mind map for critical thinking

CRITICAL THINKING

1. 1. Recognize Assumptions

1.1. distinguish fact from opinion.

1.1.1. What is the basis of your opinion?

1.1.2. What evidence do you have to support it?

1.1.3. Why do you believe the information is accurate?

1.1.4. Why do you think this would apply to this problem?

1.2. Consider relevance

1.2.1. What assumptions are you making?

1.2.2. Why do you believe your assumptions apply to this situation?

1.2.3. What assumptions do you think other people are making?

1.2.4. If we were to shift our assumptions, how would that affect our decision?

1.3. Seek alternative viewpoints

1.3.1. How do you see the situation?

1.3.2. Why do you see it this way?

1.3.3. What were you expecting to see?

1.3.4. How do you see this playing out in the future?

1.3.5. How might the situation be different if different assumptions were made?

2. 2. Evaluate Arguments

2.1. be aware of persuasion techniques.

2.1.1. What's in it for me?

2.1.2. What's their intent?

2.1.3. What are the consequences?

2.2. Recognize bias

2.2.1. Is this statement free of judgment?

2.2.2. Is there confirmation bias?

2.3. Check strong emotions

2.3.1. How is emotion affecting the way information is being presented to you?

2.3.2. How are your emotions affecting your ability to think critically?

2.3.3. How would you interpret the same data if strong emotions were not at play?

3. 3. Draw Conclusions

3.1. weigh data carefully.

3.1.1. Where does the data come from?

3.1.2. Why consider the data?

3.1.3. Is data relevant?

3.1.4. What's most important?

3.1.5. What does the data say?

3.1.6. How else can the data be interpreted?

3.2. Use multiple sources

3.2.1. How many sources are used and for what purpose?

3.2.2. Are there other source that could be used?

3.3. Ask others to critique

3.3.1. Who should critique your work and why?

3.3.2. What do you want them to do?

3.4. Diagram for understanding

3.4.1. www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html

3.4.2. www.conciselearning.com/visualmapping.html

3.4.3. www.pearltrees.com/conciselearning/1447396/

4. CRITICAL THINKING is a continuous, purposeful, and reflective process about what to believe, do, think, or learn. It is fact based, hypothesis-driven, and structured thinking. It uses systematic and objective methods to solve problems and liberates you from inaccuracies, biases, and misleading information.

Mind Mapping for Critical Thinking: Boost Analytical Skills Effortlessly

Mind mapping is an effective tool for improving critical thinking . Developed by Tony Buzan in the 1960s, mind mapping helps organize thoughts visually, making complex ideas easier to understand.

In educational settings, mind mapping supports students in organizing their knowledge and enhancing their critical thinking skills.

This method is not only beneficial in classrooms but also widely used in professional fields to brainstorm and solve problems more efficiently.

From nursing to engineering, various professions use mind mapping to unlock creative potential and improve decision-making processes.

Key Takeaways

The fundamentals of mind mapping.

Developed by Tony Buzan, it involves creating branches from a central concept to related topics. This process helps break down complex information into manageable parts.

Defining Mind Mapping

By using visual techniques like colors, images, and keywords, mind maps can make understanding and remembering information easier.

History and Development

Earlier methods of note-taking were often linear and less effective in showing connections between ideas. Buzan’s method encouraged a more holistic, visual technique that supports critical thinking and creativity.

Elements of a Mind Map

Branches extend from the central idea and represent main topics. These branches can have sub-branches that show finer details or related concepts.

This structured yet flexible format helps users see the big picture and the details simultaneously, making it an effective tool for learning and brainstorming.

Critical Thinking and Mind Maps

Enhancing Critical Thinking Ability

Mind maps support this process by visually organizing thoughts and ideas. They allow users to see connections between different pieces of information, making complex subjects more manageable.

Using mind maps encourages individuals to think critically about the content they are learning or working on. They prompt questions, invite connections, and facilitate a more thorough examination of the topic.

Mind Maps as Thinking Tools

Mind maps are effective thinking tools that aid in structuring thoughts clearly and logically.

By breaking down ideas into smaller, more digestible parts, students can explore subjects in a more in-depth and critical manner.

Creativity and Problem-Solving

They break free from linear thinking and present information dynamically, sparking new ideas and approaches.

This technique supports both divergent and convergent thinking, leading to innovative and practical solutions.

Educational Applications of Mind Mapping

Mind mapping can significantly enhance learning experiences, organize complex information, and foster critical thinking across various educational domains.

Mind Mapping in Science and Humanities

In science, it can break down complex concepts like the structure of cells or the periodic table. Students can see relationships between different elements, making it easier to remember and understand.

Improving Writing and Research Skills

By visually laying out their thoughts, students can see the structure of their argument more clearly, making it easier to write coherent and compelling essays.

Supporting Active Learning in Classrooms

Mind mapping encourages active learning by involving students in the process of knowledge construction.

In classrooms, mind maps can be used as an interactive tool to summarize lessons, plan projects, or solve problems.

Assessment and Evaluation Techniques

This method provides a visual representation of a student’s understanding, which can be a useful supplement to traditional testing methods.

Mind Mapping for Various Professional Fields

Mind mapping is a versatile tool used across diverse professional domains, aiding in effective decision-making, enhancing educational outcomes, and solving complex engineering problems.

Business Strategy and Decision-Making

For decision-making , mind mapping clarifies options, weights outcomes, and helps in visualizing the consequences of choices.

Mind Mapping in Medical and Nursing Education

Nursing students use mind mapping to organize patient care plans, understand complex medical conditions, and integrate theoretical knowledge with practical applications.

Applications in Engineering and Programming

This method supports systems thinking , enabling professionals to visualize relationships between different components of a system.

Frequently Asked Questions

Mind mapping can significantly boost critical thinking abilities and streamline the problem-solving process. The following sections cover how mind mapping aids in organizing thoughts, the benefits it offers, and best practices for its integration.

How can mind mapping enhance critical thinking skills?

What are the benefits of using mind maps in the critical thinking process.

Mind maps make it easy to organize and rearrange ideas. They promote better memory retention by associating images with concepts.

What are the essential elements to include when creating a mind map for critical thinking?

Use images and colors to differentiate elements. Arrows can indicate relationships between different branches. Keeping the map clear and concise helps in maintaining focus.

What are the best practices for integrating mind mapping techniques in critical analysis?

Collaborate with others by inviting them to add to the map. Keep the design simple but informative.

In what ways can mind mapping be applied to complex problem-solving?

How does mind mapping compare to traditional outlining for organizing thoughts and ideas.

Mind mapping is more flexible and visually engaging than traditional outlines. Outlines follow a linear structure. In contrast, mind maps are more dynamic, allowing for non-linear thinking. This can be particularly helpful for brainstorming and developing creative solutions. It also makes it easier to see how different concepts are interconnected.

You may also like

Parents teaching critical thinking: effective strategies for raising independent thinkers, 5 board games to develop critical thinking skills, mastering your thought process using critical thinking frameworks, critical thinking in leadership, download this free ebook.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Int Med Res
• v.48(3); 2020 Mar

Impact of mind mapping on the critical thinking ability of clinical nursing students and teaching application

Hang-zhou wu.

1 School of Nursing, Nursing Department, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China

Qiu-Ting Wu

2 Nursing Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China

Short abstract

We analyzed the impact of mind mapping on the critical thinking ability of clinical nursing students and its use as a teaching application. This study provides reference information for clinical teaching.

We selected 64 nursing students using convenience sampling. Participants received basic knowledge training of mind mapping in three sessions during the intervention. Questionnaires on critical thinking ability were designed by the researchers, adopting the Chinese version of the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory. Data collected using the questionnaires included learning strategy function and clinical skill improvement with mind mapping, as well as students’ degree of adaptability to mind mapping. Participants’ critical thinking ability before and after the intervention was analyzed using a paired t -test.

The critical thinking inclination of nursing students was significantly improved after intervention compared with that before the intervention ( t  = −0.74). The four dimensions of open-mindedness, inquisitiveness, cognitive maturity, and systematicity among nursing students after the intervention were also significantly improved compared with before the intervention.

Mind mapping is conducive to improving the critical thinking ability of clinical nursing students.

The modern medical environment requires nurses to have abilities of independent judgment, independent decision-making, and independent execution in clinical practice. Hence, nursing staff must be equipped with critical thinking skills. 1 , 2 Critical thinking pervades all human activities via the processes of thinking and reflection and is key in acquiring all of the abovementioned abilities. 3 , 4 In recent years, an increasing number of educators have realized the disadvantages of traditional teaching methods. Nursing educators have therefore attempted to implement various teaching methods, to improve critical thinking skills in nursing students. 5

In recent years, mind mapping has been applied in the field of nursing as a novel thinking method that has been integrated with teaching and learning. 6 – 9 Mind mapping, as a new learning memory tool, was proposed in the early 1960s by Tony Buzan, a psychologist and educational expert in Britain. 10 Mind mapping uses a technique of combining drawings with words to build memory links between a topic keyword and image, color, or other link, thereby highlighting the key point and level of the memory contents, allowing learners to effectively store and extract information. 10 It has been revealed that mind mapping, as a training tool in thinking, not only improves learning efficiency but also increases learning motivation and interest. 11 However, there is a lack of evidence on whether mind mapping can be effectively applied to clinical practice education.

The aim of the present study was to analyze whether mind mapping can effectively improve the ability to think critically among clinical nursing students. We discuss the impact of mind mapping on critical thinking among nursing students in clinical practice and provide reference information for clinical teaching.

Participants and methods

Research participants.

We selected nursing students at grade A tertiary hospitals in Fuzhou City using a convenience sampling method. All nursing students who were on duty in the medical and surgical wards from August 2016 to December 2016 were included in the study. The exclusion criteria were nursing students who did not wish to collaborate in the research process. In this study, all nursing students voluntarily participated in the research.

Research tools

The questionnaire included basic information such as sex, age, and school information. The Chinese version of the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CTDI-CV) was applied. The content validity of the CTDI-CV is 0.89, as revised by Peng 12 and other translators at Hong Kong Polytechnic University; the Cronbach's alpha value of the CTDI-CV is 0.90. This scale consists of seven dimensions: analyticity, open-mindedness, self-confidence, inquisitiveness, cognitive maturity, systematicity, and truth-seeking; there are 10 entries per each dimension, for a total of 70 entries. The content of these entries are assessed using six ranking levels, from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”. In the questionnaire, scores from 6 to 1 were considered positive entries, with higher scores indicting stronger agreement; scores from 1 to 6 scores were considered negative entries, with higher scores indicting stronger disagreement. The total score of each dimension ranges from 10 to 60, in which a score ≥40 indicates a positive inclination toward critical thinking, a score <30 a negative inclination, and a score of 30 to 40 indicates neither positive nor negative inclination toward critical thinking. The total score of the scale ranges from 70 to 420, with a score <210 indicating a negative inclination, a score of 210 to 280 a neutral inclination, a score >280 a positive inclination, and a score >350 indicating a strong inclination toward critical thinking. In the present study, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.967.

