Critical thinking (CT) is one of the most valued soft skills of the century, and technological advancements encouraging quantity over quality of information may be endangering it. Neuroscientist MaryAnne Wolf theorized that deep (thoroughly and intently) reading information could promote CT skills. Using an experimental design, this study aimed to investigate differences in CT based on deep vs. skim reading in a sample of undergraduates. Participants (N = 60) read an article about postpartum depression and were equally assigned to one of two conditions: 1) "deep reading" (instructed to deep read for ten minutes) or 2) "skimming" (skimmed for two minutes and browsed for related articles for eight minutes). Participants then completed an interview assessing two dimensions of CT (analytical, reflecting evaluation and analysis, and synthetic, reflecting implications and argumentation). The total number of analytical and synthetic CT qualitative codes identified in each participants' responses were used as scores. MANOVA results revealed that "deep readers" evidenced more analytical CT (M = 7.92, SD = 3.34) than those who skimmed (M = 5.65, SD = 3.07). An interaction effect between gender and condition approached significance (F(1,53) = 2.76, p = .10), with men (M = 7.90, SD = 2.50) and women (M = 7.94, SD = 3.86) who deep read performing equally in analytical CT; however, in the skimming condition women (M = 4.33, SD = 2.35) scored much lower than men (M = 7.07, SD = 3.19). Both genders' responses may have been influenced by the interviewer being a senior undergraduate woman. Men may have felt compelled to "prove" their commitment to a women's topic, while women may have been intimidated and feared taking up space. Observed differences will be discussed in relation to 1) critical analysis; 2) gender socialization; and 3) implications for female authority figures in education.