HOW TO EVALUATE INFORMATION (CRITICAL THINKING)
AND MAKE GOOD DECISIONS

Critical thinking means knowing how to evaluate whether information is likely to be true or false. Why is this important? Acting on true information leads to success. Acting on false information can be deadly.

Consider the case of Ted Bundy. He was a handsome, friendly, very bright law student who was exceptionally charming with women. He also seduced and killed forty girls in cold blood before being caught and sentenced to death in Florida's electric chair. Because of his attractive image, people overlooked increasing evidence that he was a killer and as a result, many young girls were murdered before he was caught. This was a failure of critical thinking that led to poor decision-making, which was deadly. What do tobacco ads have in common with Ted Bundy?

In the same way, tobacco advertisements present very attractive images that seduce you to buy the product and to overlook hard evidence that tobacco is a killer. Again, a failure of critical thinking that leads to poor decision-making, which is deadly. (see slide i)

How do you evaluate information critically, to determine if the information is likely to be true or false? You have to answer two questions, (1) Who is the source of the information? And (2) Is there reliable evidence for the information?

What must you know about the source of the information? Do they have something to gain? Are they an authority on the subject? If you're evaluating information on whether or not tobacco use causes addiction and disease, tobacco companies are not a reliable source of the information because they have something to gain, your money. A friend who is asking you to smoke may not be a reliable source of information because he has something to gain, your company, and may also have little personal experience with the consequences of smoking. A tobacco addict who tells you he can't quit smoking even though he's tried many times, a patient with a smoking-related disease who shows you and tells you about his illness, a physician who cares for hundreds of such patients and health agencies who conduct surveys on thousands of such patients are much more likely to be reliable sources of this information because they have nothing to gain except to protect your health and because they are authorities with extensive experience on the subject.

What must you know about the evidence for the information? Even if the source of the information seems to be a recognized authority on the subject who has nothing to gain, you shouldn't automatically take their word for it. You still must determine if there is reliable evidence for the information. For example, if you're evaluating information on what percentage of kid's smoke, does the information come only from someone's impression with no evidence for it or does the information come from a survey that presents evidence? If the information comes from a survey, is the evidence in the survey reliable? For example how many kids were in the survey? A survey of 1,000 kids is more reliable than a survey of 10 kids. What type of kids were in the survey? A survey of all types of kids is more reliable than a survey limited to only high school dropouts or boy scouts. How was the survey information obtained? If you ask leading questions, like "You don't really smoke do you?", the answers are not likely to be reli-