Questionnaire on the application of mind mapping in teaching activities

We used a questionnaire addressing application of mind mapping to teaching activities. The survey was self-designed by the investigators to collect the students’ attitudes and evaluations of mind mapping as a teaching method. The content validity of this questionnaire was revised by three clinical experts with senior professional titles in nursing and more than 5 years of clinical teaching experience. The content of the questionnaire included learning strategy function and clinical skill improvement for mind mapping, as well as the degree of adaptability of students to mind mapping, among other aspects. A 5-point Likert ranking scale was adopted, with response options of strongly disagree, disagree, uncertain, agree, and strongly agree. These were each given a score from one to five; a score >4 indicated a positive attitude, a score of 3 a neutral attitude, and a score <3 indicated a negative attitude. Open-ended questions were included to assess the thoughts of nursing students regarding the application of mind mapping to teaching.

This questionnaire was validated by seven experts in two-round Delphi surveys. The panelists included (1) medical or surgery nurse educators with at least 2 years’ teaching experience, (2) at least 5 years’ working experience, and (3) a bachelor’s degree or above. Panelists evaluated the appropriateness and relevance of each item independently and provided their comments. The content validity index was calculated as the percentage of items identified as “relevant” or “very relevant”; this was 92% in the first round. Based on the experts’ comments, three questions were modified. The content validity index in the second round, conducted 2 weeks later, was 100%.

The Cronbach’s alpha of the questionnaire was 0.82. The internal consistency of the questions was 0.80, indicating an acceptable internal consistency.

Intervention method

During the internship period, basic knowledge training in mind mapping was provided by a full-time educator with a PhD and many years’ experience in the application of mind mapping for nursing students. The training was conducted for a total of three sessions of 2 hours each. The main contents included the definition, development process, and role of mind mapping, as well as an introduction to the drawing software and drawing method. The researchers conducted three demonstrations of mind mapping using a clinical case diagram, to improve nursing students’ understanding and comprehension of clinical mind mapping and to enhance their interest in learning the techniques. Each demonstration lasted about 40 minutes.

Each internship group, consisting of 4 to 6 members, learned and discussed the role and drawing method of mind mapping for a total of 3 to 5 sessions per group, for 30 to 40 minutes per session. Each group was allowed to independently select a topic for the mind mapping session, according to the educational contents of the Internship Department. Each group drew a mind map according to disease entities included in ward round teaching of the Internship Department. The investigators and clinical educators collected and summarized the data.

Data collection and statistical methods

The investigators personally administered the questionnaires to nursing students before and after the intervention, and collected all completed questionnaires. Data before the intervention were collected just prior to nursing students beginning their clinical training in the medical and surgical wards. Data after the intervention were collected after students finished their training in the wards, about 2 months later.

Data input and statistical analysis were conducted using SPSS 17.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Comparative analysis was performed to assess the critical thinking ability of nursing students before and after the intervention using a paired t -test. The results of the analysis are reported using mean and standard deviation.

Ethical considerations

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was conducted with the approval of the Ethics Committee of The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Demographic variables of participants

Sixty-four nursing students from grade A tertiary hospitals in Fuzhou City were recruited using a convenience sampling method. The age range of the included students was 21 to 23 years. Among participants, 62 (96.87%) were women and two (3.13%) were men; 34 (52.35%) students were undergraduate university students and 30 (46.2%) were junior college students. There were 14 student groups, with an average of 4 to 6 students per group.

Critical thinking inclination before and after intervention

The results of the assessment of participants’ inclination toward critical thinking before and after intervention are shown in Table 1 . The total score for critical thinking inclination among nursing students before the intervention was 263.95 ± 46.09, indicating a neutral inclination. The total score for students’ critical thinking inclination after the intervention was 281.68 ± 46.14, indicating a positive inclination toward critical thinking. On comparing the critical thinking inclination before and after intervention, the inclination toward critical thinking of nursing students after the intervention was significantly improved compared with that before intervention ( t  = −0.74, P  = 0.045).

Results for participants’ inclination toward critical thinking, before and after the intervention (n = 64).

* P <  0.05.

Critical thinking ability before and after intervention according to scores on each dimension

The four dimensions of open-mindedness, inquisitiveness, cognitive maturity, and systematicity among nursing students were also significantly improved after the intervention, as compared with those before intervention ( Table 1 ) ( P  < 0.05). The four dimensions of analyticity, self-confidence, inquisitiveness, and systematicity after intervention showed a positive inclination toward critical thinking ( Table 1 ).

Survey results regarding mind mapping application in teaching

Results of the survey on the application of mind mapping to teaching activities are shown in Table 2 . The survey revealed that in the overall evaluation (average score 4.13 ± 0.73) of the mind mapping teaching method, nursing students had a positive attitude toward knowledge memory enhancement, cultivation of analytical abilities, the ability to systematically organize information, and the ability to combine theory with practice, among other aspects, all with scores of more than 4. Most nursing students reported that they enjoyed learning mind mapping and were willing to use the method in their work, with scores of more than 4 ( Table 2 ).

Survey results regarding application of mind mapping in teaching activities (n = 64).

In response to the open-ended questions, nursing students stated that the combination of mind mapping and professional knowledge can improve learning efficiency, contribute to learning memory, and cultivate analytical abilities. The main difficulties reported by participants in drawing mind maps ( Figure 1 ) were that the process is time-consuming, being unfamiliar with application software, and being unskilled in drawing, among others

Examples of nursing student’s mind map.

Improvement in critical thinking ability using mind mapping in nursing education

The research results revealed that the critical thinking ability of nursing students obviously improved after training in mind mapping, with neutral inclinations toward critical thinking before the intervention improving to positive inclinations post intervention. After the intervention, the four dimensions of analyticity, self-confidence, inquisitiveness, and cognitive maturity in critical thinking showed positive inclinations, indicating an enhanced desire for acquiring knowledge among nursing students and improved attitudes regarding independent investigation and initiative. These findings were consistent with research results reported by Chen and Zhang 13 and Chen and Zhao. 14 Therefore, our findings confirm that the application of mind mapping in teaching can improve the critical thinking ability of nursing students. 15 , 16 Mind mapping can be used to effectively integrate and optimize learning resources, helping to build a complete knowledge system. This approach will contribute to improving students’ abilities of comprehensive analysis, resulting in a more scientifically rigorous and effective learning process. 17

At the intervention stage, clinical educators guide nursing students in acquiring comprehensive and systematic knowledge and skills. These students can in turn provide patients with integrated professional health services including basic nursing, condition observation, rehabilitation guidance, and health education. 18 At the internship stage, on-duty nursing students are full of intellectual curiosity and eager to apply their professional knowledge. Hence, this is a stage during which nursing students can attain a sense of accomplishment and responsibility. In our study, training in mind mapping helped nursing students adapt to new internship environments. 9 , 19 The training possessed a good guidance function in professional knowledge mastery for students during their short internship period. 20 Thus, the dimensions of open-mindedness, inquisitiveness, cognitive maturity, and systematicity were obviously improved in our participants. However, the dimensions of analyticity, self-confidence, and truth-seeking did not show improvement. This may be because the clinical educators in this study were unfamiliar with mind mapping and thus, could not provide adequate guidance for students in these dimensions.

Positive attitude toward the application of mind mapping in teaching nursing students

In this study, we surveyed and interviewed participants and found that applying mind mapping in teaching has become a popular learning method among nursing students at the research hospitals in this study. Students reported that mind mapping helped to enhance their memory, to better acquire knowledge and analytical abilities and to systematically organize information. Students reported that they can adapt to mind mapping in clinical education that combines theory with practice, to acquire and improve their critical thinking abilities. In the present study, nursing students freely designed mind maps rather than being provided with a pre-drawn example. In this way, students’ initiative for learning can best be mobilized. 21 , 22

Despite our positive findings, we revealed that mind mapping was ineffective in improving participants’ problem-solving abilities. This is possibly related to the stronger emphasis on memory and learning efficiency of mind maps, with less emphasis on solving practical problems. In our study, nursing students reported that they might have less initiative to draw mind maps while learning because the process is time-consuming.

In conclusion, teaching using mind mapping can cultivate the critical thinking ability of nursing students. Furthermore, clinical educators can apply mind mapping during the training of these students in the internship process. This approach will help nursing students to acquire comprehensive skills and improve their initiative to learn.

Declaration of conflicting interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

This study was supported by the Projects of Educational and Teaching Reform of Universities in Fujian Province (No. J15035).

Hang-Zhou Wu https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1354-0527

• Educational Psychology
• Mind Mapping

Mind Mapping for Critical Thinking

• February 2016
• In book: Leadership and Personnel Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp.2032-2055)
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

No full-text available

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

• Lauren A. McGuire
• Emily Bisdorf-Rhoades

• جيلان جمال عطوة عبد المقصود
• Lan-Anh Thi Le
• Nga Phuong Le
• Lan-Anh Thi Ngo
• Quynh-Nga Thi Tran

• Steven Bottomley

• Pol Futures Educ Internet

• Seyed Ehsan Afsahi

• Mansoor Fahim

• Bonnie Miller

• Andrea Sada

• Saovapa Wichadee

• Fatemeh Asgharheidari

• Gregg. Husband
• ANNU REV INFORM SCI

• David R. Danielson
• Think Skills Creativ

• Interchange
• James Rubin

• Lyndon Hughes

• Brandy A. Dewar
• Jennifer E. Servos

• Haydée Páez
• Neo Tse Kian
• Penny Singh

• Lawanna S Brinthaupt
• Justin G Fisher
• Deana M Gardner
• José Manuel Saiz-Alvarez
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

What is a mind map? Tips, examples, and templates

Start collaborating with Mural today

Producing new ideas can be a challenge. If you place a blank page in front of your team members, give them a prompt, and ask them to produce something awesome, there will likely be a lot of frustration. It’s intimidating to jump straight into a fully formed, innovative concept. 

