Summary of Reviewed Studies

Table S1

Summary of Reviewed Studies

Study / Participants / Curiosity definition and coding category / Curiosity measure / Findings
Boscolo, Ariasi, Del Favero, & Ballarin, 2011 / N=247 11th-12th graders / “Feeling the need for more information” (p. 470) / NK / Rated curiosity experienced when reading paragraphs / Interest in text topic significantly predicted curiosity for paragraphs; curiosity differed across different types of texts.
Bowler, 2010 / N=10 students (8 female) ages 16-18 / “Curiosity is an intellectual need, a desire to know” (p. 1332) / NK / Coding of interviews and journal or audio entries for “metacognitive knowledge” during a school-based research project / Positive & negative feelings often felt simultaneously when experiencing curiosity; students recognized need to regulate curiosity in order to complete task.
Byman, 2005 / N=529 5th graders / -- / -- / Test of intrinsic motivation (combined from other tests such as OTIM)
OTIM-diversive exploration subscale
Broad c-trait scale
SSS-V
Teacher ratings / Curiosity and sensation seeking emerged as separate factors that were not strongly related; evidence of a method effect of teacher ratings.
ČavojováSollár, 2007 / N=88 undergrads
N= 157 4th & 5th graders / “Desire for information in the absence of any external reward (Loewenstein, 1994) and it is the key motive of humanbehavior” (p. 89). “Positive emotional-motivational system associated with the recognition, pursuit, and self-regulation of novelty and challenge” (p. 90) / NK
CV
ExB
EmA / CEI (translated to Slovak) / Data supported two-factor model with exploration and absorption as separate but positively related factors for both college students and school children.
Chak, 2007 / N=195 preschool teachers
N=126 parents of preschoolers / “Quest for knowledge” (p. 142) / NK / Questionnaire about conceptions of curiosity / Teachers rated child characteristics as more indicative of curiosity than did parents; 39% believed curiosity would decrease over time, 59% believed it would stay the same.
Connelly, 2011 / N=65 undergraduates / -- / -- / CEI-II / Curiosity did not moderate the relation between goal relevance and interest.
Dickey, 2011 / N= 20 undergrads, self-identified as digital game players / -- / -- / Data collected from chat logs and observations while playing an educational computer game; questionnaire & interviews about the game / Several participants noted curiosity about specific pieces of evidence; 20% of participants noted general curiosity to “explore the environment” rather than curiosity about a piece of evidence.
Engel & Randall, 2009 / N=31 teachers / “The need to explain the unexpected” or “the need to resolve uncertainty” (p. 184) / CV / Students during experiment served as confederates asked to deviate from task and ask inquiry/curiosity questions / When teachers were given instructions to help students learn more (rather than instructions to help students complete a worksheet), they were more likely to support students’ deviations and questions.
Gilmore & Cuskelly, 2011 / N= 33 children ages 3-8 with Downs Syndrome
N=33 typically developing children ages 3-8 / -- / -- / Task: given doors with either picture of what is inside or blank and invited to open one or other to look at picture behind door / Curiosity not significantly different for Downs Syndrome vs. typically dev kids; curiosity positively related to social persistence & creativity curiosity.
Kang et al., 2009 / Exp 1: N=19 undergrads
Exp 2: N=16 undergrads
Exp 3: N=30 undergrads / “desire for learning and knowledge” (p. 963). “Curiosity is the complex feeling and cognition accompanying the desires to learn what is unknown” (p. 963) / NK
EmA / Rate curiosity on 1-7 scale following each of 40 trivia questions / Curiosity was highest for questions where participants felt 45-55% confident of answer; curiosity positively related to pupil dilation, memory for answers, and spending resources when learning new information.
Kashdan et al., 2009 / Exp 1: N=311 undergrads
Exp 2: N=150 undergrads
Exp 3: N=119 undergrads / “Recognizing, embracing, and seeking out knowledge and new experiences” (p. 988) / ExB / CEI-II / Creation of 10-item trait curiosity scale with stretching and embracing uncertainty factors that were positively related.
