri, 2014)

🏥 Better health decisions

In healthcare, critical thinking is essential for evaluating medical claims, understanding treatment options, and resisting misinformation — all skills rooted in the six core elements. (GWU, 2020)

🧠 Metacognitive growth

Developing self-regulation — the sixth element — builds true self-awareness: understanding your own biases, errors, and blind spots, and correcting them before they cause harm. (PMC, 2023)

🌱 Lifelong independence

Citizens with developed critical thinking skills are more self-sufficient, less dependent on external authorities for guidance, and better equipped for the complexities of modern life. (Facione, 1998)

Practical Guide How to Practise Each of the 6 Elements

Understanding the six elements theoretically is valuable. But what actually builds the skill is repeated, deliberate practice. Here is a practical starter for each element.

Practising Interpretation

The next time you read a news article, stop after the headline and ask: do I actually know what this says, or am I making assumptions? Read the full piece before forming a view. Look up the original study if one is cited. Make it a habit to say, "Let me make sure I understand this correctly before I react."

Practising Analysis

Take any argument you encounter — a political speech, an advertisement, a colleague's proposal — and write out: what is the core claim? What premises support it? What assumptions are hidden? Are there any logical fallacies present? Even spending two minutes doing this on a single piece of content per day builds significant analytical skill over time.

Practising Evaluation

Build a source-quality habit. When you read something, ask: what is this source? What are their credentials and possible biases? Has this been peer-reviewed or independently verified? Rate the quality of the evidence on a simple 1–5 scale. This active evaluation practice prevents passive acceptance of unverified claims.

Practising Inference

When you reach a conclusion, deliberately ask: what are two or three other conclusions this evidence could support? Are there alternative explanations I have not considered? Am I jumping too far? The habit of generating alternative inferences before committing to one dramatically reduces over-confidence in your conclusions.

Practising Explanation

Write out your reasoning. Not conclusions — reasoning. "I believe X because Y, and Y is supported by Z. I considered alternative W, but ruled it out because of Q." Writing forces clarity. If you cannot write the reasoning chain clearly, there is a gap somewhere. Writing is the most powerful explanation practice available to a beginner.

Practising Self-Regulation

At the end of each important decision or argument, spend three minutes asking yourself: was I motivated by evidence, or by what I wanted to be true? Did I dismiss any counter-evidence too quickly? If I were advising a friend in this situation, what would I tell them? This reflective habit is the beginning of genuine metacognitive practice.

The honest truth about developing these skills

You will not master all six elements at once. Research confirms that critical thinking develops incrementally and unevenly — most people have natural strengths in some elements and genuine weaknesses in others. The goal is not perfection; it is a consistent, honest effort to think a little more carefully than you did yesterday. That compound effort, applied over months and years, produces genuinely transformative results.

FAQ Frequently Asked Questions What are the 6 core elements of critical thinking? The 6 core elements, identified by the APA Delphi Report (Facione, 1990), are: Interpretation, Analysis, Evaluation, Inference, Explanation, and Self-Regulation. Each one represents a specific cognitive skill that contributes to high-quality reasoning and sound decision-making. Who identified the 6 elements of critical thinking? A panel of 46 international experts — philosophers, psychologists, and educators — convened by the American Philosophical Association (APA) identified the 6 core skills through a two-year Delphi consensus process, led by Dr. Peter A. Facione (California Academic Press, 1990). The report is considered the gold standard framework in critical thinking research. Can critical thinking be learned by anyone? Yes. The APA Delphi Report explicitly states that critical thinking is an acquired, teachable skill. This is reaffirmed by Halpern (2014), the OECD (2019), and numerous subsequent studies. It is not an innate talent tied to IQ — it is a set of cognitive habits that develop through deliberate practice. Which is the most important of the 6 elements? The APA Delphi panel found analysis, evaluation, and inference to have the highest consensus (above 95%) as the most central skills. However, self-regulation is arguably the most important in practice, because it governs the quality of all the others — without it, the other five skills can be applied selectively and dishonestly. How long does it take to develop these skills? Research does not specify a fixed timeline, as development is highly individual and context-dependent. However, studies on deliberate practice in cognitive skills suggest that consistent, daily practice over several months produces measurable improvement. The OECD recommends embedding critical thinking practice in all subjects and daily activities for the best results. Is critical thinking the same as being sceptical? No. Critical thinking is not blanket scepticism. It means proportioning belief to evidence — strongly accepting things with strong evidence, being uncertain about things with weak evidence. A critical thinker is open-minded and willing to be convinced by good arguments, which is the opposite of reflexive scepticism. Full References

• [1] Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction (The Delphi Report). California Academic Press. ERIC Document ED315423. qcc.cuny.edu
• [2] Facione, P. A. (1998, 2015 update). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts. Insight Assessment / Measured Reasons LLC. insightassessment.com
• [3] Facione, P. A., & Facione, N. (2001). Analyzing explanations for seemingly irrational choices: Linking argument analysis and clinical reasoning. Journal of General Education. (As cited in OECD, 2019.)
• [4] OECD. (2019). Critical Thinking — OECD Learning Compass 2030 Construct. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. oecd.org
• [5] Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking (5th ed.). Psychology Press.
• [6] World Economic Forum. (2016). The Future of Jobs Report. WEF. weforum.org
• [7] Dwyer, C. P. (2023). The Nature and Measure of Critical Thinking: The PACIER Framework and Assessment. PMC / National Library of Medicine. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
• [8] Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2023). An evaluative review of barriers to critical thinking in educational and real-world settings. PMC. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
• [9] Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2019). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools (8th ed.). Foundation for Critical Thinking.
• [10] Cogn-IQ. (2025). Critical Thinking in Psychometrics — Definition & Examples. cogn-iq.org
• [11] The Decision Lab. (2025). Critical Thinking Skills. thedecisionlab.com
• [12] GWU Office of Student Life & Academic Support. (2020). Critical Thinking Skills. George Washington University. oss.smhs.gwu.edu
• [13] Alghafri, A. S. R. (2014). Research on creativity and critical thinking in elementary students. (As cited in OECD, 2019.)
• [14] Reynolds, M. (2011). Reflective practice: Origins and interpretations. Action Learning: Research and Practice. (As cited in Wikipedia: Critical Thinking, 2025.)
• [15] Dewey, J. (1909). How We Think. D.C. Heath Publishing. Republished 1933, Lexington, MA.

Start applying the 6 elements today

Every one of these skills can be practised right now — no special equipment, no course required. Pick one element and bring it intentionally to one decision or piece of information you encounter today.

Interpretation Analysis Evaluation Inference Explanation Self-Regulation

The Delphi Report wasn't a list of things you learn in school. It was a map of how excellent thinkers have always operated — and it is available to anyone willing to practise.