Mind maps can help ease that intimidation factor and get you and your team unstuck. Whether you’re brainstorming ideas to solve a specific problem, trying to put together big-picture plans, or just want to get those creative juices flowing, mind mapping is a great place to start.

What is a mind map?

A mind map is a brainstorming technique used to visually organize information into a hierarchy. They feature one main idea as the central point of the diagram, with subtopics branching out and connecting to supporting ideas. First popularized by Tony Buzan, an author and educational consultant, mind maps are a visual way to generate new ideas and solve complex problems. Individuals or teams start by naming a problem or central topic and then adding relevant subtopics.

Mind map diagrams follow a hierarchical structure where the most important ideas are the closest to the center, and each additional tier rolls up to the one before it. This structure helps you see a broad overview of the concept, understand its complexities and connections, and make decisions effectively.

What makes mind maps so powerful is not just the diagrams themselves, but also the process that goes into creating them. The inside-out structure makes it easy to get all your thoughts and ideas down in one place and draw connections between them. They encourage lateral thinking, pushing you to explore and investigate a topic from every angle.

Mind maps vs concept maps

You may hear people conflate mind maps with concept maps, and it’s easy to understand why. Both are diagrams that use nodes and links to visualize how ideas are connected. The key difference is that mind maps are hierarchical, while concept maps are not. 

While a mind map has one central theme, a concept map illustrates how a variety of different topics or ideas are connected, with no tiers or levels.

When to use a mind map 

Mind maps are best suited for creative thinking and brainstorming that happens in real time. However, there are other ways that mind maps can be useful throughout your workday. These include:  

• Brainstorming and ideation : Mind maps help you quickly create associations and map out related ideas in a way that can spark new, creative ideas. 
• Note-taking during meetings : A mind map helps you quickly add and organize thoughts in a visual way that is easy to refer back to and build upon. 
• Project management and planning : When you have a big project, you can break down complex tasks into smaller components to better visualize the steps needed to achieve your objectives.
• Decision-making : Mind maps can help you weigh the pros and cons of a decision or lay out all of the possible options and then narrow down to your ultimate decision.  
• Presentations and educational materials : A mind map can be a visual aid during presentations or when teaching people something new. It helps make complex information more accessible to the audience.

However you use mind maps, you’ll find that they allow you to discover hidden complexities and connections to facilitate better brainstorming, exploration, decision-making, and project planning.

Benefits of mind mapping 

The obvious benefit of mind mapping is that it’s an effective brainstorming technique. It helps you generate new ideas or solve complex problems and makes your job easier when you’re stuck on a challenge. But there are a few additional benefits of mind mapping that can positively impact your whole team and work performance.

• It reduces the pressure or stress that can occur when problem-solving or trying to develop creative ideas.  
• It increases memory retention and recall due to the visual and spatial arrangement of the mind map. 
• It gives you a holistic view of your project or thought process. 
• It reduces information overload and keeps things organized. 
• It enhances communication and clarity as visual representations are more engaging, flexible, and direct. 
• It helps you think more critically and analytically .

How to create a mind map: A step-by-step guide

Before you get started building out your mind map, you’ll need to choose a mind mapping tool. If you’re working with a team, use a digital whiteboard or mind mapping software so your team can contribute and access the mind map after the working session . The important thing is to not to let the blank space scare you; your mind map will naturally grow once you get going.

1. Identify the primary topic

In the middle of your workspace, add the main topic for this exercise. It could be a single word or a short phrase like “improving team morale,” or it could be a central idea like “work culture.” You could even use a central image or graphic to inspire ideas. 

For example, say your team is working on a new product. You could include an image from a competitor whose work you admire and want to build on or outperform. You could also add a few short phrases or words to describe the goal.

2. Branch out into subtopics

Next, identify subtopics and smaller themes related to your central concept — we recommend starting with three to five. These will be the starting branches for your mind map. Then, you can continue branching out and adding additional layers of related ideas. Ultimately, there aren’t any limits to the number of levels you can include in your mind map.

Remember, these ideas don’t have to be fully formed or polished, just associations that you’ll later build off of or develop further.

3. Connect related topics

Next, draw lines or use colors to connect related ideas. This visual representation allows you to see patterns and connections that might have been less apparent in a traditional linear outline or list. Examine your ideas and identify categories or themes that pop up. Add sticky notes, images, or text, or use different colors to illustrate these common themes. 

Taking our team building example, your team may notice that there are many ideas having to do with getting out of the office and participating in activities in nature. To produce a coherent theme, you might then highlight these as part of an overall theme called “nature retreats.”

4. Select the top themes and categories

Determine which themes are the most relevant and beneficial to your main objective. Then reorganize your mind map to reflect these categorical choices and steer your ideas in a specific direction.

5. Delve deeper into niched-down ideas 

Next, expand and refine each idea with more research and detail. Add important context and resources to make the mind map more informative for your team and external stakeholders. Each idea or piece of information you add ensures that no critical details are overlooked.

Mind mapping tips and techniques

The process of creating a mind map is simple enough, but it takes some practice to get the most out of it. Use these tips and techniques to improve the mind mapping process and make it easier to draw conclusions from your diagram.

Mind map design

Because mind maps are such a visual medium, it’s helpful to focus on how you design them. You by no means need to be a professional designer to make good-looking, easy-to-use mind maps — you just need to keep these tips in mind. ‍

Colors and shades ‍

Use a different color for each branch off your main point to make it easy to see different sections at a glance. You can also use lighter shades of that same color for subsequent levels as you continue to build out the branches of your mind map. ‍

Lines and arrows

Consider using different line widths to indicate how strong the connection is between certain elements. You can also use different colors, dashed or dotted lines, and other visual cues to indicate the relationship between ideas. If you’re sharing your mind map with others, make sure you include a key so they can understand how to read it. ‍

Images and icons

Don’t be afraid to play around with photos, drawings, icons, emojis, and other visuals. They can help you communicate abstract ideas, orient the viewer, and provide inspiration as you go through the mind mapping process.

Collaborative mind mapping

When it comes to mind mapping as a team, the whole is definitely greater than the sum of its parts. Collaborating in real-time makes it easy to get into a flow of free associations and building upon each other’s ideas — something that’s tough to do asynchronously. Here are some quick mind mapping guidelines for more impactful collaboration.

• Start with a warmup to get everyone in a creative mindset
• Timebox the activity to add some positive pressure
• Keep an open mind and a non-judgmental attitude
• When brainstorming, think quantity over quality
• Set aside time to build on each other’s ideas
• End the session with clear takeaways and next steps ‍

Mind map examples and templates to get you started

Rather than starting from scratch, use one of these templates to jumpstart your mind mapping process.

Basic mind mapping

Organize your ideas into a structured diagram to see an overview of the concept, understand its complexities and connections, and make decisions effectively. This basic mind mapping template gives you space to brainstorm, collaborate, and visually structure your ideas. It includes handy tips as well as different examples of mind maps, so you can choose the one that best fits your needs.

‍ Get started with the mind map template ‍

Basic mind map example

Mind map brainstorming

Use this mind map template to brainstorm big ideas, identify new patterns, or quickly organize your thoughts. ‍

Get started with the mind mapping brainstorm template

Mind map brainstorming example

A sitemap is a specialized type of mind map that serves a critical purpose in every website build or redesign project. It helps to visualize the website’s structure to optimize navigation, map the user experience, and determine page hierarchies. It can also be used to identify gaps in content or accelerate the design process.

Get started with the sitemap template

Sitemap example

Also called a hierarchy chart, an org chart is the perfect way to show the organizational structure of your company. A visual representation helps people quickly understand where they fit in the organization, what tasks they need to accomplish, and key stakeholders for projects. ‍

Get started with the org chart template

Organization chart example

Collaborative mind mapping made easy with Mural

So, now that you’re ready to get started on mind mapping, do you have the right tools to make it happen? There are so many mind map examples out there, but it’s important to find one that works for everyone in your business, whether you work remotely or in-office. A mind map you can customize for your needs is crucial for an innovative brainstorming session.

With Mural’s mind map template , you’ll not only spur creativity within your team but also simplify complex ideas and concepts. You can then transform your mind maps into infographics that communicate ideas more effectively with stakeholders. Get started today with a Free Forever plan , and invite your whole team so everyone can get involved in your next brainstorming session.

Get started with mind mapping and diagramming in Mural.

Related blog posts

10 Brainstorming Techniques for Developing New Ideas

What is a flowchart? Examples, tips, and templates

How to Facilitate a Brainstorming Session

Related blog posts.

How to build a functional organizational structure

Working out loud – asynchronously

The best mind mapping tools as of 2024

We use essential cookies to make Venngage work. By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

Manage Cookies

Cookies and similar technologies collect certain information about how you’re using our website. Some of them are essential, and without them you wouldn’t be able to use Venngage. But others are optional, and you get to choose whether we use them or not.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are always on, as they’re essential for making Venngage work, and making it safe. Without these cookies, services you’ve asked for can’t be provided.

Show cookie providers

• Google Login

Functionality Cookies

These cookies help us provide enhanced functionality and personalisation, and remember your settings. They may be set by us or by third party providers.

Performance Cookies

These cookies help us analyze how many people are using Venngage, where they come from and how they're using it. If you opt out of these cookies, we can’t get feedback to make Venngage better for you and all our users.

• Google Analytics

Targeting Cookies

These cookies are set by our advertising partners to track your activity and show you relevant Venngage ads on other sites as you browse the internet.

• Google Tag Manager
• Infographics
• Daily Infographics
• Popular Templates
• Accessibility
• Graphic Design
• Graphs and Charts
• Data Visualization
• Human Resources
• Beginner Guides

Blog Graphs and Charts What is a Mind Map? Definition, Uses, Benefits and Templates

What is a Mind Map? Definition, Uses, Benefits and Templates

Written by: Aditya Rana Apr 03, 2024

Do you ever feel overwhelmed by information overload?

You’ve got work projects (or school) to deal with, things going on in your personal life, and events and vacations to plan. Is there any escape from it all?

I’m sure you’ve tried notes and to-do lists in vain, but that is more work.

If  only  there were a way to make sense of it all. It would help if you had a mind map to help organize information and make sense of everything.

In this post, I’ll show you how to use a Free Mind Map Maker Tool and mind map templates to bring your ideas to life.

Click to jump ahead:

What is a mind map?

• Features of a mind map
• 7 benefits of mind maps

Understanding the mind map concept

Mind mapping techniques and tips, using venngage as a mind-mapping tool, mind map templates, mind map examples.