Kashdan, Rose, & Fincham, 2004 / Multiple samples of undergrads, n= 214, 103, 97, & 100 in USA; 213 in multiple countries / “a positive emotional-motivational system associated with the recognition, pursuit, and self-regulation of novel and challenging opportunities” (p. 291) / CV
ExB
EmA / CEI
STPI
MCI
SSS-V / Factor analysis of CEI provided evidence of exploration and absorption components; absorption and exploration scales most highly related to other curiosity scales but also related to most other scales such as NFC and Openness to Experience; stability of response to CEI over 1-month timeframe.
Kashdan & Yuen, 2007 / N=484 high school students / “Feelings of curiosity can be defined as the recognition, pursuit, and intense desire to investigate novel, challenging, or puzzling phenomena” (p. 260) / CV
ExB / CEI / Perceived school challenge moderated the relation between curiosity and standardized test scores; students with higher curiosity performed better when they perceived school to be a challenging environment.
Knobloch, Patzig, Mende, & Hastall, 2004 / Exp. 1: N=95 undergrad & other
Exp. 2: N=83 undergrads
Exp. 3: N=133 general public (mostly HS students) / -- / -- / Scale developed to measure curiosity induced by texts, several questions about how curious felt while reading / Ratings of curiosity higher for narratives presented in a reverse order format than a linear or inverted format.
Koo & Choi, 2010 / N=225 undergrads (51%) and others / “An intrinsic desire for new information to stimulate interest and/or remove uncertainty, which is aroused by novel, complex, or ambiguous stimuli, and motivates exploratory behavior (Litman, Collins, & Spielberger, 2005)” (p. 14). “the desire that motivates individuals to learn new ideas, eliminate information gaps, and solve intellectual problems (Litman, 2008)” (p. 14) / NK
CV
ExB
EmA / CFI scale
CFD scale / I-type and D-type curiosity moderated the relation between perceived ease of use, perceived enjoyment, and perceived usefulness of Internet search, with a stronger relation for those with high curiosity.
Lin, Wong, & McBridge-Chang, 2012 / N=104 5th graders / “The desire to learn about a topic of interest via reading” (p. 720) / NK / Curiosity subscale of the Motivation for Reading Questionnaire (MRQ) / Curiosity significantly related to reading comprehension for Chinese, but not English in a Hong Kong sample; curiosity significantly related to additional motivational subscales.
Litman, 2008 / 4 experiments:
Undergrads N1=725
N2=658
N3=762
N4=515 / “EC is the desire for knowledge that motivates individuals to learn new ideas, eliminate information-gaps, and solve intellectual problems” (p. 1586) / NK
ExB / EC scale
CFD scale / Evidence of two factor model of EC with I-type & D-type curiosity; EC discursive curiosity positively loaded on I-type factor, and CFD-persistence positively loaded on D-type factor; D-type positively related to performance approach and avoidance and mastery goal orientation; I-type strongly positively related to mastery goal orientation.
Litman, 2010 / Exp 1: N=372 undergrads
Exp 2: N=158 undergrads / “intrinsic desire to seek out and acquire new information” (p. 397) / NK
ExB / EC scale
CFD scale / Positive relation between I & D-type curiosity. I-type positively related and D-type negatively related to ambiguity tolerance. Anger, anxiety, & depression positively related to D-type and negatively related to I-type curiosity. Need for closure negatively related to I-type curiosity.
Litman, Crowson, & Kolinski, 2010 / Exp 1: N=263 community members (non-students), ave. age=35.35
Exp 2: N=202 employed adults, ave. age=48.58 / “EC is the desire to obtain new knowledge expected to stimulate positive feelings of intellectual interest or reduce undesirable states of informational deprivation” (p. 531) / NK
EmA / EC scale
CFD scale / Support for 2-factor I/D model in non-students; I-type EC positively associated with educational level, intrinsic motivation, & challenge, but negatively related to external motivation-outward; D-type EC positively associated with intrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation-enjoyment, extrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation-outward.
Litman, Hutchins & Russon, 2005 / N=265 undergrads / “desire for new information that motivates exploratory behaviour and knowledge acquisition” (p. 559) / NK
ExB / After knowledge questions, rated curiosity on 1-4 scale
EC scale
CFD scale / Feeling-of-knowing related to state EC, with most curiosity when knowledge was on the “tip of the tongue” (TOT) and least curiosity when answer was known; EC more highly related to “don’t know” and CFD more highly related to “TOT;” EC & CFD highly related.
