Les 3 sex*

Critical thinking: A survival guide

Summary

Algorithms put forward the most consulted content… but not necessarily the most verified. In this age of online information and misinformation, how do we distinguish the true from the false?

Logo de l'organisme Les 3 sex*

This article is presented in collaboration with the Pouvoir Choisir project, a participatory action-research project conducted by Les 3 sex* and Oxfam-Québec on young people’s needs in terms of sexuality education and sexual behavior.

You get to school and join your group of friends, who are in the middle of a lively discussion. One of your friends, Charles, confidently shares that he heard about how hormones found in drinking water can reduce testosterone levels and affect athletic performance. Yasmine laughs it off and says he’s exaggerating but adds that she, too, heard the same thing from her brother and an elite sports podcaster.

You check your phone to see if what he’s saying is true. It doesn’t take long for you to find a few content creators who validate Charles’ claims. You find this information interesting, to say the least. You’ll be sure to bring it up on your next bike ride.

Spoiler alert: what Charles says is more fiction than fact, but more on that later.

In today’s era, in which information and fake news are available at our fingertips, critical thinking can help you see things more clearly.

Critical thinking means questioning, analyzing, interpreting, evaluating, and judging what you read, hear, say, or write (Hitchcock, 2024). You’ve probably already heard about the importance of critical thinking at school, but critical thinking doesn’t solely mean criticizing or questioning everything constantly.

Firstly, what is a judgment? It is the assessment of something’s value, in this case, information. For a judgment to be critical, it must be rooted in fact, not just opinion or intuition. It must be based on criteria such as reliability, accuracy, and context.

Why is critical thinking so important?

As part of the Pouvoir Choisir project, Les 3 sex* and Oxfam-Québec have joined forces to conduct participatory action research into the needs of young people concerning sex education and sexual behaviour.

One of these research findings was that sex education varies greatly from one academic institution to the next, and few students find answers to their questions, regardless of how legitimate their questions may be. Unsurprisingly, they are then quick to turn to the ultimate source of information: the Internet.

Don’t get us wrong, having free access to all this online content can be valuable, but the volume of available information is overwhelming. In general, the amount of high-quality, verifiable content is much smaller than the vast amount of misinformation and biased information.

It isn’t always easy to know what’s true or false

It can happen to anyone who inadvertently shares false information. Sometimes this “information” is presented so cleverly that it seems like it would take an 18-step method, three hours of reading, and a PhD to verify it. Why is this? The content probably contains several elements that make it appear trustworthy. For example: 

  1. The person speaking: This person has positioned themselves as an expert, is charismatic, and speaks in a confident, self-assured tone. The person may look like us or be familiar to us because we’ve been following them for a while on social media. Some content creators will dress in a style that gives the impression that they’re experts in their domain—for example, by wearing a lab coat or athletic gear.
  2. The content being presented: The information being shared uses precise vocabulary and scientific wording. It likely makes references to studies or historical facts.
  3. The context surrounding the content: The content is shared by those around us, by someone we follow on social media or traditional media.

When there isn’t a lot of information available about sex, it can be tricky to make a good, critical assessment. It’s normal, you have to start somewhere. The good news is that the more we inform ourselves and exercise our judgment, the easier it gets.

How to exercise critical judgment

Let’s check back with our friend Charles and the information he shared at the beginning of this article.

We’ll use this as an example to try to exercise our critical judgment.

Step 1: Identify the person addressing us

First, let’s ask ourselves a few questions about the person who created the content and their expertise:

  • Is this person a sexual health professional? Are they qualified to tackle a subject of this nature?
  • What’s being said about the person creating the content on other platforms? Are they being criticized for spreading misinformation? 
  • Do qualified people interact with their content?

In the example we shared, the speaker is not clearly identified. We don’t know if they are qualified or possess the knowledge to talk about hormones and sexual health. People who are more likely to be credible to speak about sexuality include sexologists, community organizations, health or sexual health professionals, organizations that provide sex education, and so on.

This person has also shared a statistic, which sounds scientific, but without identify a source. This prevents us from verifying the information and validating whether what’s being said is true or false. 

Step 2: Analyze the purpose behind the information being shared

It’s important to ask yourself the following: What is the purpose of this piece of content? Is its intention to inform or to get people talking? Is it someone expressing their opinion? Are they trying to sell something? Is the goal manipulation—do they want people to react? 

