Curiosity and Interest: Emergence and Divergence

An examination of measures of young children's interest in natural object categories

Developmental research utilizes various different methodologies and measures to study the cognitive development of young children; however, the reliability and validity of such measures have been a critical issue in all areas of research practices. To address this problem, particularly in the area of research on infants' interests, we examined the convergent validity of previously reported measures of children's interests in natural object categories, as indexed by (1) parents' estimation of their child's interest in the categories, (2) extrinsic (overt choices in a task), (3) intrinsic (looking time toward objects), and (4) physiological (pupil dilation) responses to objects of different categories. Additionally, we also examined the discriminant validity of all the aforementioned measures against the well-established and validated measure of parents' estimations of children's vocabulary knowledge. Children completed two tasks: (a) an eye-tracking task, where they were presented with images from a range of defined categories, which collected indices of looking time and pupillary activity; (b) a sticker-choice task, where they were asked to choose between two sticker-images from two different categories belonging to the range of categories assessed in the previous task. Parents completed two questionnaires to estimate (i) their child's interests and (ii) vocabulary knowledge in the categories presented. We first analyzed the discriminant validity between the two parent measures, and found a significant positive association between them. Our successive analyses showed no strong or significant associations between any of our measures, apart from a significant positive association between children's looking time and parents' estimations of children's vocabulary knowledge. From our findings, we conclude that measures of infants' interests thus far may not have sufficient reliability to adequately capture any potential relationship between these measures, or index different components of interest in young children. We suggest next steps for further validation studies in infant research.

Ecological contexts associated with early childhood curiosity: Neighborhood safety, home and parenting quality, and socioeconomic status

Introduction

Curiosity is an important social-emotional process underlying early learning. Our previous work found a positive association between higher curiosity and higher academic achievement at kindergarten, with a greater magnitude of benefit for children with socioeconomic disadvantage. Because characteristics of the early caregiving and physical environment impact the processes that underlie early learning, we sought to examine early environmental experiences associated with early childhood curiosity, in hopes of identifying modifiable contexts that may promote its expression.

Methods

Using data from a nationally representative sample of 4,750 children from the United States, this study examined the association of multi-level ecological contexts (i.e., neighborhood safety, parenting quality, home environment, and center-based preschool enrollment) on early childhood curiosity at kindergarten, and tested for moderation by socioeconomic status.

Results

In adjusted, stratified models, children from lower-resourced environments (characterized by the lowest-SES tertile) manifested higher curiosity if they experienced more positive parenting, higher quality home environments, and if they lived in "very safe" neighborhoods.

Discussion

We discuss the ecological contexts (i.e., parenting, home, and neighborhood environments) that are promotive of early childhood curiosity, with an emphasis on the role of the neighborhood safety and the "neighborhood built environment" as important modifiable contexts to foster early childhood curiosity in lower-resourced families.

Does employee work-related curiosity predict workplace thriving? The moderating role of core-self evaluations

Purpose

Given the increasing organizational need for having a thriving workforce due to the fast-growing and competitive knowledge-based service economy and growing demand to explore new factors that may benefit individuals to excel at work. Drawing upon the intrinsic motivation perspective, with a Chinese sample (N = 309), the authors aimed to investigate whether work-related curiosity (WRC) may create conditions that indirectly promote employees' workplace thriving via task focus and whether this mediation was moderated by an individual's personality difference, i.e. core-self evaluations.

Design/methodology/approach

A time-lagged study among full-time employees who happen to be part-time students in the executive development program was used to test the hypothesized model by employing a structural equation modeling approach.

Findings

WRC showed a significant positive association with task focus which in turn was positively related to workplace thriving. Furthermore, as predicted, the positive association between WRC and workplace thriving via task focus was stronger for employees with high core self-evaluations compared to those with low core-self evaluations.

Originality/value

The results of this study suggest that an individual's WRC can be instrumental in augmenting workplace thriving by providing a scientific explanation for the underlying psychological process of task focus and identifying the factors associated with the process, such as core-self evaluations. This study contributes to extending the literature on significant employee outcomes, i.e. thriving at work, by offering new empirical and theoretical insights that WRC may play a critical role in the process and identifying a boundary condition of personality factor, i.e. core-self evaluations.