Mind maps help you organize information and ideas in the same way that our brains make connections.

Here’s an example of a mind map.

Mind map definition

A mind map is a visual diagram representing ideas, tasks, or other items linked to and arranged around a central concept using a non-linear graphical layout.

Mind maps help visualize and classify ideas and are great tools for studying, problem-solving, and decision-making.

Key features of a mind map

Why are mind maps an effective tool for capturing and organizing your thoughts? To understand, we’ll need to understand its structure.

Central concept

Mind maps feature a central concept or topic in the middle of the page, often represented as an image or word.

This mind map explains the “Four P’s Copywriting Formula”, with the central idea prominently placed on the left (the main theme doesn’t always have to be in the middle of a mind map!).

From the main idea should extend multiple branches, which include information on sub-topics linked to the central idea.

This mind map shows how a central concept can be explored in depth by branching the main idea (in this case, team communication strategies ) into more specific or actionable items.

Mind maps often use visuals, including images, icons, graphics, and symbols, to enhance memory and engagement.

This mind map uses visuals to illustrate the job hiring process. Each step is color-coded and includes an icon or graphic representing the described step to enhance memory recall and engagement through visual cues.

Flexibility

With mind maps, there’s no structure or right or wrong way to create the end product. You’re free to add ideas and explore connections organically.

This mind map is non-linear and multidirectional, reinforcing the idea that there’s no right way to organize information. Connecting items in a mind map depends on how you think about the relationship between concepts.

7 benefits of using mind maps

Mind maps help us think in ways we’re not used to, which means you can expect many benefits. Let’s explore each in detail.

Aids with memory recall

Mind maps help you better remember and recall information. According to one research on its benefits in education, mind maps enhanced  retention by 10-15%. 

This mind map, such as this example on the reasons for jealousy, taps into our visual-spatial memory, making it easier to recall the information later than if we had just read it as text.

Helps you better understand ideas and concepts

Mind maps help you better understand ideas by visually breaking down and categorizing information in an easy-to-grasp format.

This mind map mirrors how our brains naturally make sense of information (by connecting dots and forming patterns), making it much easier to understand a concept like corporate communication.

Boosts creativity

By encouraging you to explore relationships between ideas in a free-flowing manner, mind maps make it possible to get creative and innovative.

This mind map branches out into different categories of marketing strategies, with further subcategories to encourage you to dig deeper. The overall shape also looks like an ‘8’, which could serve as a visual reminder or represent the continuous cycle of creativity and feedback essential in marketing.

Increases productivity

Mind maps can improve productivity by providing a clear visual outline of your tasks and goals, which makes it easy to identify priorities and allocate resources.

This mind map offers a structured overview of the project management process and can help transform complex project information into an accessible and actionable visual format.

Leads to better communication

Mind maps improve communication skills by promoting a better understanding of information, processes, and tasks among individuals.

This mind map visually presents critical strategies crucial during business interactions. It serves as a quick reference guide and improves one’s ability to negotiate and interact effectively in a business environment.

Cultivates critical thinking skills

Mind maps improve critical thinking skills by letting you see a problem from various angles, which helps establish connections between what may initially seem unrelated.

This mind map aids in critical thinking by laying out the basics of total quality management in a manner that requires interpretation, understanding, and application to real-world organizational challenges.

Improves problem-solving ability

Mind maps can help you solve problems effectively by enabling you to brainstorm solutions and evaluate the best course of action in a clear and structured manner.

This mind map lays out the career paths one could pursue with a sociology degree. It allows people with this degree to problem-solve career planning and make informed decisions about their future.

Mind maps are effective because they mimic how the human brain organizes information and makes connections.

British psychology author Tony Buzan popularized mind maps in the 1970s during a TV show where he revealed how to use mind maps to harness our cortical skills — words, images, numbers, logic, rhythm, color, and spatial awareness.

Of course, mind maps are not that new, though.

They can be traced back to ancient times, with the first mind map attributed to Porphyry of Tyros from the 3rd century, who mapped the relationship between material and immaterial things.

Mind mapping techniques refer to strategies and methods to organize information and create a mind map.

Though there are several mind-mapping techniques, I’ll guide you through one that’s fail-safe.

Choose a central idea first

Start by defining a clear idea that represents the main theme or topic. Place it in the center of your page with a circle or box around it. This is the ‘heart’ of your mind map.

Can you guess the central idea of this mind map? If you guessed company policies, you’re bang on the money!

Describe key ideas to support your central theme

After you have a central theme, it’s time to create branches to contextualize the topic you are mapping.

These branches act as the pillars of thoughts and should be defined through text, visually, or both!

This mind map template expands on the main topic with five critical pillars described with text and visuals and color-coded for easy recognition in the crowd of circles.

Draw sub-branches to refine information further

From your main branches, draw additional branches to represent sub-topics that break down complex ideas into more manageable chunks.

This mind map is an excellent example of each branch being split into specialized sub-topics that provide a more detailed understanding of the central concept by dissecting it into parts.

Use color to categorize information

Colors are a great way to differentiate between ideas, themes, or categories and make mind maps visually appealing.

Another bonus of using colors in mind maps is that they provide a creative way to organize information and make it easier to remember.

This mind map template uses colors strategically to differentiate between business objectives, action plans, and problems.

Use symbols and images to make mind maps appealing

Icons and symbols are visual tools that make your mind maps visually appealing.

More importantly, images are mnemonic devices that can improve recall and make mind maps a practical study or brainstorming tool.

This mind map shows various health categories such as exercise, diet, sleep, and stress management. But you could tell that immediately without reading and looking at the imagery.

Use cross-linkages

Cross-linkages show connections between different ideas or branches on a mind map, revealing how different concepts relate to each other and enhancing overall understanding.

Here are some other mind-mapping tips:

• Use single words or uncomplicated phrases.
• Use printed words, which are easier to read than joined-up or indistinct writing.
• Use the right tool to create a mind map. Though you can draw a mind map manually using pen and paper, using a digital Mind Map Maker is better because it lets you be more flexible, add visuals, and add easily share your creation.

Want to learn more about mind maps? Check out our other resources! 15+ Mind Map Examples to Organize Your Team and Inspire New Ideas 40+ Mind Map Templates To Help You Visualize Ideas How to Use a Mind Map for Note Taking During Business Meetings

Though pen and paper can be a great way to quickly create a basic mind map, it’s not the best method for creating one that is visually engaging and easy to share.

I recommend using a digital  mind mapping tool  like Venngage to create mind maps in seconds. And don’t worry—you don’t need any design skills since the tool has a drag-and-drop interface.

Here’s how to create mind maps with Venngage.

Step 1 – Sign up for a FREE Venngage account

Sign up for a free Venngage account using your email, Gmail, or Facebook account.

Step 2 – Pick a mind map template from our templates page

Go to our  templates page  to see our entire library of templates. Select the  mind map templates  on the left side panel to filter for mind maps.

Here, you’ll see all our mind map templates. PS: You can further even more for different types of mind maps such as business, concept, marketing, etc.

Step 3 – Edit one of our mind map templates

Once you find a template, click the “Create” button. This will take you to the sign-in or sign-up screen if you haven’t created an account.

Once signed in, you’ll have access to the  mind map maker  tool, where you can customize mind map templates.

Pretty straightforward so far, right?

Here’s a quick overview of some nifty customization options within Venngage.

• Click any node and use the ‘+’ or ‘-‘ to add or delete it.
• Change the text, icons, or graphics within the template.
• Add your  brand colors  to your mind map with a single click using  My Brand Kit (available only for Business users).

Once you’re happy with a design, you can download it in PDF, PNG, and other formats (for Business plan users only) or share a link to your mind map for free.

You’ve seen plenty of mind map templates by now, but why should you use one?

The benefit of mind map templates is that they help you save time and provide an easy starting point.

I mean, why create mind maps the hard way, where you’ve got to come up with design, layout, and graphics, when you can use a template where the hard work is already done for you?

You’ll find no shortage of  mind map templates  online (do a quick Google), but I recommend using Venngage templates, which have been created by professional designers.

Some of our mind map templates are free to use, while others require a small monthly fee. Sign-up is free, as is access to Venngage’s online drag-and-drop editor.

In business, success relies on good ideas, and brainstorming is a great way to uncover them, as seen in this ecommerce marketing strategy mind map.

If you’re responsible for figuring out how to improve a process at the workplace, the best way to start is by brainstorming.

This mind map is great for process improvement as it focuses on three key areas and then breaks each down further, enabling discussion of what is possible.

If you’ve worked for a corporate job, you’ll surely have seen mind maps before, like this strategy mind map explaining the company’s communication plan.

Mind maps are also great educational tools that can explain complex concepts quickly. Is there any other way you’d want to learn about different real estate types?

Students can also benefit from mind maps, especially before tests when they have to memorize a lot of information. Creating a mind map is a great way to cement connections!

Conclusion: Transform the way you organize information and plan processes with mind maps

With a million things going through our heads every day, it can be challenging to organize ideas and even more challenging to get others to understand them.

Not with mind maps, though. Until technology becomes so advanced, we can read each other’s thoughts.

Mind maps are the best way to map ideas, take notes, and share your thoughts. Start making your mind map today for free with Venngage (no design experience required).

Discover popular designs

Infographic maker

Brochure maker

White paper online

Newsletter creator

Flyer maker

Timeline maker

Letterhead maker

Mind map maker

Ebook maker

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 16 September 2010

Does the mind map learning strategy facilitate information retrieval and critical thinking in medical students?

• Anthony V D'Antoni 1 , 2 ,
• Genevieve Pinto Zipp 1 ,
• Valerie G Olson 1 &
• Terrence F Cahill 1  

BMC Medical Education volume  10 , Article number:  61 ( 2010 ) Cite this article

A learning strategy underutilized in medical education is mind mapping. Mind maps are multi-sensory tools that may help medical students organize, integrate, and retain information. Recent work suggests that using mind mapping as a note-taking strategy facilitates critical thinking. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a relationship existed between mind mapping and critical thinking, as measured by the Health Sciences Reasoning Test (HSRT), and whether a relationship existed between mind mapping and recall of domain-based information.

