Cultivating an understanding of

curiosity as a seed for creativity -

eBook PDF
Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/download/cultivating-an-understanding-of-curiosity-as-a-see
d-for-creativity-ebook-pdf/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

(eBook PDF) Economic Methodology Understanding

Economics as a Science 2nd Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-economic-methodology-
understanding-economics-as-a-science-2nd-edition/

Translation as a Science Translation as an Art, 2e: A

Practical Approach 2nd Edition Noa Talaván - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/translation-as-a-science-
translation-as-an-art-2e-a-practical-approach-ebook-pdf/

A review of uncertainty visualization errors: Working

memory as an explanatory theory - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/a-review-of-uncertainty-
visualization-errors-working-memory-as-an-explanatory-theory-
ebook-pdf/

(eBook PDF) A Guide to Writing as an Engineer, 4th

Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-a-guide-to-writing-as-
an-engineer-4th-edition/
Understanding Mobility as a Service (MaaS): Past,
Present and Future 1st Edition David A. Hensher - eBook
PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/understanding-mobility-as-a-
service-maas-past-present-and-future-ebook-pdf/

(eBook PDF) Microeconomics as a Second Language

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-microeconomics-as-a-
second-language/

(eBook PDF) The Bible As Literature: An Introduction

5th Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-the-bible-as-literature-
an-introduction-5th-edition/

Neuroplasticity as a convergent mechanism of ketamine

and classical psychedelics - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/neuroplasticity-as-a-convergent-
mechanism-of-ketamine-and-classical-psychedelics-ebook-pdf/

