On Praising Convergent Thinking: Creativity as Blind Variation and Selective Retention

Abstract

Arthur Cropley (2006) emphasized the critical place that convergent thinking has in creativity. Although he briefly refers to the blind variation and selective retention (BVSR) theory of creativity, his discussion could not reflect the most recent theoretical and empirical developments in BVSR, especially the resulting combinatorial models. Therefore, in this article I first provide an overview of contemporary BVSR theory, including both a general combinatorial model and its specific manifestations (internal vs. external selection, simultaneous vs. sequential selection, exploration vs. elimination, and open vs. closed preselection). This overview then permits theoretical treatment of the connections between convergent thinking and BVSR. These connections entail the direct involvement of convergent thinking in BVSR, as well as the occasions in which sequential BVSR operates in a manner resembling convergent thinking. The article closes with a discussion of some misunderstandings regarding the function of domain-specific knowledge in BVSR creativity. This discussion includes the argument that hindsight bias often makes creativity appear far more knowledge based than it was at the time the creative ideas first emerged. This bias can make researchers overlook how BVSR mediates between expertise and creativity. Hence, care must be taken not to bypass BVSR in granting all due credit to convergent thinking.

Notes

¹As I pointed out in a book review (Simonton, 2013c), the same issue confronted Ness's (2013) Genius Unmasked, where the author listed several tools used by creative geniuses, namely, finding the right question, observation, analogy, juggling induction and deduction, changing point of view, broadening perspective, dissecting the problem, reversal, recombination and rearrangement, the power of groups, and frame shifting. The problem is that each of these, without exception, must entail the introduction of BVSR to work. For example, finding the right question presupposes that the creator risks finding the wrong question—a question that cannot be answered. Edison asked the right question when it came to the electric light, but asked the wrong questions when it came to fuel cells, mining and ore milling, and the electric car (Simonton, 2014c). Yet to get to that knowledge, he had to engage in multiple generate-and-test episodes that turned up nothing that satisfied his utility criteria. Fortunately, Ness acknowledged the necessity of applying BVSR in the final chapter of her book.