In the example we shared, the goal seems to be more about provoking a response rather than informing audiences, especially considering that it begins with a warning that “the world doesn’t understand” and goes on to try to shock us with the consequences of estrogen exposure.

If the goal was really about informing audiences, then the content creator would make it a point to share nuanced information backed by scientific research.

What’s more, a lot of sexuality-related content presents personal experiences, opinions, or preferences. That doesn’t necessarily mean it has to be tossed aside, so long as the information doesn’t claim to be the only truth. In fact, some content can be more credible when it’s discussed by someone who is concerned with the topic at hand.

For example, if you’re seeking information about asexuality, then the experiences shared by asexual individuals is incredibly important for obtaining a more in-depth understanding, but remember: one testimonial alone cannot accurately portray the full scope of diverse experiences. 

Step 3: Consider the context in which the information is being received

Social media algorithms decide what content you see based on what you’ve previously interacted with, your interests, and your activity. They tend to show the most popular or engaging sex-related content—content that garners a reaction,  polarizes the audience, or is sponsored. As a result, the content served up to you isn’t always what’s been fact-checked but rather what’s gotten people talking. For instance, if a content creator shows up on your feed repeatedly, even though you don’t follow them, that’s likely the algorithm’s doing.

The result? We find ourselves in echo chambers, which gives us the impression that everyone’s on the same page or that what we’re exposed to is the truth because it’s what everyone’s talking about. We’re also more inclined to believe what corresponds to our values and the values of those around us. This tendency can create cognitive biases, like tinted glasses that filter information through our views on sexuality, sometimes leading us to take shortcuts when analyzing topics through a critical lens.

Here are just some examples of biases that can impact our critical judgment of online information: 

Type of cognitive biasDefinitionHow it applies to the video
Confirmation bias We only retain the information that validates our existing beliefs, without considering contradictory ideas. Choosing not to question the information about hormones in water because we already believe that men’s testosterone levels are lower, and they are becoming less virile. 
Attribution bias We jump to conclusions from partial or out-of-context information.Relying solely on the video for information about estrogen levels in Quebec’s drinking water and the effects these have on testosterone. 
Conformity bias We think and behave like everybody else.Not questioning the information in the video because it was shared in the group chat. 

We all have biases. It’s only normal.

Step 4: Make an effort to get all the information

Dig deeper. Once again, it’s important to remember that our algorithms promote the content with the most views, but not necessarily the content that’s most factually accurate. The content is often a summary of information—sometimes a little too brief, if you ask us. 

Try to go further than the first pages of a Google search, or try to find content that doesn’t necessarily appear in your feed to get a better idea. Sites with verified information, like organizations, the government, or those that feature experts in sexology and sexual health, tend to be good places to start.

We also suggest talking things over with friends, your family, and even colleagues. Sharing content with others lets you see things with fresh perspective, express any doubt, and double-check information together.

Lastly, when we use our critical thinking skills, we come to realize that some content, like the example video we previously shared, has too few green flags to trust. It’s important to question information and form your own opinion. Criticism is healthy, but we have to be careful about falling into conspiracy theories.

Try to find the sweet spot somewhere between believing everything we see without giving it a second thought and questioning everything we see, believing in nothing. 

Critical thinking is a muscle. The more we exercise it, the easier it gets, but to train this reflex, you need to use it. Don’t forget to take a breather every once in a while, too. 

  • Halpern, D. F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: Helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker. New directions for teaching and learning, 1999(80), 69–74.

    Hitchcock, D. (2024). Critical thinking. In Dans Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman (eds.,) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2024 ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/critical-thinking/

    Machete, P., & Turpin, M. (2020). The use of critical thinking to identify fake news: A systematic literature review. In Responsible Design, Implementation and Use of Information and Communication Technology: 19th IFIP WG 6.11 Conference on e-Business, e-Services, and e-Society, I3E 2020, Skukuza, South Africa, April 6–8, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 19 (pp. 235–246). Springer International Publishing.

    Melançon, A. (2017, December 2). Comment conserver son esprit critique sur le Web? [How can you stay critical on the Web?]. L’éveilleur .https://leveilleur.espaceweb.usherbrooke.ca/comment-conserver-son-esprit-critique-sur-le-web/