Expertise and Reason in Creative Thinking: Evidence from Case Studies and the Laboratory

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511606915.003

1 - Expertise and Reason in Creative Thinking: Evidence from Case Studies and the Laboratory

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 January 2010

Robert W. Weisberg

Edited by

James C. Kaufman and

John Baer

Show author details

Robert W. Weisberg: Affiliation:
Psychology Department, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
James C. Kaufman: Affiliation:
California State University, San Bernardino
John Baer: Affiliation:
Rider University, New Jersey

Book contents

Get access

Summary

The thesis of this chapter is that knowledge and reason play an important role in creative thinking. I equate knowledge and expertise (e.g., Ericsson, 1996, 1998, 1999; Weisberg, 2005), the capacity to perform at a high level, acquired through practice (e.g., an expert pilot); or the possession of exceptional knowledge, acquired through study (e.g., an expert on medieval art). Reason is the ability to draw conclusions, a process in which one thought follows from another as the result of deduction or induction. Creative thinking refers to processes underlying production of creative products, which are novel works – or innovations – brought about through goal-directed activities. Thus, we examine the hypothesis that skill and knowledge, as well as reasoning processes, play important roles in innovation. That hypothesis is of interest because much theorizing concerning creative thinking assumes exactly the opposite, that is, that expertise and reason cannot support creative thinking (e.g., Csikszentmihalyi, 1996; Simonton, 2003; Sternberg, 1996). I first consider two general orientation issues: the definition of creativity and whether expertise and reasoning should be considered separate. I then examine the negative view concerning expertise and reason in creativity, which I call the tension view. I then present evidence, from case studies of creative achievements as well as from laboratory studies of problem solving, that expertise and reason play critical roles in creative thinking.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development , pp. 7 - 42

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606915.003 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Calder, A. (1966). An autobiography with pictures. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar

Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67, 380–400.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). The mind's eye in chess. In Chase, W. G. (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 215–281). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar

DeGroot, A. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving. Psychological Monographs, 58 (Whole No. 270).CrossRef Google Scholar

Ericsson, K. A. (1996). The acquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some of the issues. In Ericsson, K. A. (Ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports, and games (pp. 1–50). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Ericsson, K. A. (1998). The scientific study of expert levels of performance: General implications for optimal learning and creativity. High Ability Studies, 9, 75–100.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ericsson, K. A. (1999). Creative expertise as superior reproducible performance: Innovative and flexible aspects of expert performance. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 329–333.Google Scholar

Everett, W. (2001). The Beatles as musicians: The Quarry Men through “Rubber Soul.”New York: Oxford.Google Scholar

Fleck, J. I., & Weisberg, R. W. (2004). The use of verbal protocols as data: An analysis of insight in the candle problem. Memory & Cognition, 32, 990–1006.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Fleck, J. I., & Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Are all insight problems created equal? The search for the prototypical insight problem. Manuscript in preparation, Temple University.Google Scholar

Frensch, P. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Expertise and intelligent thinking: When is it worse to know better? In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence, Vol. 5 (pp. 157–188). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.

Friedel, R., & Israel, P. (1986). Edison's electric light: Biography of an invention. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. New York: Basic.Google Scholar

Hayes, J. R. (1989). Cognitive processes in creativity. In Glover, J. A., Ronning, R. R., & Reynolds, C. R. (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 135–145). New York: Plenum.CrossRef Google Scholar

Heppenheimer, T. A. (2003). First flight. The Wright brothers and the invention of the airplane. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar

Holmes, F. L. (1996). Expert performance and the history of science. In Ericsson, K. A. (Ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports, and games (pp. 313–319). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

James, W. (1880, October). Great men, great thoughts, and the environment. Atlantic Monthly, 46, 441–459.Google Scholar

Kaplan, C. A., & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 374–419.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kozbelt, A. (2004). Reexamining the equal-odds rule in classical composers. In Frois, J. P., Andrade, P., & Marques, J. F. (Eds.) Art and science: Proceedings of the XVIII Congress of the International Association of Empirical Esthetics, 540–543. Lisbon, Portugal: IAEI.Google Scholar

Kozbelt, A. (2005). Factors affecting aesthetic success and improvement in creativity: A case study of the musical genres of Mozart. Psychology of Music, 33, 235–255.CrossRef Google Scholar

Landau, E. G. (1989). Jackson Pollock. New York: Abrams.Google Scholar

Luchins, A. S., & Luchins, E. H. (1959). Rigidity of behavior. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Press.Google Scholar

Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Metcalfe, J. (1987). Premonitions of insight predict impending error. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 623–634.Google Scholar

Metcalfe, J., & Weibe, D. (1987). Intuition in insight and non-insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 15, 238–246.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ohlsson, S. (1992). Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In Keane, M. T. & Gilhooly, K. J. (Eds.), Advances in the psychology of thinking (Vol. 1, pp. 1–44). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar

Olby, R. (1994). The path to the double helix: The discovery of DNA. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Pariser, D. (1987). The juvenile drawings of Klee, Toulouse-Lautrec, and Picasso. Visual Arts Research, 13, 53–67.Google Scholar

Perkins, D. (1981). The mind's best work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.Google Scholar

Perkins, D. (2000). The eureka effect: The art and logic of breakthrough thinking. New York: Norton.Google Scholar

Reising, R. (2002). Every sound there is: The Beatles' “Revolver” and the transformation of rock and roll. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar

Sadie, S. (Ed.). (2001). The new Grove dictionary of music and musicians. New York: Norton.Google Scholar

Scheerer, M. (1963). On problem-solving. Scientific American, 208, 118–128.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Schooler, J. W., Ohlsson, S., & Brooks, K. (1993). Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 166–183.CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1995). Foresight in insight? A Darwinian answer. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 465–494). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2003). Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: The integration of product, person, and process perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 475–494.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Costs of expertise. In Ericsson, K. A. (Ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports, and games (pp. 347–354). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Watson, J. D. (1968). The double helix: A personal account of the discovery of the structure of DNA. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar

Weisberg, R. W. (1986). Creativity: Genius and other myths. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar

Weisberg, R. W. (1993). Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar

Weisberg, R. W. (2003). Case studies of innovation. In Shavinina, L. (Ed.), International handbook of innovation. New York: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar

Weisberg, R. W. (2004). On structure in the creative process: A quantitative case-study of the creation of Picasso's Guernica. Empirical Studies in the Arts, 22, 23–54.CrossRef Google Scholar

Weisberg, R. W. (2005). Modes of expertise in creative thinking: Evidence from case studies. In Ericsson, A. & Feltovich, P. (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook on Expertise and Expert Performance. New York: Cambridge.Google Scholar

Weisberg, R. W., & Sturdivant, N. (2005). An analysis of the creative productivity in four classical composers. Unpublished manuscript, Temple University.Google Scholar

Weisberg, R. W., & Suls, J. M. (1973). An information-processing analysis of Duncker's candle problem. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 255–276.CrossRef Google Scholar

Zaslaw, N. (1989). Mozart's symphonies: Context, performance practice, reception. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.