Thinking dispositions and epistemic cognition: Combined influences when reading to learn

This theoretical paper explores the evolving concept of critical thinking in the context of contemporary education. Critical thinking has long been a central educational goal, emphasizing the ability to evaluate information critically and make informed judgments. This study examines the interplay between three key constructs: thinking dispositions (i.e., habits of mind influencing reasoning), intellectual virtues (i.e., admirable traits of character supporting reasoning), and epistemic cognition (i.e., processes through which individuals understand, evaluate, and justify knowledge claims and beliefs), particularly in reading comprehension. By analyzing extant research and theoretical frameworks, including the AIR model, we argue that fostering sophisticated thinking dispositions and intellectual virtues—such as actively-openminded thinking (AOT) and intellectual humility (IH)—enhances epistemic reading practices. We propose a profile-oriented approach, using the AIR model of epistemic cognition to illustrate how individuals with varying levels of AOT/IH would approach a task involving the comprehension of multiple texts. Our focus is on the ways that people's thinking dispositions and intellectual virtues may interact to inform different epistemic approaches to complex learning scenarios, even in individuals with high levels of competence. We propose a profile-oriented approach to complex learning situations, using the AIR model of epistemic cognition to illustrate how individuals with varying levels of actively-openmindedness and intellectual humility would approach a task involving the comprehension, evaluation, integration, and use of multiple texts. • We explore the evolving concept of critical thinking in the context of education. • We examined the interplay between dispositions, virtues, and epistemic cognition. • Fostering sophisticated dispositions and virtues enhances epistemic reading. • A profile-oriented approach may explain how individuals differ in reading practices.