Comparison of Critical Thinking Types between Groups and Pairs

This quantitative study investigated how different types of critical thinking are associated with group work and pair work among 174 university students using a questionnaire with 44-item under three sections. Findings show learners most strongly apply evaluative and people-oriented thinking skills when solving complex problems and judging others’ ideas. Collaborative communication is highly characterised by shared goals, trust and learning from mistakes in group work, meanwhile explanation, idea exchange and shared responsibility are strongest in pair work. Strong positive relationships were found between critical thinking and group work (r=.651) as well as pair work (r=.573), with no significant differences across academic clusters. The results indicate that both collaborative formats support critical thinking through complementary interaction patterns. The findings further reveal that learners demonstrate consistent use of thought-oriented, action-oriented and people-oriented thinking across collaborative contexts. Group work encourages collective problem solving, flexible processes and mutual trust, while pair work promotes focused dialogue, knowledge construction and shared responsibility between partners. Overall, the patterns suggest that collaborative learning environments provide supportive conditions that stimulate higher order thinking, communication and engagement among university learners. These results reinforce the importance of carefully designed collaborative tasks that balance interaction structure and learner participation in different learning situations across university classrooms and academic courses in higher education contexts today and beyond globally for diverse learners worldwide today effectively and efficiently. The study suggests that deliberately structured group and pair activities should be integrated across disciplines to enhance students’ problem-solving and critical thinking skills in higher education settings.

Critical thinking, problem-solving skills, self-determination, group work, pair work

1. Ahmad, N., Alias, F.A., Hamat, M., & Mohamed, S.A. (2024) Reliability Analysis: Application of Cronbach’s Alpha in Research Instruments. SIG: e-L earning@CS, 114-119. https://appspenang.uitm.edu.my/sigcs/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alexandru, C. A. (2025). Group assignments and support aimed to develop student teamwork skills and a positive attitude towards teamwork in computer science higher education. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Computing Education Practice (CEP ’25) (pp. 9–12). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3702212.3702215 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alturki, U., & Aldraiweesh, A. (2024). The impact of self-determination theory: the moderating functions of social media (SM) use in education and affective learning engagement. Humanities and Social Sciences Communication, 11, 693. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03150-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Alzubi, A. A., Nazim, M., & Ahamad, J. (2024). Examining the effect of a collaborative learning intervention on EFL students’ English learning and social interaction. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 8(2), 26–46. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202425541 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Arora, R., Gajendragadkar, S., & Neelam, N. (2023). Team effectiveness: A key to success in IT organizations. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 17(1), 97-110 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Belbin, R. M. (2013). Team roles at work (2nd ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chang, Y., & Brickman, P. (2018). When group work doesn’t work: Insights from students. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(3), Article ar42. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-09-018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012801 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A Meta-Analytic Review of Experiments Examining the Effects of Extrinsic Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627-668. https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/1999_DeciKoestnerRyan_Meta.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Deterding, S., Guckelsberger, C., Lintunen, E.M. & Ady, N.M. (2025). Advancing Self-Determination Theory via computational modelling: the case of competence and optimal challenge. Motivation and Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-025-10156-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Dias-Oliveira, E., Pasion, R., Vieira da Cunha, R., & Lima Coelho, S. (2024). The development of critical thinking, team working, and communication skills in a business school–A project-based learning approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 54, 101680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101680 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Escandell, S., & Chu, T. L. (Alan). (2021). Implementing Relatedness-Supportive Teaching Strategies to Promote Learning in the College Classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 50(4), 441-447. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283211046873 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Fan, M., Liu, X., Song, X., & Xie, J. (2025). The effects of group size on critical thinking and writing development in collaborative writing: A mixed methods study. System, 110, 103738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103738 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fang, X. & Chiu, T.K.F. (2025). Using Self-Determination Theory to Explain How Mind Mapping and Real-time Commenting Enhance Student Engagement and Learning Outcomes in Video Creation. Computers and Education Open, 8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100254 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Fenwick, T. J., & Parsons, J. (1999). A critical investigation of the problems with problem-based learning. Education for Health, 12(2), 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/13576289900000014 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Gagné, N., & Parks, S. (2013). Cooperative learning tasks in a Grade 6 intensive ESL class: The role of scaffolding. Language Teaching Research, 17(2), 188–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812460812 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Grenier, S., Gagne, M., & O'Neill, T. (2024). Self-determination theory and its implications for team motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 73(4), 1833-1865. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12526 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. He, L. (2024) The Application of SPSS Correlation Analysis in the Study of Precision Teaching of English in Universities. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Science, 9(1), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/amns-2024-1371 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hitchcock, D. (2018). Critical thinking. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2018 ed.). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/critical-thinking/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3–4), 85–118 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Lintner, T., Diviák, T., & Nekardová, B. (2024). Interaction dynamics in classroom group work. Social Networks, 79, 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2024.05.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (2020). Conflict and constructive controversy in groups. In Group processes (pp. 215–239). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44136-8_10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Nunes, P.M., Proença, T., Carozzo-Todaro, M.E. (2024). A systematic review on well-being and ill-being in working contexts: contributions of self-determination theory. Personnel Review, 53(2), 375–419. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2021-0812 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Rahmat, N. H. (2025). Exploring interactions in pair work through social constructivism. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 15(6), Article 25683. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v15-i6/25683 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Rahmat, N.H. (2020) Conflict Resolution Strategies in Class Discussions. International Journal of Education, 12(3), 49-66. https://doi.org/10.5296/ije.v12i3.16914 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Schermeier, S., Deiglmayr, A., & Rummel, N. (2025). Small group collaboration in hybrid university learning: Contrasting collaboration quality in hybrid, F2F and remote settings. Learning and Instruction, 102, Article 102276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102276 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022100 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Vansteenkiste, M., Niemiec, C. P., & Soenens, B. (2010). The Development of the Five Mini-Theories of Self-Determination Theory: An Historical Overview, Emerging Trends, and Future Directions. In T. C. Urdan, & S. A. Karabenick (Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement, v. 16A—The Decade Ahead: Theoretical Perspectives on Motivation and Achievement (pp. 105-165). https://doi.org/10.1108/S0749-7423(2010)000016A007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Vetter, T.R. (2017) Descriptive Statistics: Reporting the Answers to the 5 Basic Questions of Who, What, Why, When , Where, and a Sixth, so What? Anesth Analg, 12595), 1797-1802. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000002471 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. White, R.L., Bennie, A., Vasconcellos, D., Cinelli, R., Hilland, T., Owen, K.B., & Lonsdale, C. (2021). Self-determination theory in physical education: A systematic review of qualitative studies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103247 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Ziegenfuss, J. Y., Casey A. E., Jennifer M. D., Meghan M. J., Thomas E. K, and Marna, C.. (202) Impact of Demographic Survey Questions on Response Rate and Measurement: A Randomized Experiment. Survey Practice 14 (1), https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2021-0010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study