In this quasi-experimental study, 131 first-year medical students were randomly assigned to a standard note-taking (SNT) group or mind map (MM) group during orientation. Subjects were given a demographic survey and pre-HSRT. They were then given an unfamiliar text passage, a pre-quiz based upon the passage, and a 30-minute break, during which time subjects in the MM group were given a presentation on mind mapping. After the break, subjects were given the same passage and wrote notes based on their group (SNT or MM) assignment. A post-quiz based upon the passage was administered, followed by a post-HSRT. Differences in mean pre- and post-quiz scores between groups were analyzed using independent samples t -tests, whereas differences in mean pre- and post-HSRT total scores and subscores between groups were analyzed using ANOVA. Mind map depth was assessed using the Mind Map Assessment Rubric (MMAR).

There were no significant differences in mean scores on both the pre- and post-quizzes between note-taking groups. And, no significant differences were found between pre- and post-HSRT mean total scores and subscores.

Conclusions

Although mind mapping was not found to increase short-term recall of domain-based information or critical thinking compared to SNT, a brief introduction to mind mapping allowed novice MM subjects to perform similarly to SNT subjects. This demonstrates that medical students using mind maps can successfully retrieve information in the short term, and does not put them at a disadvantage compared to SNT students. Future studies should explore longitudinal effects of mind-map proficiency training on both short- and long-term information retrieval and critical thinking.

Peer Review reports

The amount of information that medical students are expected to master is voluminous[ 1 ]. Yet, there are limited learning strategies available to these students to master the volume of information required to succeed in medical school[ 2 ]. In recent years, the number of publications on learning strategies used in medical education that may help students learn and ultimately integrate information has increased[ 3 – 6 ]. Although these learning strategies may differ in efficacy and applicability, they are all based on a conceptual framework called the constructivist theory of learning, which states that meaningful learning, or learning with understanding, occurs when adult learners assimilate new information within their existing frameworks[ 7 , 8 ].

Constructivist theory is rooted in the subjectivist worldview, which emphasizes the role of the learner within the context of his environment[ 9 ]. The interaction between the learner and his environment results in meaning or understanding; therefore, the two are inextricable[ 9 ]. Many learning strategies, such as case-based learning and PBL, assume the learner is committed to lifelong learning and will integrate previous knowledge with newly acquired knowledge[ 10 , 11 ].

The theoretical basis of constructivism is depicted in Figure 1 . In medical school, academic information is available to the medical student through reading, visualizing, or listening. Irrespective of the mechanism, information enters the mind of the student, who is actively trying to make sense of the information. Because the sensemaking of the student may be very different from that of the professor presenting the information,[ 12 ] one of the assumptions underlying constructivist theory is that the student will integrate the information into a personal framework so that it will be retained,[ 8 ] which results in meaningful learning.

Constructivist theory of learning . Theoretical assumptions that underlie constructivist theory using a bottom-up approach. Academic information is commonly available to the learner through reading, visualizing, or listening. Irrespective of the mechanism, information enters the mind of the learner, who is actively trying to make sense of the information. Adapted from Ausubel [ 7 ].

Critical thinking

Meaningful learning is necessary for critical thinking. The operational definition of critical thinking is a metacognitive, nonlinear process of purposeful judgment that includes self-directed learning and self-assessment[ 13 , 14 ]. How critical thinking should be taught and how it is learned are unclear,[ 15 , 16 ] especially at the medical school level. Willingham[ 15 ] stated that critical thinking occurs when a student penetrates beyond the surface structure of a problem and recognizes how the problem can be solved, and in addition, possesses the content knowledge integral to solving the problem. Without both components, a student may be able to critically analyze one problem, but will falter when given a similar problem in a different context[ 15 ]. Graduating physicians should be able to critically evaluate novel cases that they encounter in the clinic using their previous, albeit limited, clinical experiences[ 17 ].

Concept mapping in medical education

In graduate medical education, West et al[ 17 ] used the concept map learning strategy developed by Joseph Novak[ 18 ] in resident physicians, and studied the validity and reliability of concept mapping assessment (CMA). They found that concept maps could be scored reliably and CMA could measure changes in the conceptual framework of physicians[ 17 ].

Mind mapping in medical education

Mind mapping was developed by Tony Buzan[ 19 ] and the inspiration for this strategy arose from the notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci[ 20 ]. Mind maps, like da Vinci's notes, are multi-sensory tools that use visuospatial orientation to integrate information, and consequently, help students organize and retain information[ 21 , 22 ].

Mind maps can be used as a teaching tool to promote critical thinking in medical education by encouraging students (adult learners) to integrate information between disciplines and understand relationships between the basic and clinical sciences[ 21 ]. The ability to integrate information by finding valid relationships between concepts allows students who construct either mind maps or concept maps to reach a metacognitive level[ 15 ]. However, the added dimensions of pictures and colors that are unique to mind maps have not only been shown to facilitate memory,[ 23 ] but may appeal to a wide range of students withvisual- and linear-oriented learning styles. Consequently, the advantage of using mind maps in medical education is that this strategy may benefit more students with diverse learning styles.

Both mind maps and concept maps allow students to recognize the intra- and inter-relationships between concepts, which reflects the kind of real-world thinking predominant in the clinical setting[ 24 ].

Farrand et al[ 25 ] were the first group to investigate the potential role of mind mapping in medical education. These researchers explored whether the mind map learning technique was superior to traditional note taking in both short- and long-term factual recall of written information in medical students. They found that the mind map technique significantly improved long-term memory of factual information. Additionally, they found significant differences in self-reported motivation with the mind map group having lower levels of motivation than the self-selected study group. Although not supported by other literature, this finding may be explained by the fact that students were not given adequate time to adjust to using the mind map technique, and therefore, may have felt less comfortable using it. Although the results of the study were promising, the authors did not address critical thinking. Consequently, studies exploring the relationship between mind mapping and critical thinking are needed before the usefulness of mind mapping can be fully supported in medical education.

Wickramasinghe et al[ 26 ] were the second group to investigatethe effectiveness of mind maps in medical education. Using a similar study design as that used by Farrand et al,[ 25 ] these authors assigned new entry medical students into 2 groups: mind map and self-selected study groups. The authors also developed a method to score the mind maps based on structure and content; however, they did not describe the method nor did they provide any data to support it[ 26 ]. The authors reported that there was no significant difference in scores between groups[ 26 ]. They did, however, report that all of the subjects in the mind map group perceived that mind maps are useful for memorizing information. Based on their findings, the authors concluded that mind mapping may not be effective in improving retention of short-term information[ 26 ].

Mind maps and concept maps

Although concept maps and mind maps have similar characteristics, they are fundamentally different in design. Concept maps are devoid of color and pictures, and are constructed in a top-to-bottom hierarchy. Mind maps, in contrast, use a central theme in the middle of a page with categories and subcategories that radiate peripherally, thus making them truly non-linear. The cross-links among categories highlight their intrinsic relationships, and allow the student to compare and contrast information. Unlike concept maps, mind maps are multisensory--they include color and pictures, which facilitate the conversion of information from short- to long-term memory[ 23 , 27 ]. An example of a mind map created by a medical student in this study can be found in Figure 2 .

Student mind map . An example of a mind map from one of the medical students in this study. Note the judicious use of pictures and colors, along with hierarchical organization positioned radially. Note how different colors were used to indicate different hierarchies (eg, green is primary hierarchy, blue is secondary, aqua is tertiary, etc.). In addition to the above example, other student mind maps have been published elsewhere[ 22 , 28 ].

Since critical thinking is dependent upon both content (domain) knowledge and problem familiarity,[ 15 ] mind mapping may facilitate critical thinking because it fosters student retention of factual information, as well as relationships between concepts[ 25 ]. Currently, however, there are no data to support the hypothesis that mind maps facilitate critical thinking in medical students.

Purpose of the study

The primary purpose of this study was to investigate whether a relationship existed between the mind map learning strategy and critical thinking, as measured with the Health Sciences Reasoning Test (HSRT), and whether this relationship was stronger than one between the preferred learning strategy of standard note-taking (SNT) and critical thinking.

The secondary purpose of this study was to determine whether mind maps were superior to SNT in the short-term recall of factual information. Mind map depth was assessed using the previously published Mind Map Assessment Rubric[ 28 ].

Study setting and sample

After full approval by an Institutional Review Board, this study was conducted during the 2008-2009 academic year at a US medical school located in a large metropolitan area.

An a priori power analysis[ 29 ] using a one-tailed t -test revealed a minimum sample size of 70 subjects. This calculation was based on the following: effect size d = 0.8, alpha = 0.05, and power = 0.95. The large sample size ( N = 131) assumes a normal distribution of the population, and therefore, parametric statistics were used to analyze the data. The sample of convenience consisted of first-year medical students who voluntarily participated in this study.

The independent variable in this study was the note-taking strategy used by the medical students. Subjects were randomly assigned to 2 note-taking groups: a standard note-taking (control) group and mind map (experimental) group. The design of the study is outlined in Figure 3 .

Study design . Research procedure.

Subjects in both note-taking groups were asked to learn information contained in a 394-word text passage—on the topic of cacti and other succulent plants—from the verbal ability section of a previously published Graduate Record Examination (GRE). This topic was chosen to reduce the chance that the medical students would have previous advanced knowledge of this field. The GRE is a standardized entrance examination used as part of the US graduate-school admissions process. The exam is used by faculty to decide which students will be admitted to graduate school and who will be awarded academic fellowships. A GRE text passage was used in this study because the GRE is taken by students who are, in general, of a similar age to those entering US medical schools. Consequently, the text passage was at an appropriate cognitive level for medical students. A post hoc analysis of the medical students in the study revealed that none of them majored in botany at the undergraduate level.

Subjects in the control group used standard note-taking (SNT) strategies that they used throughout their academic careers to learn the text passage. SNT is defined as any study strategy that does not rely on reorganizing information using architecture commonly seen in a concept map or mind map[ 25 ]. SNT is a process whereby notes are arranged in a hierarchy from the top of a page to the bottom, or from left to right, without any hierarchy[ 30 ]. Subjects in the experimental (mind map) group were given a 30-minute presentation on mind maps and then instructed to create mind maps in order to take notes on the material in the text passage.

There were two dependent variables in this study. The first one was the score on the text passage quiz, of which there were two. These two quizzes, which were based on the content of the GRE text passage, were administered to all subjects after assignment to the groups. All subjects were simultaneously (but in different rooms) exposed to the passage for 5 minutes and were not permitted to write any notes. The passage was collected and followed by the administration of math quiz 1. This quiz was used to "blank" the minds of the subjects by preventing the simple recall of information that could result in a higher quiz score and confound the results[ 25 ].

After math quiz 1, all subjects were administered text passage quiz 1. The purpose of this 5 multiple-choice question quiz was to test the students' factual understanding of the passage without any note-taking strategy. This baseline quiz was used as a covariate to account for potential differences between the groups prior to initiating any note-taking strategy.

