Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal® II (Revised)
The Watson-Glaser series is the gold standard for measuring critical thinking ability and decision making in high-potential professionals, new managers, and future leaders. Backed by science and decades of research, the assessment is used in organizations as a selection and development tool and in academic settings to assess gains in critical thinking from specific coursework. Watson-Glaser II takes critical thinking and its application in the workplace to a new level.
More contemporary, global, and business relevant items
Better face validity and applicability of items for non-U.S. markets
Questions separate “bright” from “exceptional”
Two new 40-item forms can be administered in approximately the same time as the previous Short Form (total test time is 35 minutes)
Critical thinking is organized into an easy-to-interpret 3-factor "RED" model:
Recognizing assumptions in ideas, statements, and strategies
Evaluating the merit of arguments or information that is presented
Drawing appropriate conclusions based on the evidence available; Brings together Inference, Deduction, and Interpretation subtests
- See the score and some predictive behaviors
- Conduct a critical thinking-based behavioral interview (questions include standard and score-based)
- Build a custom learning & development plan to enhance the individual's critical thinking skills
• Measures thinking, reasoning and intelligence
• Predicts judgment, problem solving, creativity, and more
• Classifies individuals as low, average, and high
• Suggests critical-thinking based job behaviors
• Actionable reports – Profile, Interview, and Development
• Simplified 3-factor model: RED
• Questions separate “bright” from “exceptional”
• Long history of use by major corporations, consultants, and schools
• Correlations with leading personality and intelligence tests
• Multi-lingual versions
• Online and paper administrations
• All-in-one test for identifying high potential across many jobs and applications
• Aligns with multiple 21st century skills identified by a public/private consortium
• Percentile and raw scores show you how an individual ranks
• Reveals how someone might act on the job in specific situations
• Three views of individual let you see the score, conduct an interview, and develop skills
• Logically appealing and easy-to-interpret model provides a framework for critical thinking
• Distinguishes across high ability levels to see shades of critical thinking
• Extensive norm groups and validation studies across industries and markets
• A richer picture when used together with other instruments
• Assessment delivered in local language for global workforces
• Flexible administration formats to suit your needs and your test takers
Critical thinking is organized into an easy-to-interpret 3-factor “RED” model:
Assumptions are statements that are implied to be true in the absence of proof. Identifying assumptions helps in discovery of information gaps and enriches views of issues. Assumptions can be unstated or directly stated. The ability to recognize assumptions in presentations, strategies, plans, and ideas is a key element in critical thinking. Being aware of assumptions and directly assessing their appropriateness to the situation helps individuals evaluate the merits of a proposal, policy, or practice.
Arguments are assertions that are intended to persuade someone to believe or act a certain way. Evaluating arguments is the ability to analyze such assertions objectively and accurately. Analyzing arguments helps in determining whether to believe them or act accordingly. It includes the ability to overcome a confirmation bias – the tendency to look for and agree with information that confirms prior beliefs. Emotion plays a key role in evaluating arguments as well. A high level of emotion can cloud objectivity and the ability to accurately evaluate arguments.
Drawing conclusions consists of arriving at conclusions that logically follow from the available evidence. It includes evaluating all relevant information before drawing a conclusion, judging the plausibility of different conclusions, selecting the most appropriate conclusion, and avoiding overgeneralization beyond the evidence.
© Pearson Assessment Inc.
For more information or a quotation for this product, please contact us: We're happy to provide sample questions, reports, or validity information if available for most of the titles that are showcased on this site.
Please be aware that, due to international law or Copyright restrictions, it is not always possible to provide samples of questionnaires or information that may constitute intellectual property, trade secrets, or other proprietary information.