The art of thinking · Thinking in practice
Divergent and convergent thinking
Also known as: Divergent thinking, Convergent thinking, Divergent production, Convergent production
German: Divergentes und konvergentes Denken
In the psychology of thinking, divergent thinking generates many possible answers to an open question, and convergent thinking narrows possibilities down to the one answer that fits; J. P. Guilford introduced the distinction as divergent and convergent production in his work on creativity and the structure of intellect (1950, 1956).
- Thinking models
- Problem solving
In one sentence
Divergent thinking opens up many possible answers; convergent thinking narrows them to the one that fits — after J. P. Guilford (1950, 1956).
Example
A writer first collects every way a reader might phrase a fault (divergent), then chooses the heading wording that matches most of them (convergent).
How it applies
- Guilford’s distinction: In his presidential address to the American Psychological Association, “Creativity” (1950), J. P. Guilford called for research on creative thinking. In “The structure of intellect” (1956) he listed divergent production — generating varied answers — and convergent production — arriving at one correct or best answer — among the operations of the intellect.
- Creativity research: Tests of divergent thinking, such as listing unusual uses for an object, became common measures in creativity research; they capture one part of creativity, not creativity as a whole.
- Working method: Many problem-solving and design methods alternate the two phases on purpose: first widen the field, then decide.
Divergent vs. convergent thinking
Divergent thinking asks “What else could it be?” and is judged by the number and variety of ideas. Convergent thinking asks “Which one fits?” and is judged by correctness or fit. A method that only diverges never decides; one that only converges decides too early.
External references
- Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487
- Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53(4), 267–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040755
How to read this pool
Entries, context cards and transitional topics
The art of thinking explains ways of thinking — where a method comes from, what it asks of you and how it was adapted later. You meet four kinds of content here, each with its own job:
- Glossary entry
- Defines one concept or method of thinking: its origin, an example and how it relates to neighboring ideas. “X vs. Y” sections set two methods side by side.
- Context card of the art of thinking
- A short, self-contained answer to one question about a way of thinking — its lineage, its steps, its limits. These cards are listed on The art of thinking only.
- Transitional topicBridges both pools
- A context card that bridges both pools: it shows how a way of thinking was adapted into documentation, analysis or quality practice. It sits with the reference context cards and is marked as transitional wherever it appears.
- Reference entry or context card
- Belongs to the Glossary & Norms Space on regulation, norms and engineering. Entries here link to one only where a method is also an established tool of documentation or quality work, such as the five whys or a user’s mental model.