After taking text passage quiz 1, subjects in the mind map group were given a presentation on mind maps and how to construct them, while at the same time, subjects in the control group were sequestered for a break and could not leave the lecture hall. After 30 minutes, all subjects were then re-exposed to the text passage and instructed to take notes using either standard note-taking (SNT) or mind maps (MMs), depending on their group assignment. All subjects were given 25 minutes for note-taking and at the end of this time period, all passages and notes were collected. This was followed by the administration of math quiz 2 in order to again discourage the simple recall of information by the subjects. After math quiz 2, all subjects were simultaneously administered text passage quiz 2 based upon the passage. This quiz consisted of 10 multiple-choice questions: the same 5 questions from quiz 1 plus an additional 5 questions. This was done to see if the students retained the factual information and to address potential testing effects (ie, higher scores due to repeated testing exposure).

The second dependent variable of this study was the HSRT score. The HSRT consists of 33 multiple-choice questions that measure critical thinking by challenging students to form reasoned judgments based on textually presented information consisting of a number of vignettes[ 31 ]. The information presented in the vignettes includes diagrams, charts, and other data related to health care scenarios. The HSRT does not test domain knowledge (ie, subject-specific knowledge such as that found in anatomy and biochemistry); therefore, subject-specific knowledge is not needed by the students taking the exam. The HSRT has been extensively studied in health professional students and working professionals[ 14 , 31 ].

The HSRT reports an overall numerical score and 5 subscales: analysis, inference, evaluation, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning. The operational definitions of these subscales, adapted from a previous Delphi study, [ 14 ] follow: analysis (ability to identify the intended and actual inferential relationships among statements, questions, concepts, descriptions or other forms of representation intended to express beliefs, judgments, experiences, reasons, information or opinions); inference (ability to identify and secure elements needed to draw reasonable conclusions; to form conjectures and hypotheses, to consider relevant information and to educe the consequences flowing from data, statements, principles, evidence, judgments, beliefs, opinions, concepts, descriptions, questions, or other forms of representation); evaluation (ability to state the results of one's reasoning; to justify that reasoning in terms of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological and contextual considerations upon which one's results were based; and to present one's reasoning in the form of cogent arguments); deductive reasoning (assumed truth of the premises purportedly necessitates the truth of conclusion and this includes traditional syllogisms, as well as, algebraic, geometric, and set-theoretical proofs in mathematics); and inductive reasoning (an argument's conclusion is purportedly warranted, but not necessitated, by the assumed truth of its premises and this includes scientific confirmation and experimental disconfirmation)[ 31 ].

Mind maps were scored using the Mind Map Assessment Rubric (MMAR). The interrater reliability of the MMAR is strong and has been reported to be 0.86[ 28 ]. Face validity of the MMAR has been investigated, and the entire rubric is available online (see reference [ 28 ]).

Sample characteristics

A total of 131 subjects ( N = 131) participated in the study (Table 1 ). All subjects were matriculated, first-year medical students and the study was conducted on a half-day during their orientation. Prior to the study, subjects were queried and it was found that none of them used mind maps as their preferred learning strategy. The SNT group consisted of 65 subjects ( n = 65) and the MM group consisted of 66 subjects ( n = 66).

Sex and ethnicity distributions were similar in both groups as demonstrated in Table 1 . The mean age of subjects in both groups was also similar. In the SNT group, the mean age of subjects was 24.45 years ( SD = 3.26) and in the MM group, the mean age of subjects was 24.74 years ( SD = 3.91). Using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), no significant difference in mean age between groups was found. Subjects in the SNT group had a mean total SAT score of 1285.71 ( SD = 112.06) and those in the MM group had a mean total SAT score of 1254.46 ( SD = 110.20). No significant difference in total SAT score between groups was found. In addition, no significant differences in SAT verbal and math subscores between groups were found. The mean total MCAT score of subjects in the SNT group was 27.26 ( SD = 3.04) and the mean total MCAT score of subjects in the MM group was 27.05 ( SD = 3.17). No significant difference in total MCAT score between groups was found. In addition, no significant differences in MCAT biology, physics, and verbal subscores between groups were found.

Quiz assessment of domain knowledge

The mean score of the pre-quiz (quiz 1) among subjects in the SNT group was 3.15 ( SD = 1.22) and the mean score of the pre-quiz (quiz 1) among subjects in the MM group was 3.42 ( SD = .84). A two-tailed independent samples t test revealed no significant difference between the means: t (129 df) = -1.47, p = .14.

The mean score of the post-quiz (quiz 2) among subjects in the SNT group was 7.85 ( SD = 1.40) and the mean score of the post-quiz (quiz 2) among subjects in the MM group was 7.64 ( SD = 1.22). A two-tailed independent samples t test revealed no significant difference in means between the groups: t (129 df) = .912, p = .36. Figure 4 is a bar chart depicting these data.

Quiz scores between groups . Both quizzes were based on a 394-word text passage. There are no significant differences in mean scores between groups on both the pre-quiz (quiz 1) and post-quiz (quiz 2).

A comparison of the means of the pre-quiz (quiz 1) scores and post-quiz (quiz 2) scores between groups revealed no significant differences (SNT pre-quiz mean = 3.15, MM pre-quiz mean = 3.42, SNT post-quiz mean = 7.85, and MM post-quiz mean = 7.64). However, the difference between means of the pre-quiz (quiz 1) and post-quiz (quiz 2) scores in each group differed. In the SNT group, this difference was 4.70 (7.85 - 3.15 = 4.70) and in the MM group, this difference was 4.22 (7.64 - 3.42 = 4.22).

In order to further analyze these results and control for the fact that the quiz scores themselves were slightly skewed (ie, a long tail created by a few students who did very poorly), a standardized z score was used. A difference z score was created between the standardized quiz scores so that the degree to which the variability in each quiz affected the outcome would be the same. Unlike the quiz scores, the difference z score conforms to a Gaussian distribution as demonstrated in Figure 5 . The difference z score is standardized with a mean of 0 and a SD of 1.08. On the average, subjects in the MM group had lower scores on the second quiz (-.2061 SD ), while those in the SNT group increased by about the same amount (.2093 SD ). This represents about two-tenths of a SD . The fact that the scores of the groups vacillated by almost the same amount is not by chance. A two-tailed independent samples t test revealed a significant difference between the means of the z score difference: t (129 df) = 2.241, p = .027.

Differences between quiz scores using a standardized z score . A difference score was created between the standardized quiz scores so that the degree to which the variability in each quiz affected the outcome would be the same. The difference score is standardized with a mean of 0 and a SD of 1.08. On the average, subjects in the MM group had lower scores on the second quiz (-.2061 SD ), while those in the SNT group increased by about the same amount (.2093 SD ). This represents about two-tenths of a SD and the difference was found to be significant ( p = .027).

HSRT assessment of critical thinking

Descriptive statistics of pre-HSRT scores for all subjects ( N = 131) were as follows: total ( M = 23.75, SD = 3.38), analysis ( M = 4.85, SD = 1.06), inference ( M = 3.82, SD = 1.25), evaluation ( M = 5.30, SD = .84), induction ( M = 7.97, SD = 1.20), and deduction ( M = 7.59, SD = 1.76). Descriptive statistics of post-HSRT scores for all subjects ( N = 131) were as follows: total ( M = 23.73, SD = 3.78), analysis ( M = 4.84, SD = 1.05), inference ( M = 3.74, SD = 1.24), evaluation ( M = 5.28, SD = .88), induction ( M = 7.96, SD = 1.24), and deduction ( M = 7.69, SD = 1.91). Descriptive statistics comparing pre-HSRT scores between subjects in the SNT group and MM group are found in Table 2 . Similarly, descriptive statistics comparing post-HSRT scores between subjects in the SNT group and MM group are found in Table 3 .

ANOVA was used to compare the means of pre- and post-HSRT total scores and subscores between the SNT group and MM group. No significant differences were found among any of the pre- and post-HSRT total scores and subscores. The bar chart in Figure 6 , which displays pre- and post-HSRT total scores, demonstrates no significant differences between pre- and post-HSRT total scores between groups.

HSRT total scores between groups . There are no significant differences in mean total scores between groups on both the pre-HSRT and post-HSRT.

The difference in mean score of the pre-quiz (quiz 1) between subjects in the SNT group and MM group was not significant. This baseline finding suggests that both groups retained the same amount of information equally based upon a single, 5-minute exposure to the text passage.

The post-quiz (quiz 2) was administered to subjects after they were re-exposed to the text passage and instructed to write notes using either their preferred note-taking strategy (SNT) or newly acquired mind mapping (MM) strategy. Although the mean score of the post-quiz (quiz 2) was slightly higher among subjects in the SNT group (7.85, SD = 1.40) compared to those in the MM group (7.64, SD = 1.22), the difference was not significant. This result suggests that mind mapping is not superior to standard note-taking for the short-term recall of domain-based information, an outcome that concurs with the results of Wickramasinghe et al.[ 26 ]. However, it should be emphasized that subjects in the MM group did not score significantly less than those in the SNT group even though they were only given a single, brief overview of the mind map learning strategy without a practice period to increase proficiency in creating mind maps. The fact that no significant difference was found between groups may lend support to the utility of mind mapping in medical education. Subjects in the SNT group had the benefit of using their preferred note-taking strategy and by allowing them to do so, these subjects were able to cognitively organize, integrate, and learn the information based on a system that has been firmly reinforced throughout their academic careers. A post hoc analysis of the notes written by SNT subjects revealed that none of them wrote notes remotely similar to mind maps or concept maps. In fact, most of their notes were written in a traditional categorical way with information starting at the top of the page and ending at the bottom. Consequently, subjects in the SNT group focused on learning the material in a short period of time without being distracted to write notes in a new way. In contrast, subjects in the MM group were forced to use the unfamiliar mind map learning strategy (based on a brief introductory learning session) that may have distracted them from optimally learning the material. Yet, despite the lack of exposure to mind maps and their novice status, subjects in the MM group were able to integrate, and ultimately, retain enough information so that they did not score significantly less than subjects in the SNT group. This important finding suggests the strength of mind mapping even after a single, 30-minute introductory session in promoting critical thinking in the novice learner, and supports the notion of adult learner capability[ 7 ].

