Describe and evaluate current views on divergent and convergent thinking, including the psychometric approach and the investment theory of creativity

What will be an ideal response?

Until recently, a purely cognitive perspective dominated research on creativity. Commonly used tests tapped divergent thinking—the generation of multiple and unusual possibilities when faced with a task or problem. Divergent thinking contrasts with convergent thinking, which involves arriving at a single correct answer and is emphasized on intelligence tests.
Tests of divergent thinking are known as the psychometric approach to creativity because they permit scores to be compared to the performance of standardization samples. Yet critics note that these measures are poor predictors of creative accomplishment in everyday life because they tap only one of the complex cognitive contributions to creativity. And they say nothing about personality traits, motivation, and environmental circumstances that foster creative potential. Still, divergent-thinking tests do tap relevant skills, have been the major focus of research on creativity in children, and have enhanced our understanding of the development of creativity.
Recent theories agree that many elements must converge for creativity to occur. One influential multifaceted approach is Sternberg's and Lubart's investment theory of creativity. According to Sternberg and Lubart, pursuing a novel project (one not being tackled by others) increases the chances of arriving at a creative, highly valued product. But whether a person invests in novelty depends on that person's cognitive, personality, motivational, and environmental resources.
Divergent thinking is essential for generating novel solutions to problems. But the successful creator must also choose the best responses, setting aside fruitless options. Therefore, creativity involves alternating between divergent and convergent thinking.