On the importance of case studies in research on creativity

The present article proposes that case studies of real-world—in vivo—creative thinking, rather than laboratory—in vitro—investigations, should provide the foundation for the study of creative thinking. While there is a significant literature examining case studies of real-world creative advances, those studies have not been central in modern research on creativity. Psychological theorizing about creativity has been dominated by the “divergent thinking/remote associates” (DT/RA) perspective, which argues that creative ideas arise as the result of making connections between previously-unlinked ideas. The DT/RA view has developed independently of case-study research on creative thinking. The present paper argues that neglect of case studies by modern researchers is a mistake, for two reasons. First, in order to ensure that laboratory studies of creative thinking are relevant to real-world phenomena, it is necessary to begin our investigation of creative thinking by examining those phenomena. Second, case studies can provide evidence concerning the thought processes underlying creative advances at the highest levels that cannot ordinarily be obtained from laboratory studies. To provide support for that argument, several case studies are examined. Semmelweis’s discovery of the cause of childbed fever is presented in some detail, and brief discussions are presented of Edison’s invention of the lightbulb, Watson and Crick’s discovery of DNA, Frank Lloyd Wright’s creation of Fallingwater (the house over the waterfall), and the Wright brothers’ invention of the airplane. The results are summarized and their implications for psychological theory and research on creative thinking are discussed.