As mentioned previously, there were 10 questions on quiz 2: the first 5 were the same questions found on quiz 1 and questions 6 through 10 were new. When looking at questions 6 through 10 on quiz 2, the mean score among subjects in the SNT group was 3.95 ( SD = .87) and the mean score among subjects in the MM group was 3.79 ( SD = .86). This difference was not found to be significant. Similar to responses for questions 1 through 5 on quiz 2, the mean score in the SNT group was slightly higher on quiz 2 (questions 6 through 10) than the MM group, but not significant. Again, this finding may have been due to the fact that subjects in the SNT group were using a familiar note-taking strategy, whereas those in the MM were using an unfamiliar strategy.

Further analysis of the difference between mean total scores of the pre-quiz (quiz 1) and post-quiz (quiz 2) in each group was calculated using a standardized z score (Figure 6 ). The SNT group revealed an increase of about two-tenths of a SD (.2093 SD ), while the MM group decreased by about two-tenths of a SD (-.2061 SD ). Using a two-tailed independent samples t test, this difference was found to be significant . This result suggests that mind mapping did not enhance short-term memory in this novice group of subjects who were only exposed to a brief overview of how to construct mind maps.

The results of the present study support those of Wickramasinghe et al,[ 26 ] who found that the mean quiz score of subjects in their mind map group was 31.3% and the mean quiz score of subjects in their self-selected study group was 37.6%. These authors reported that there was no significant difference in scores between groups[ 26 ]. However, the results of the present study are in contrast to those of Farrand et al,[ 25 ] who reported that recall was only slightly higher in the mind map group after the second quiz. After adjusting for baseline performance and motivation, this difference was significant. Without the adjustment, the difference was not significant, which is consistent with the findings of the present study. Farrand et al[ 25 ] reported a robust difference in recall in favor of subjects in the mind map group after one week.

The mean total score on the pre-HSRT for subjects in the SNT group was 23.41 ( SD = 3.69) and the mean total score on the pre-HSRT for subjects in the MM group was 24.07 ( SD = 3.04). This difference was not significant and this finding demonstrates that both groups had similar baseline critical thinking abilities as measured by the HSRT.

The mean total score on the post-HSRT for subjects in the SNT group was 23.47 ( SD = 3.82) and the mean total score on the post-HSRT for subjects in the MM group was 23.97 ( SD = 3.75). Subjects in the MM group did not score significantly different than those in the SNT group on the post-HSRT, a finding that suggests the power of mind mapping even when it was introduced to a novice group of subjects during a brief introductory session. The fact that subjects in the MM group scored worse on the post-HSRT compared to their pre-HSRT total scores could be explained by their unfamiliarity in creating mind maps or fatigue from the testing process. Additionally, requiring MM subjects to learn mind mapping may have created contextual interference that hampered short-term retention as demonstrated by the results of the post-HSRT; however, this may actually promote long-term retention as noted in the contextual interference literature[ 32 ]. Subjects in the MM group may have been so preoccupied with creating mind maps that they failed to think critically about the information. Therefore, repeated exposure to mind mapping over time may be a necessary requisite in order to better test whether the use of mind mapping increases critical thinking as measured by the HSRT.

Limitations and future research

The SNT group remained in the lecture hall during the break while the MM group was concomitantly exposed to a 30-minute mind map presentation. A potential limitation, therefore, is that during the break subjects in the SNT group could have mentally reviewed the text passage. These subjects were observed during this time and were not permitted to view the text passage. The possibility that they were able to accurately recall the text passage during the break (while the MM group listened to the presentation) is unlikely because they were exposed to the text passage 20 minutes before the break and had also taken an intervening math quiz (see Figure 3 ).

Because critical thinking takes time to develop, short-term changes in critical thinking was another limitation of the current study. Multiple mind-map sessions may be necessary for students to gain proficiency in the strategy before significant changes in the acquisition of domain-based knowledge and critical thinking emerge. Recently, Srinivasan et al[ 24 ] reported that concept map scores significantly increased in physicians who created concept maps on two separate occasions. They recommended that future concept map studies should allow subjects to create concept maps on multiple occasions. This may also be true of mind maps because, although not investigated in medical students, researchers have demonstrated that mind map depth increases as students gain proficiency in their construction over time[ 13 , 30 ].

Future studies should be designed to allow subjects to create multiple mind maps so that they can gain proficiency in the technique. This would enable them to move from novice to expert regarding the creation of mind maps, and therefore, could ultimately allow them to emphasize critical thinking. Additionally, these studies could also measure longitudinal changes in HSRT scores as students become more proficient at mind mapping.

The results of this study demonstrate that the mind map learning strategy does not result in a significant gain in short-term, domain-based knowledge (assessed using multiple-choice quizzes) compared to standard note-taking in medical students. However, in subjects who were unfamiliar with mind mapping, a short 30-minute presentation on the strategy allowed them to score similarly to subjects in the SNT group who used strategies that have been firmly established. By using preferred note-taking strategies, subjects in the SNT group were able to rely on previous note-taking experiences that helped shaped their current understanding and learning of the material in the text passage,[ 10 ] while those in the MM group could not rely on prior mind map note-taking experiences as they were novices. Subjects in the MM group may have relied on previous knowledge of other non-mind map note-taking strategies, which could explain why they were able to score similarly. The similarity in mean scores between groups lends support to adult learning theory[ 7 , 8 , 11 ].

This study demonstrates that mind mapping can be easily taught to medical students who have no previous background in mind mapping and doing so requires no cost or expensive equipment [ 22 , 33 ]. Thus, mind mapping may be an attractive resource to add to the study-strategy repertoire of entering medical students to help them learn and organize information. As discussed by Daley and Torre [ 34 ] in a recent analytical review, the effects of mapping need to be investigated longitudinally. The data of the present study build upon those of previous studies [ 25 , 26 ] and should provide a springboard for those interested in investigating the effect of mind mapping on critical thinking and clinical reasoning during medical school and beyond.

Abbreviations

analysis of variance

concept map

concept map assessment

Graduate Record Examination

Health Sciences Reasoning Test

Medical College Admissions Test

mind map assessment rubric

problem-based learning

standard deviation

standard error of the mean

standard note-taking

Anderson J, Graham A: A problem in medical education: Is there an information overload?. Med Educ. 1980, 14: 4-7. 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1980.tb02604.x.

Article   Google Scholar  

Rye PD, Wallace J, Bidgood P: Instructions in learning skills: An integrated approach. Med Educ. 1993, 27: 470-473. 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1993.tb00305.x.

Barrows HS: Practice-based Learning: Problem-based Learning Applied to Medical Education. 1994, Springfield: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine

Google Scholar  

Dolmans DH, De Grave W, Wolfhagen IH, van der Vleuten CP: Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Med Educ. 2005, 39: 732-741. 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02205.x.

Kim S, Phillips WR, Pinsky L, Brock D, Phillips K, Keary J: A conceptual framework for developing teaching cases: A review and synthesis of the literature across disciplines. Med Educ. 2006, 40: 867-876. 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02544.x.

Zajaczek JE, Gotz F, Kupka T, Behrends M, Haubitz B, Donnerstag F, Rodt T, Walter GF, Matthies HK, Becker H: eLearning in education and advanced training in neuroradiology: Introduction of a web-based teaching and learning application. Neuroradiology. 2006, 48: 640-646. 10.1007/s00234-006-0108-x.

Ausubel DP: Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. 1978, New York, NY: Holt Rinehart and Winston

Bodner GM: Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. J Chem Educ. 1986, 63: 873-878. 10.1021/ed063p873.

Burrell G, Morgan G: Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis. 1979, London, England: Heinemann

Forrest SP, Peterson TO: It's called andragogy. Acad Manag Learn Educ. 2006, 5: 113-122.

Knowles M: The Modern Practice of Adult Education: Andragogy Versus Pedagogy. 1977, New York, NY: Association Press

Mezirow J: A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Educ Q. 1981, 32: 3-24. 10.1177/074171368103200101.

Daley BJ, Shaw CR, Balistrieri T, Glasenapp K, Piacentine L: Concept maps: A strategy to teach and evaluate critical thinking. J Nurs Educ. 1999, 38: 42-47.

APA: Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction. ERIC document: ED. 1990, 315-423.

Willingham DT: Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach?. Am Educator. 2007, 31: 8-19.

Taconis R, Ferguson-Hessler MGM, Broekkamp H: Teaching science problem solving: An overview of experimental work. J Res Sci Teach. 2001, 38: 442-468. 10.1002/tea.1013.

West DC, Pomeroy JR, Park JK, Gerstenberger EA, Sandoval J: Critical thinking in graduate medical education: A role for concept mapping assessment?. JAMA. 2000, 284: 1105-1110. 10.1001/jama.284.9.1105.

Novak JD, Gowin DB: Learning How to Learn. 1984, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press

Book   Google Scholar  

Buzan T, Buzan B: The Mind Map Book. 1993, London, England: BBC Books

Gelb MJ: How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci: Seven Steps to Genius Every Day. 1998, New York, NY: Dell

McDermott P, Clarke DN: Mind Maps in Medicine. 1998, Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone

D'Antoni AV, Pinto Zipp G: Applications of the mind map learning technique in chiropractic education: A pilot study and literature review. Journal of Chiropractic Humanities. 2006, 13: 2-11.

Day JC, Bellezza FS: The relation between visual imagery mediators and recall. Mem Cogn. 1983, 11: 251-257.

Srinivasan M, McElvany M, Shay JM, Shavelson RJ, West DC: Measuring knowledge structure: Reliability of concept mapping assessment in medical education. Acad Med. 2008, 83: 1196-1203. 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31818c6e84.

Farrand P, Hussain F, Hennessy E: The efficacy of the 'mind map' study technique. Med Educ. 2002, 36: 426-431. 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01205.x.

Wickramasinghe A, Widanapathirana N, Kuruppu O, Liyanage I, Karunathilake I: Effectiveness of mind maps as a learning tool for medical students. South East Asian J Med Educ. 2007, 1: 30-32.

Bellezza FS: The spatial arrangement mnemonic. J Educ Psychol. 1983, 75: 830-837. 10.1037/0022-0663.75.6.830.

D'Antoni A, Pinto Zipp G, Olson V: Interrater reliability of the mind map assessment rubric in a cohort of medical students. BMC Med Educ. 2009, 9: 19-10.1186/1472-6920-9-19.

Faul F, Erdfelder E: GPOWER: A priori, post-hoc, and compromise power analysis for MS-DOS computer program. 1992, Bonn, Germany: Bonn University Department of Psychology, 3

Pinto Zipp G, Maher C, D'Antoni AV: Mind Maps: Useful schematic tool for organizing and integrating concepts of complex patient care in the clinic and classroom. J Coll Teaching Learning. 2009, 6: 59-68.

