The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation.

Abstract

Research on curiosity has undergone 2 waves of intense activity. The 1st, in the 1960s, focused mainly on curiosity's psychological underpinnings. The 2nd, in the 1970s and 1980s, was characterized by attempts to measure curiosity and assess its dimensionality. This article reviews these contributions with a concentration on the 1st wave. It is argued that theoretical accounts of curiosity proposed during the 1st period fell short in 2 areas: They did not offer an adequate explanation for why people voluntarily seek out curiosity, and they failed to delineate situational determinants of curiosity. Furthermore, these accounts did not draw attention to, and thus did not explain, certain salient characteristics of curiosity: its intensity, transience, association with impulsivity, and tendency to disappoint when satisfied. A new account of curiosity is offered that attempts to address these shortcomings. The new account interprets curiosity as a form of cognitively induced deprivation that arises from the perception of a gap in knowledge or understanding. Curiosity is the most superficial of all the affections; it changes its object perpetually; it has an appetite which is very sharp, but very easily satisfied; and it has always an appearance of giddiness, restlessness and anxiety.

Interest development: Arousing situational interest affects the growth trajectory of individual interest

“…Kang, Scharmann, Kang, & Noh, 2010; M. J. Kang et al, 2009;Loewenstein, 1994;Rotgans & Schmidt, 2014b). Thus, in theory at least, every student's interest can be aroused for any subject and may subsequently (if reinforced) lead to the development of a long-lasting dispositional interest for the subject.…”

“…(See also Berlyne, 1978;M. J. Kang et al, 2009;Loewenstein, 1994. ) Others have concentrated on the relationship between situational interest and individual interest.…”

The Origins and Extent of Entrepreneurial Action-Orientedness: An Experimental Study

“…They build on Loewenstein's (1994) simply by choosing r appropriately. However, the ensuing analysis has in common with the one in Subsection 3.2 that moving from the baseline treatment to the counterfactual information treatment, induces a shift in the (now informational) reference point.…”

Improving the Eighth Graders’ Motivation Toward Science Learning Through Inquiry-Based Teaching

“…Helping them to further understand the course value through explaining why it is worthy to work hard for the course, so that their motivations can be sparked (Reeve, Jang, Hardre, & Omura, 2002); 2. Arousing their curiosity as they would be inspired to put efforts in exploring if they are aware of their knowledge gap (Loewenstein, 1994); 3. Developing their situational interest by exciting their interest though events or experiences in the classroom that are autonomous (offering them an opportunity to make meaningful choices), novel, surprising, with suspension, and debatable as this short-period interest is a trigger for students to spontaneously get involved in the activity (Anderman, Noar, Zimmerman, & Donohew, 2004;Schraw, Flowerday, & Lehman, 2001;Palmer, 2009); 4.…”