Capturing, clarifying, and consolidating the curiosity-creativity connection

The cognitive-motivational concepts of curiosity and creativity are often viewed as intertwined. Yet, despite the intuitively strong linkage between these two concepts, the existing cognitive-behavioral evidence for a curiosity-creativity connection is not strong, and is nearly entirely based on self-report measures. Using a new lab-based Curiosity Q&A task we evaluate to what extent behaviorally manifested curiosity-as revealed in autonomous inquiry and exploration-is associated with creative performance. In a preregistered study (N = 179) we show that, as hypothesized, the novelty of the questions that participants generated during the Curiosity Q&A Task significantly positively correlated with the originality of their responses on a divergent-thinking task (the conceptually-based Alternative Uses Task). Additionally, the extent to which participants sought out information that was implicitly missing in the presented factual stimuli ("gap-related information foraging") positively correlated with performance on two predominantly convergent-thinking tasks (the Remote Associates Task and Analogy Completion). Question asking, topic-related information foraging, and creative performance correlated with trait-based "interest-type" curiosity oriented toward exploration and novelty, but not with "deprivation-type" curiosity focused on dispelling uncertainty or ignorance. Theoretically and practically, these results underscore the importance of continuing to develop interventions that foster both creative thinking and active autonomous inquiry.

Childhood emotional abuse and adolescent flourishing: A moderated mediation model of self-compassion and curiosity

BACKGROUND

Resilience and positive mental health may be negatively influenced by childhood maltreatment. While many scholars have noted that adolescents exposed to childhood emotional abuse could meet the criteria for flourishing, little research has investigated the mediating effect of self-compassion and the moderating effect of curiosity on the relationship between childhood emotional abuse and adolescent flourishing.

OBJECTIVE

This study proposed and tested a moderated mediation model that attempted to explain the pathway from childhood emotional abuse to adolescent flourishing.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

The sample consisted of 315 female students (mean age 12.81 years, range 12-14 years) in a girls' secondary school in Hong Kong, China.

METHODS

We conducted a three-wave study with six-month intervals. The participants completed self-administered questionnaires at school under the guidance of trained research assistants.

RESULTS

Self-compassion at Time 2 mediated the relationship between childhood emotional abuse at Time 1 and adolescent flourishing at Time 3. Furthermore, the mediating effect was moderated by adolescent curiosity at Time 1 and Time 2.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggested that although childhood emotional abuse may hinder the development of self-compassion, reduced levels of self-compassion and curiosity (especially the stretch dimension of curiosity) could work together to promote flourishing in adolescents with a history of childhood emotional abuse. The results lent further support to the developmental psychopathology and resilience perspectives in explaining the relationship between childhood trauma and positive developmental outcomes.

Measuring Parent Rated Interest and Deprivation type Curiosity in Swedish Young Children - are they meaningfully distinct?

Background

Proxy ratings of young children’s curiosity has the potential to be useful for research in Sweden. One such proxy rating is the parent-rating Interest/Deprivation Young Children scale. This scale has previously only been validated in Dutch samples, where it differentiated curiosity dimensions of interest (joyful exploration) and deprivation (reduction of aversive feelings of not knowing).

Objective

The objective of this study was to investigate internal and construct validity of the Swedish version of the Interest/Deprivation Young Children scale.

Method

A translation of the Interest/Deprivation Young Children scale was conducted and then administered to 266 parents in Sweden, who rated their children (4-6-years old) on 10 items, with 5 items each for subscales of interest and deprivation dimensions of epistemic curiosity. Responses were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis.

Results

Results indicate acceptable internal reliability for deprivation-curiosity items (α = 0.78) and for interest-curiosity items (α = 0.79). For the combined scale score alpha was found good (α = 0.84). However, confirmatory factor analysis failed to differentiate interest and deprivation dimensions of curiosity.

Conclusions

Item revisions are suggested which could be implemented for further investigations. Also, the possibility of using the I/D-YC total score as a more general measure of child curiosity is argued for. An open question is how other dimensions of curiosity might be more viable for proxy ratings of child curiosity.

