Berpikir kritis merupakan suatu aktivitas mental yang dilakukan secara bernalar dan reflektif dengan melibatkan keterampilan interpretasi, analisis, evaluasi, inferensi, eksplanasi, dan regulasi diri. Siswa perlu berpikir kritis dalam  menyelesaikan masalah matematika model PISA. Siswa dalam menyelesaikan masalah seringkali menghadapi kesulitan dan hambatan. Oleh karena itu penting bagi siswa memiliki daya juang yang disebut Adversity Quotient.

        Jenis penelitian ini termasuk penelitian deskriptif dengan pendekatan kualitatif. Penelitian ini mendeskripsikan profil berpikir kritis siswa SMP dalam menyelesaikan masalah matematika model PISA ditinjau dari adversity quotient. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan di SMP Negeri 32 Surabaya dengan subjek masing masing satu siswa yang memiliki adversity quotient tipe climber dan camper.Teknik pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan cara pemberian angket Adversity Response Profile, tes pemecahan masalah matematika model PISA, dan wawancara. Data dianalisis berdasarkan indikator berpikir kritis interpretasi, analisis, evaluasi, inferensi, eksplanasi, dan regulasi diri pada setiap tahap penyelesaian masalah memahami masalah, merencanakan penyelesaian masalah, melaksanakan rencana penyelesaian masalah, dan memeriksa kembali. 

          Hasil penelitian yang diperoleh menunjukkan bahwa pada tahap memahami masalah antara subjek climber dan camper menunjukkan interpretasi setelah membaca soal. Selain itu, dalam menentukan informasi penting, subjek climber dan camper telah menyampaikan dengan rinci dan tepat. Pada tahap merencanakan penyelesaian masalah, rencana yang dipaparkan oleh subjek climber lebih tepat dibandingkan rencana yang diungkapkan subjek camper, namun secara garis besar rencana yang tersebut adalah sama. Subjek climber telah menunjukkan evaluasi terhadap rencana penyelesaiannya. Subjek climber juga mampu mengidentifikasi hubungan antara informasi yang diperoleh dengan cara penyelesaian yang dimilikinya dan memaparkan alasan logis yang mendukung rencana penyelesaiannya, akan tetapi subjek camper dalam hal ini masih belum mampu melakukannya. Selanjutnya, antara subjek climber dan subjek camper, mereka sama sama menunjukkan regulasi terhadap rencana penyelesaian mereka. Pada tahap melaksanakan rencana penyelesaian, kedua subjek yaitu subjek climber dan subjek camper sama sama menunjukkan penyelesaian berdasarkan rencana yang telah disusun. Subjek climber juga menyajikan langkah langkah penyelesaiannya lebih lengkap dibandingkan subjek camper. Akan tetapi, kedua subjek climber dan camper sama sama menunjukkan regulasi dengan memeriksa kembali langkah langkah mereka. Pada tahap memeriksa kembali, subjek climber lebih rinci dan tepat dalam menarik kesimpulan dibandingkan subjek camper. Subjek climber dan camper menunjukkan evaluasi terhadap solusi yang mereka peroleh dan menunjukkan regulasi dengan mengecek ulang hasil pengerjaan mereka. 

        Critical thinking is a mental activity carried out in a rational and reflective manner by involving skills of interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self regulation. Students need to think critically in solving mathematical problems of PISA model. Students in solving problems often face difficulties and obstacles. Therefore it is important for students to have fighting power called Adversity Quotient.

This type of research includes descriptive research with a qualitative approach. This study describe the profile of students critical thinking in solving mathematical problems of PISA model reviewed from adversity quotient. This research was conducted in State Junior High School 32 Surabaya with the subject of one student who had the climber and camper adversity quotient. Data collection techniques were carried out by giving questionnaires of Adversity Response Profile, mathematical problem solving tests on the PISA model, and interviews. Data are analyzed based on critical thinking indicators interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self regulation at each stage of problem solving understanding the problems, devising a plan, carrying out the plan, and looking back.

The research results obtained show that at the stage of understanding the problem, between the subjects of climber and camper shows an interpretation after reading the questions. In addition, determining important information, the subject of the climber and camper has conveyed in detail and precisely. At the stage of devising a plan, the plan presented by the climber subject is more appropriate than the plan revealed by the camper subject, but in general the plan is the same. The climber subject has shown an evaluation of the planned completion. The climber subject is also able to identify the relationship between the information obtained by the solution he has and explain the logical reasons that support the solution, but the camper subject in this case is still unable to do so. Furthermore, between the subjects of the climber and the subject of the camper, they both showed regulation of their completion plan. At the stage of carriying out the plan, the two subjects, namely the subject of climber and the subject of the camper, both showed solutions based on the plan that had been prepared. The climber subject also provides complete completion steps compared to the camper subject. However, both the climber and camper subjects both showed regulation by reexamining their steps. At the stage of looking back, the subject of the climber is more detailed and precise in drawing conclusions than the subject of the camper. The climber and camper subjects show evaluations of the solutions they have obtained and show regulations by checking their results.