Facione NC, Facione PA: The Health Sciences Reasoning Test: Test Manual. 2006, Millbrae: The California Academic Press

Lee TD, Magill RA: Locus of contextual interference. J Exp Psychol Learn. 1983, 9: 730-746. 10.1037/0278-7393.9.4.730.

Degirmenci Ü, Kreil S, Burk S, Breuer G, Kornhuber J, Weih M: Anteil stigma-assoziierter themen im psychiatrie-konzept von medizinstudierenden in der einführung in die klinische medizin: Eine mind-map studie. GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung. 2010, 27: 1-5.

Daley BJ, Torre DM: Concept maps in medical education: An analytical literature review. Med Educ. 2010, 44: 440-448. 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03628.x.

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/10/61/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Eileen D Chusid, PhD, for her assistance during the data-acquisition phase of this study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Graduate Programs in Health Sciences, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Seton Hall University, 400 South Orange Avenue, South Orange, NJ, 07079, USA

Anthony V D'Antoni, Genevieve Pinto Zipp, Valerie G Olson & Terrence F Cahill

Division of Pre-clinical Sciences, New York College of Podiatric Medicine, 53 East 124th Street, New York, NY, 10035, USA

Anthony V D'Antoni

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony V D'Antoni .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AVD conceived the design of the study, performed the statistical analyses, scored the mind maps, and drafted the manuscript. GPV participated in the design of the study, scored the mind maps, and drafted the manuscript. VGO participated in the design of the study, scored the mind maps, and helped draft the manuscript. TFC participated in the design of the study and helped draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ original submitted files for images

Below are the links to the authors’ original submitted files for images.

Authors’ original file for figure 1

Authors’ original file for figure 2, authors’ original file for figure 3, authors’ original file for figure 4, authors’ original file for figure 5, authors’ original file for figure 6, rights and permissions.

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

D'Antoni, A.V., Zipp, G.P., Olson, V.G. et al. Does the mind map learning strategy facilitate information retrieval and critical thinking in medical students?. BMC Med Educ 10 , 61 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-61

Download citation

Received : 18 November 2009

Accepted : 16 September 2010

Published : 16 September 2010

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-61

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Medical Student
• Critical Thinking
• Text Passage
• Contextual Interference

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Impact of mind mapping on the critical thinking ability of clinical nursing students and teaching application

Affiliations.

• 1 School of Nursing, Nursing Department, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
• 2 Nursing Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
• PMID: 32212879
• PMCID: PMC7370812
• DOI: 10.1177/0300060519893225

Objective: We analyzed the impact of mind mapping on the critical thinking ability of clinical nursing students and its use as a teaching application. This study provides reference information for clinical teaching.

Methods: We selected 64 nursing students using convenience sampling. Participants received basic knowledge training of mind mapping in three sessions during the intervention. Questionnaires on critical thinking ability were designed by the researchers, adopting the Chinese version of the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory. Data collected using the questionnaires included learning strategy function and clinical skill improvement with mind mapping, as well as students’ degree of adaptability to mind mapping. Participants’ critical thinking ability before and after the intervention was analyzed using a paired t -test.

Results: The critical thinking inclination of nursing students was significantly improved after intervention compared with that before the intervention ( t = −0.74). The four dimensions of open-mindedness, inquisitiveness, cognitive maturity, and systematicity among nursing students after the intervention were also significantly improved compared with before the intervention.

Conclusion: Mind mapping is conducive to improving the critical thinking ability of clinical nursing students.

Keywords: China; Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory; Mind map; clinical education; critical thinking ability; nursing students.

PubMed Disclaimer

Examples of nursing student’s mind…

Examples of nursing student’s mind map.

Similar articles

• Critical thinking dispositions and learning styles of baccalaureate nursing students from China. Zhang H, Lambert V. Zhang H, et al. Nurs Health Sci. 2008 Sep;10(3):175-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2018.2008.00393.x. Nurs Health Sci. 2008. PMID: 18786058
• The Effects of Reflective Training on the Disposition of Critical Thinking for Nursing Students in China: A Controlled Trial. Zhang C, Fan H, Xia J, Guo H, Jiang X, Yan Y. Zhang C, et al. Asian Nurs Res (Korean Soc Nurs Sci). 2017 Sep;11(3):194-200. doi: 10.1016/j.anr.2017.07.002. Epub 2017 Aug 18. Asian Nurs Res (Korean Soc Nurs Sci). 2017. PMID: 28991600 Clinical Trial.
• Comparing the effects of traditional lecture and flipped classroom on nursing students' critical thinking disposition: A quasi-experimental study. Dehghanzadeh S, Jafaraghaee F. Dehghanzadeh S, et al. Nurse Educ Today. 2018 Dec;71:151-156. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.027. Epub 2018 Sep 28. Nurse Educ Today. 2018. PMID: 30286373
• The effectiveness of concept mapping on development of critical thinking in nursing education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Yue M, Zhang M, Zhang C, Jin C. Yue M, et al. Nurse Educ Today. 2017 May;52:87-94. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.02.018. Epub 2017 Mar 1. Nurse Educ Today. 2017. PMID: 28273528 Review.
• Teaching critical thinking skills to undergraduate nursing students. Beeken JE, Dale ML, Enos MF, Yarbrough S. Beeken JE, et al. Nurse Educ. 1997 May-Jun;22(3):37-9. doi: 10.1097/00006223-199705000-00016. Nurse Educ. 1997. PMID: 9197656 Review.
• Barriers and Facilitators Experienced by Undergraduate Nursing Faculty Teaching Clinical Judgment: A Qualitative Study. Kerns C, Wedgeworth M. Kerns C, et al. SAGE Open Nurs. 2024 Aug 18;10:23779608241274728. doi: 10.1177/23779608241274728. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec. SAGE Open Nurs. 2024. PMID: 39161937 Free PMC article.
• From Chaos to Clarity: Use of Mind Maps as a Tool to Ensure Better Learning among Medical Students. Shrivastava SR, Shrivastava PS. Shrivastava SR, et al. Indian J Community Med. 2024 Jan-Feb;49(1):233-236. doi: 10.4103/ijcm.ijcm_312_23. Epub 2024 Jan 12. Indian J Community Med. 2024. PMID: 38425952 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
• Mind mapping in recalling and retrieving core contents in anesthesia technology students. Sajadi AS, Majd PM, Maroufi SS, Abolghasemi J. Sajadi AS, et al. J Educ Health Promot. 2023 Nov 27;12:397. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_1423_22. eCollection 2023. J Educ Health Promot. 2023. PMID: 38333160 Free PMC article.
• Effects of mind mapping based on standardized patient program in patient education among postgraduate nursing students in clinical setting. Wang L, Wang Y, Wang X, Xue C. Wang L, et al. BMC Med Educ. 2023 Dec 20;23(1):982. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04944-4. BMC Med Educ. 2023. PMID: 38124105 Free PMC article.
• Mind Mapping as a Novel Method in Teaching the Morphology of Skin Lesions: A Quasi-Experimental Study. Palaniappan V, Karthikeyan K, Mohan R. Palaniappan V, et al. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2023 Apr;11(2):80-85. doi: 10.30476/JAMP.2023.97240.1750. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2023. PMID: 37113684 Free PMC article.
• Chan ZC. A systematic review of critical thinking in nursing education. Nurse Educ Today 2013; 33: 236–240. - PubMed
• Ingram B, Jesse M, Fleagle S, et al. Transform, interact, learn, engage (TILE): creating learning spaces that transform undergraduate education. In: Carpenter RG (ed.) Cases on higher education spaces: innovation, collaboration, and technology 2013, pp.165–185.
• Naber J, Wyatt TH. The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 2014; 34: 67–72. - PubMed
• Jeong HS. Critical thinking disposition, problem solving process, and empathy among Nursing Students. Adv Sci Technol Lett 2015; 103: 44–48.
• Zhang ZG, Hou YY, Zhang J, et al. The influence of seven different teaching methods in the critical thinking ability of nursing student: a network meta-analysis. Chin J Nurs 2016; 51: 960–966.

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

Related information

Linkout - more resources, full text sources.

• Europe PubMed Central
• PubMed Central

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Critical Thinking Template: 5W + 1H

Join Biggerplate FREE to access thousands of mind maps!

Already a member? Login .

This mind map was made with Inspiration. Visit Inspiration

Related Mind Maps:

Share this mind map.

To open this mind map, you`ll need Visit Website or compatible mind mapping software installed.

Need help? Please contact us

Another free Inspiration Strategy Mind Map shared on Biggerplate! Register FREE to download thousands of mind map templates and examples!

Register FREE to download this map.

Already registered? Login .

Go Further with Mind Mapping: Upgrade to Biggerplate Plus!

Upcoming webinars:.

Validate your mind mapping software skills with Biggerplate Certification!

Fill out the form below to sign-up for a new account

MindMap Gallery Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking

This is a mind map about Critical Thinking.

• Recommended to you

use of ppen source intelligenc

semantic map

sexua assault

theological conflict

open education

6 steps of goal setting and achieving

How to Make Postitive Effects on Communication

Concepts about Money

Careers in Education and Training

Adapted Physical Education Specialists

Recognize Assumptions

Distinguish fact from opinion

What is the basis of your opinion?

What evidence do you have to support it?

Why do you believe the information is accurate?

Why do you think this would apply to this problem?

Consider relevance

What assumptions are you making?

Why do you believe your assumptions apply to this situation?

What assumptions do you think other people are making?

If we were to shift our assumptions, how would that affect our decision?

Seek alternative viewpoints

How do you see the situation?

Why do you see it this way?

What were you expecting to see?

How do you see this playing out in the future?

How might the situation be different if different assumptions were made?

Evaluate Arguments

Be aware of persuasion techniques

What's in it for me?

What's their intent?

What are the consequences?

Recognize bias

Is this statement free of judgment?

Is there confirmation bias?

Check strong emotions

How is emotion affecting the way information is being presented to you?

How are your emotions affecting your ability to think critically?

How would you interpret the same data if strong emotions were not at play?

Draw Conclusions

Weigh data carefully

Where does the data come from?

Why consider the data?

Is data relevant?

What's most important?

What does the data say?

How else can the data be interpreted?

Use multiple sources

How many sources are used and for what purpose?

Are there other source that could be used?

Ask others to critique

Who should critique your work and why?

What do you want them to do?