People's naïve belief about curiosity and interest: A qualitative study

The purpose of this study was to critically examine how people perceive the definitions, differences and similarities of interest and curiosity, and address the subjective boundaries between interest and curiosity. We used a qualitative research approach given the research questions and the goal to develop an in-depth understanding of people's meaning of interest and curiosity. We used data from a sample of 126 U.S. adults (48.5% male) recruited through Amazon's Mechanical Turk (Mage = 40.7, SDage = 11.7). Semi-structured questions were used and thematic analysis was applied. The results showed two themes relating to differences between curiosity and interest; active/stable feelings and certainty/uncertainty. Curiosity was defined as an active feeling (more specifically a first, fleeting feeling) and a child-like emotion that often involves a strong urge to think actively and differently, whereas interest was described as stable and sustainable feeling, which is characterized as involved engagement and personal preferences (e.g., hobbies). In addition, participants related curiosity to uncertainty, e.g., trying new things and risk-taking behaviour. Certainty, on the other hand, was deemed as an important component in the definition of interest, which helps individuals acquire deep knowledge. Both curiosity and interest were reported to be innate and positive feelings that support motivation and knowledge-seeking during the learning process.

How Are Curiosity and Interest Different? Naïve Bayes Classification of People’s Beliefs

Researchers studying curiosity and interest note a lack of consensus in whether and how these important motivations for learning are distinct. Empirical attempts to distinguish them are impeded by this lack of conceptual clarity. Following a recent proposal that curiosity and interest are folk concepts, we sought to determine a non-expert consensus view on their distinction using machine learning methods. In Study 1, we demonstrate that there is a consensus in how they are distinguished, by training a Naïve Bayes classification algorithm to distinguish between free-text definitions of curiosity and interest (n = 396 definitions) and using cross-validation to test the classifier on two sets of data (main n = 196; additional n = 218). In Study 2, we demonstrate that the non-expert consensus is shared by experts and can plausibly underscore future empirical work, as the classifier accurately distinguished definitions provided by experts who study curiosity and interest (n = 92). Our results suggest a shared consensus on the distinction between curiosity and interest, providing a basis for much-needed conceptual clarity facilitating future empirical work. This consensus distinguishes curiosity as more active information seeking directed towards specific and previously unknown information. In contrast, interest is more pleasurable, in-depth, less momentary information seeking towards information in domains where people already have knowledge. However, we note that there are similarities between the concepts, as they are both motivating, involve feelings of wanting, and relate to knowledge acquisition.

Epistemic Curiosity and Situational Interest: Distant Cousins or Identical Twins?

To what extent are epistemic curiosity and situational interest different indicators for the same underlying psychological mechanism? To answer this question, we conducted two studies. In Study 1, we administered measures of epistemic curiosity and situational interest to 158 students from an all-boys secondary school. The data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis to find out whether a one-factor or a two-factor solution provides the best fit to the data. The findings supported a one-factor solution. A two-factor solution was only satisfactorily supported if one accepted that the two latent constructs were correlated .99. Study 2 was an experiment in which we experimentally manipulated the amount of prior knowledge 148 students had about a particular thermodynamic phenomenon. Epistemic curiosity and situational interest were each measured four times: before a text was studied, before and after a problem was presented, and after a second text was read. The treatment group studied a text explaining the problem after the problem was presented, whereas the control group read it before the problem was presented. The control group, in other words, gained prior knowledge about the problem. In the treatment group, both epistemic curiosity and situational interest significantly increased while being confronted with the problem. This was not the case in the control group. In addition, only in the treatment group scores on both measures significantly decreased after the text explaining the problem was studied. These findings support a knowledge gap account of both situational interest and epistemic curiosity, suggesting an identical underlying psychological mechanism.

The Murky Distinction Between Curiosity and Interest: State of the Art and Future Prospects

Curiosity and interest are at the core of human inquiry. However, controversies remain about how best to conceptualize these constructs. I propose to derive definitions by attending to the common core of typical usages of the two terms. Using this approach, curiosity can be defined as a psychological state that includes three components: recognition of an information gap, anticipation that it may be possible to close it, and an intrinsically motivated desire to do so. Interest can be more broadly defined as intrinsically motivated engagement with any specific object, content, or activity. The two definitions imply that curiosity is a special case of interest. Furthermore, I propose to use the state-trait distinction to distinguish between momentary and enduring forms of both curiosity and interest, which makes it possible to treat state versus trait curiosity and interest in conceptually parallel ways. To make further progress in understanding the two constructs, research is needed that investigates their affective dynamics and their generalizability across age-related and socio-cultural contexts.