LitmanJimerson, 2004 / N=321 undergrads / “a desire for new information aroused by novel, complex, or ambiguous stimuli” (p. 147) / NK
CV
EmA / CFD
T-cur scale (Spielberger et al., 1976)
PC scale
EC scale / Creation of 18-item CFD scale with three factors: intolerance of situations where information was inaccessible, need for competence to reduce feelings of ignorance, and problem-solving motivated by feelings of tension or urgency; positive relation between CFI and CFD subscales; EC highly correlated with CFD.
Litman & Silvia, 2006 / N=355 undergrads / “the desire for new knowledge or experience” (p. 318) / NK / C/IW scale
CEI
EC scale
PC scale
CFD scale / Evidence for a two factor model of curiosity, with CDF on one factor and all other scales on other factor, and EC-specific exploration loading on both factors; I-factor and D-factor highly correlated.
LitmanSpielberger, 2003 / N=739 undergrads / “Desire for acquiring new knowledge and new sensory experience that motivates exploratory behavior” (p. 75) / NK
ExB / PC scale
EC scale
STPI
NES
SSS / Evidence for curiosity as unitary construct with multiple dimensions; EC divided into two factors: specific curiosity and diversive curiosity; EC correlated with PC and other measures of curiosity, but not measures of sensation seeking.
MascherekZimprich, 2012 / N=233 members of the Zurich Longitudinal Study on Cognitive Aging, ave. age at T1= 72.99 years, at T3=77.9 years / -- / -- / Intellectual curiosity factor of the Typical Intellectual Engagement (TIE) Inventory / Decrease in intellectual curiosity across 5 years; intellectual curiosity positively related to TIE factors of abstract thinking, problem solving, and reading; positive relation between the rate of change of problem solving and rate of change of intellectual curiosity across five years.
Mussel, 2010 / N1=395 undergrads, N2=191 undergrads / “desire for knowledge that motivates individuals to learn new ideas, eliminate information-gaps, and solve intellectual problems” (p. 506) / NK
ExB / EC scale
CFD scale
CEI / Curiosity measures, NFC, openness to experience, and typical intellectual engagement were all highly correlated, and all loaded onto one factor; evidence only of convergent, not discriminant validity.
Neblett, Philip, Cogburn, & Sellers, 2006 / N=548 African American adolescents / -- / -- / Curiosity subscale of Wellborn’s scale of behavioral engagement / Curiosity significantly positively related to academic persistence, self-worth, and egalitarian messages, and negatively related to racial discrimination, racial pride, and negative messages.
Reio, Petrosko, Wiswell, & Thongsukmag, 2006 / N=369 undergrads / “Curiosity can be broadly defined as a desire to acquire new [information and] knowledge and new sensory experience that motivates exploratory behavior” (p. 118) / NK
ExB / MCI
STPI
SSS
NES
ACS / Identification of three factors: cognitive curiosity, physical thrill seeking, and social thrill seeking; physical thrill seeking positively related to cognitive curiosity and social thrill seeking; cognitive curiosity negatively related to social thrill seeking.
Richter & Schmid, 2010 / N=124 undergrads / “Specific epistemic curiosity is a motivational state that is aroused by questions and reduced by knowledge acquisition” (p. 51) / ExB
EmA / 15-item scale devised for this study / Curiosity mediated the relation between beliefs about uncertainty of knowledge and consistency checking while reading a text. Extrinsic motivation significantly moderated the relation between uncertainty beliefs and curiosity; significant relation for individuals with low, but not high extrinsic motivation.
Silvia, 2005 / Exp 1: N=76 undergrads
Exp 2: N=32 undergrads
Exp 3: N=77 undergrads / -- / -- / CEI (exp 1)
Curiosity as part of a question in interest scale (exp 2)
Curiosity subscale of the Values in Action Inventory / Interest, but not trait curiosity predicted selection of complexity, enjoyment, and interest in polygons; controlling for curiosity did not effect the relation between interest and ability perceptions.
