5.2 Thinking, Problem Solving and Creativity: An Overview

A review of the literature on thinking and problem-solving reveals a variety of theoretical orientations and a whole host of experimental investigations. To sift through this mass of data is a separate task in and of itself. Consequently, we shall focus on one specific aspect of the thinking-problem-solving dimension. This is the area referred to as creativity or creative problem-solving.

In order to orient ourselves, we must briefly consider the semantics of the word. At present, investigations reveal the existence of some 50 or 60 definitions and the list is expanding every day. Sternberg examined the many definitions which have been offered, and classified them into six major groups or classes. These groupings are not mutually exclusive since each definition may contain elements which fall into different classes. The class into which a definition was placed was determined by the main theme of the definition.

The first class of definitions will be labeled “Gestalt” or “Perception” type definitions wherein the major emphasis is upon the recombination of ideas or the restructuring of a “Gestalt”. Certainly, Wertheimer’s definition that creativity is the “process of destroying one gestalt in favor of a better one” belongs in this category. So also the definition of keep that it is “the intersection of two ideas for the first time” and Duhrssen’s notion that it is the “translation of knowledge and ideas into a new form” belongs in this category.

The second class of definitions may be called “end product” or “innovation” oriented definitions. A representative member of this class is Stein’s definition that “Creativity is that process which results in a novel work that is accepted as tenable or useful or satisfying by a group at some point in time”. Even Webster’s dictionary is oriented in this direction for “to create” is defined as “To bring into being”, “To produce as a work of thought or imagination”. Harmon prefers to speak of it as “Any process by which something new is produced – an idea or an object, including a new form or arrangement of old elements”.

A third class of definitions can be characterized as “Aesthetic” or “Expressive”. The major emphasis here is upon self-expression. The basic idea seems to be that one has a need to express himself in a manner which is unique to him. Any such expression is deemed to be creative. Hence we have Lee’s definition that “The creative process can be defined as ability to think in uncharted waters without influence from conventions set up by past practices.” In this vein, he offers that “The creative process is the person, the creator, working through his creation”. Northrop sees the essence of creativity as being the "decision to do something when you are irritated". Thurstone thinks of it in terms of problem sensitization and Ghiselin defines it as “The process of change, of development, of evolution, in the organization of subjective life”.

A fourth class of definitions can be characterized as “psychoanalytic” or “dynamic”. In this group, we find creativity defined in terms of certain interactional strength ratios of the id, ego and superego. In this respect, Bellak assumes that all forms of creativity are permanent operant variables of personality and he subscribes to the notion that to be creative, the ego must regress in order for preconscious or unconscious material to emerge. Leading proponents of this type of definition are Anderson, Kris and Kubie.

A fifth class of definitions can be grouped under the classification of “Solution Thinking”. Here, the emphasis is upon the thinking process itself rather than upon the actual solution of the problem. Spearman, for instance, defines creativity in terms of correlates. That is, creativity is present or occurs whenever the mind can see the relationship between two items in such a way as to generate a third item. Guilford on the other hand, defines creativity in terms of a very large number of intellectual factors. The most important of these factors are the discovery factors and the divergent-thinking factors. The discovery factors are defined as the “ability to develop information out of what is given by stimulation.” The divergent thinking factors relate to one’s ability to go off in different directions when faced with a problem. This is similar to Dunker’s notion that in order to solve a problem one often must move tangentially from common types of solution. Other proponents of this class of definitions are Poincare and Wallas.

The sixth and last class of definitions is labeled “Varia” simply because there is no easy way of characterizing them. There is, for instance, Rand’s definition that creativity is the “addition to the existing stored knowledge of mankind”. Lowenfeld speaks of it as the result of our subjective relationship with man and environment. Porsche sees it as the integration of facts, impressions, or feelings into a new form. Read feels that it is that quality of the mind which allows an individual to juggle scraps of knowledge until they fall into new and more useful patterns and Shepard speaks of it as a destructive process much like Wertheimer when he spoke of creativity in terms of destroying one Gestalt in favor of another.