Тік ойлау: Проблемаларды шешудегі талдау тәсілі

Thinking technique that involves an analytical approach to problem solving

Vertical thinking is a type of approach to problems that usually involves one being selective, analytical, and sequential. It could be said that it is the opposite of lateral thinking. Unlike lateral thinking that involves using added intuition, risk taking, and imagination through unconscious and subconscious processes, vertical thinking consists of using more of a conscious approach via rational assessment in order to take in information or make decisions. This type of thinking encourages individuals to employ a sequential approach to solving problem where a creative and multidirectional response are seen as imprudent. Vertical thinkers prefer to rely on external data and facts in order avoid failure or counterfactual thinking.

The notion of "vertical thinking" as a method of solving problems was first introduced by Edward de Bono and can be traced back to his publication of Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step in the year 1970. In the book, the concept of vertical thinking can be seen to have many parallels with that of "critical thinking". De Bono explains in his text that the main distinguishing factor between the two concepts is the fact that critical thinking only involves thinking rationally, whereas vertical thinking requires the individual to apply the modus in forming a solution.

In the aforementioned book written by de Bono (Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step), the concept of lateral thinking is expressed as the polar opposite to the vertical thinking.

Vertical thinking is distinguished as something that is linear, while on the other hand lateral thinking can be seen as non linear. The reason for this is the simple fact that vertical thinking utilizes a sequential method in solving problem, where only one solution is generally realized. On the other hand, due to the non linear nature of lateral thinking multiple solutions to the problems are fashioned in a more imaginative manner.

When an individual decides to employ vertical thinking in solving a problem, the objective is to create a solution that demonstrates the "depth of knowledge" whereas the use of lateral thinking creates a solution where the "breadth of knowledge" is exhibited. The depth of knowledge in an elucidation predominantly reflects how well the individual can construct a logical justification for their solution with regards to detail. In contrast, breadth of knowledge would express how well the individual can come up with a variety of solutions for the same problem. Disregarding aspects of logic and creativity of solutions, the disparity in objectives can be seen as a case of "quality against quantity".

Compared to lateral thinking where the number of solutions generated is only limited by the individual's ingenuity, the solutions formed through vertical thinking is a finite process. By basing the outcome on existing knowledge rather than expending the depths of your creativity in forming a solution, there are generally only a few possible answers within logical limitations. Hence, the number of solutions are viewed as finite and in most cases are only limited to one. De Bono is addressed directly in the book and fact that in the real world the application of merely one method of thinking is fictitious is called upon. It is mentioned that due to the human cognitive process, the alignment towards a single method of thinking is simply not possible. Even when individuals adopt a sequential method of solving a problem, between the initiation and conclusion of the question there has to exist some form of creativity. Furthermore, in response to how de Bono suggests the incitement of critical thinking in youth, Paul and Elder argue that critical thinking is not established, but rather an innate ability that every individual possesses.

De Bono discussed that vertical thinking is a selective process while lateral thinking can be seen as generative. Though the usage of vertical thinking is often favored over lateral thinking in most academic fields such as those of science and mathematics, there are noticeable shortcomings when considering this method of thinking. Vertical thinking is often preferred when considering academical backgrounds as the thought process provides a credible plotting. Due to the sequential nature of the thought process, the steps required to reach an outcome are often easily drawn from. This often adds to the perceived legitimacy as well as allow for easier verification of validity. Furthermore, when considering the linear approach, the solutions generated from such methods of thinking are often neutral, which is again preferred when bearing in mind an academic background. Moreover, the risks of this method of thinking is much lower than that of lateral thinking. Backed by an existing knowledge base, solutions generated using this method are more well informed. Due to the perfectionism generally involved when creating a solution, there is often a lack of originality in the answers. Referring to this point, most innovative ideas were not created through vertical thinking as ideas generated this can be seen as mundane as it is only based on existing knowledge. To quote Henry Ford, "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." The creation of the car engine can serve to exemplify the short comings of vertical thinking as we would still be riding horses today if an original approach to transportation was not realized. Lastly, the use of lateral thinking as opposed to vertical thinking allows individuals to make connections between completely unrelated fields, in many cases leading to the generation of ideas that transcends existing structures.

There are tests available that assess the characteristics that are associated with both the vertical thinking style. Some include:

This personality assessment, also known as MBTI, evaluates personality types and functions. For example, the characteristics that relate to the vertical thinking/lateral thinking style that this test assesses, involves sensing versus intuition.

This instrument, otherwise known as the SO LAT, evaluates analytic versus holistic thinking styles. The analytic thinking mode can be compared to vertical thinking, whereas holistic thinking can be compared to lateral thinking.

Since there are no tests that measure nonlinear/linear thinking specifically, Vance, Groves, Paik, and Kindler created their own measure, the LNTSP, in 2007. This measure contains 74 items that evaluates the characteristics that are mostly associated with these thinking styles, additionally, it could be compared to the MBTI. Vertical thinking (linear thinking) focused on items that are associated with using analytic thinking, external data, and factual information. An example of an item used to measure linear thinking involves the phrase "I primarily weigh quantitative factors when making a decision about a large purchase or investment, such as my age, budget needs, or future earnings." Furthermore, the participants that answer questions like this on the LNTSP would do so using a likert scale.