Silvia, 2008 / Exp 1: N=83 undergrads
Exp 2: N=122 undergrads / “the emotion trait associated with feelings of interest” (p. 95) / EmA / Exp 1:
C/IW scale
PC scale
Exp 2:
C/IW scale
CEI
CFD scale / C/IW, PCS, & openness to experience scale loaded on one factor. C/IW, CEI, & CFD loaded on second factor. Appraised ability to understand (but not appraised complexity) mediated the relation between curiosity and interest in poems & art.
Silvia, Henson, & Templin, 2009 / N=191 undergrads / -- / -- / C/IW scale
CEI
EC scale
PC scale / Individuals for whom interest in art was more dependent upon appraisals of novelty-complexity were higher in curiosity than individuals for whom novelty-complexity was not as predictive of interest.
Smalls, White, Chavous, & Sellers, 2007 / N=390 7th-10th graders / -- / -- / Academic curiosity scale adapted from Skinner & Belmont, 1993 / Curiosity was positively related to grades and academic persistence, and negatively related to having a lower academic identity and negative school behaviors.
Villiger, Niggli, Wandeler, & Kutzelmann, 2012 / N=793 4th graders / -- / -- / Curiosity subscale of the Motivation for Reading Questionnaire / Curiosity for reading was significantly impacted by a school/home intervention.
vonStrummDeary, 2011 / N=569 members of the Lothian Birth Cohort of 1921 / “the tendency to seek out, engage in, enjoy, and continuously pursue opportunities for effortful cognitive activity (von Stumm, 2010)” (p. 5). / ExB
EmA / Intellectual curiosity factor of the Typical Intellectual Engagement (TIE) Inventory / IQ positively predicted intellectual curiosity; intellectual curiosity mediated the relation between IQ and verbal fluency.
Wavo, 2004 / N=901 7th graders / “Curiosity behavior is a behavior characterized by exploring or stimulus-seeking responses to either novel or complex stimuli” (p. 181) / CV
ExB / Curiosity subscale of the Battery of Affective Outcomes of Schooling Scales (Engelhard, 1985) / Curiosity was positively related to performance on a district examination.
Woods-Groves, Eaves, & Williams, 2009 / 3 samples: N=40, N=374 teachers rating the children in their class, N=586 non-teachers (typically family members) rating school-age children / -- / -- / Human Behavior Rating Scale (HBR scale; curiosity is one of 5 factors) completed by teachers / High reliability and consistency of the HBR scale.
Yang & Lay, 2011 / N=508 undergrads / “having desire to understand or access information on the Internet” (p. 342). / ExB / Scale adapted from previous scales by Pierce et al. (2005) and Kashdan et al. (2009) / Curiosity for accessing the Internet was negatively related to reported use of the Internet for non-homework-related tasks while completing homework, and was positively related to Internet efficacy.
Zhao, Lu, Wang, & Huang, 2011 / N=3475 junior high and senior high school students / “the desire to acquire and investigate new knowledge and new sensory experience (LitmanSpielberger, 2003)” (p. 347). / NK
ExB / Scale adapted from Huang (2003) / Internet self-efficacy, parental support, and peer influence positively predicted curiosity; curiosity positively predicted exploratory behavior directly and indirectly by increasing flow.
ZisimopoulosGalanaki, 2009 / N=940 typically developing children
N=40 learning disabled 5th & 6thgraders / -- / -- / Curiosity/Interest subscale of the Scale of Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Orientation in the Classroom / No significant difference in curiosity/interest for children with and without learning disabilities (LD); significant relation between curiosity/interest and perceived academic competence for non-LD students; no significant relation for LD students.

Note: NK = Need for knowledge or information; CV = Association with collative variables; ExB = Exploratory behavior; EmA = Emotions or arousal; I-type = interest type curiosity; D-type = deprivation type; STPI = State Trait Personality Inventory; NES = Novelty Experience Scale; SSS-V = Sensation Seeking Scale V; CEI = Curiosity and Exploration Inventory; C/IW scale = Curiosity/Interest in the World Scale; ACS = Academic Curiosity Scale; MCI = Melbourne Curiosity Inventory; OTIM = Ontario Test of Intrinsic Motivation; NFC = Need for Cognition; EC scale = Epistemic Curiosity Scale; CFD scale= Curiosity as a Feeling-of-Deprivation Scale; PC scale = Perceptual Curiosity Scale