Combination Drug Delivery Approach as an Effective

Therapy for Various Diseases 1st Edition Prashant
Kesharwani - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/combination-drug-delivery-
approach-as-an-effective-therapy-for-various-diseases-ebook-pdf/
 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Cultivating an understanding of curiosity as a seed for
creativity
Madeleine E Gross1, Claire M Zedelius1 and Jonathan W Schooler
Curiosity—the desire to know—is a powerful motivator for
learning and behavior. Theoretical and anecdotal discussions
have also linked curiosity to creativity and innovation, but there
is little empirical evidence for this connection, aside from a
handful of recent studies. We review the existing evidence and
discuss potential mechanisms through which curiosity may
facilitate the creative process. We further discuss important
methodological issues that have limited past research on the
relationship between curiosity and creativity. One limitation is
the lack of studies investigating curiosity as a psychological
state that fluctuates over time and with changing contexts
rather than only as a trait. Another limitation is the scarcity of
behavioral measures of exploration and curiosity. We discuss
the few existing behavioral measures that have been used and
introduce a new measure relying on real effort.
Address
Psychological and Brain Science Department, University of California,
Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Corresponding authors:
Gross, Madeleine E (madeleinegross@ucsb.edu), Zedelius, Claire M
(claire.zedelius@psych.ucsb.edu)
1
The first two authors contributed equally to this paper.
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 2020, 35:77–82
This review comes from a themed issue on Curiosity (Exolore versus
Exploit)
Edited by Daphna Shohamy and Ran Hassin
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.07.015
2352-1546/ã 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
I have no special talent. I am only passionately
curious.
—Albert Einstein, from Letter to Carl Seelig, 1952.
Curiosity—the desire to know—is a powerful motivator
for learning. The wealth of positive life outcomes associ-
ated with this trait has inspired news outlets to herald it as
a ‘superpower’, a seductive enabler of innovation. But
despite a long history of research on curiosity, much is still
unknown about it. One question in particularly dire need
of further research concerns the association between
curiosity and creativity.
www.sciencedirect.com
We begin this review by highlighting the limited existing
research examining the relationship between curiosity
and creativity, as well as possible shared mechanisms
that may drive the relationship between these two char-
acteristics. We end this section by highlighting important
methodological issues currently limiting progress in
understanding this connection. In particular, we note
the largely correlational nature of existing research which
relies almost entirely on self-report, trail-level
questionnaires.
In the following two sections, we call attention to the fact
that curiosity, while varying across individuals, also fluc-
tuates within individuals. We suggest that future experi-
mental research should examine the consequences of
states of curiosity on creativity; however, we note that
such research requires reliable behavioral measures that
capture momentary states of curiosity, which are currently
lacking. To this end, we propose a novel effort-based
behavioral measure. We conclude this review by noting
several intriguing directions for future research.
The relationship between curiosity and
creativity
Curiosity involves the pursuit of new knowledge and
experiences. Creativity involves transforming existing
knowledge, ideas, or objects into something novel and
interesting. When framed in this way, it is easy to see the
overlap between the two—both revolve around novelty.
But is this a superficial similarity, or are curiosity and
creativity tied to one another in a fundamental way?
A number of recent studies have begun to address this
question. First, individual differences in curiosity have
been linked to people’s perceptions of themselves as
creative [1,2,3], as well as predicting entrepreneurial
and workplace innovation [4–6]. A recent study investi-
gating individual differences in exploratory eye move-
ments also found correlations between curiosity and
creativity [7]. In this study, two types of curiosity were
examined: Epistemic Curiosity [8], or the desire for
knowledge, and Perceptual Curiosity [9], an interest in
novel sensory experiences. Both types of curiosity were
correlated with self-reported creative behaviors (e.g. mak-
ing crafts or painting), creative personality characteristics,
and performance on a creative drawing task. Interestingly,
the strength of the correlations was similar for perceptual
and epistemic curiosity, indicating that both the more
intellectually oriented curiosity as well as the desire for
new sensory experiences may be important for creativity.
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 2020, 35:77–82
78 Curiosity (Exolore versus Exploit)
It has been argued that a sense of curiosity is a necessary,
though not sufficient, condition for creativity [10] in that
curiosity may facilitate the desire to engage in creative
behaviors. In line with this reasoning, a recent study
found that curious individuals ask more open-ended
questions to feedback providers while working on a
creative design task, which in turn enhanced the quality
of their creative designs [11]. Curiosity has also recently
been found to impact the generation stage of the creative
process [12]. In this investigation, epistemic curiosity
was again examined, and the study further distinguished
between its two subcomponents; diversive curiosity, also
referred to as interest curiosity, which is characterized by
a broad interest in new information; and specific curiosity,
also referred to as deprivation curiosity, which is charac-
terized by a desire to gain knowledge about a particular
topic in order to fill a knowledge gap [13,14]. It was found
that diversive, but not specific, curiosity predicted crea-
tive problem solving. This effect was mediated by infor-
mation seeking in the early stages of the creative process.
Specific curiosity, in contrast, may benefit creativity when
specific expertise is required. When looking for a creative
solution for lowering carbon emissions, for instance, one
might benefit from an intrinsic desire to learn everything
there is to know about carbon emissions. In line with this
reasoning, a recent investigation found that specific curi-
osity promotes creative thinking via idea linking, a sequen-
tial process of exploration by which information on a
specific topic initiates a cascade of ideation that eventu-
ally leads to a solution [15].
What can this recent work tell us about the mechanisms
linking creativity and curiosity? The studies reviewed
thus far speak to several mechanisms through which
curiosity can facilitate creativity. These include basic
exploratory tendencies (i.e. exploratory eye movements)
and more complex information seeking behaviors (i.e.
asking questions, linking ideas). Creative cognition is now
also widely thought to involve attentional mechanisms [e.
g. Refs. 16,17], specifically, an inability to filter irrelevant
information. Curiosity similarly is characterized by a wide
scope of attention, as indicated by neuroscientific and eye
tracking studies [18–20,7]. Thus, in addition to explo-
ration and information seeking behaviors, a wide scope of
attention may be another mechanism through which
curiosity facilitates the creative process. Moreover, zoom-
ing out to a more temporally extended level of analysis, an
individual’s perpetual desire to acquire knowledge may
lead them to deeply engage with unfamiliar ideas for
sustained periods of time. This sustained engagement
may help them discover something original or bring about
a substantial body of creative work.
It should be noted that empirical evidence to support the
creativity-curiosity connection is still very scarce. The
aforementioned correlational designs are only suggestive
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 2020, 35:77–82
of a causal relationship. To date, very few studies have
experimentally manipulated curiosity to look for causal
effects. In a recent meta-analysis gauging the strength of
the relationship between curiosity and creativity, the
included studies were all correlational and relied on
self-reported trait measures of curiosity [32]. Indeed,
one issue that currently limits curiosity research is the
lack of studies—particularly studies using behavioral
measures—that assess curiosity as a psychological state
rather than only as a trait.
Curiosity as a psychological state
Most definitions of curiosity describe it in an inherently
dynamic way, as a ‘desire’ or ‘motivation’ rising and
declining depending on context, comparable to physical
hunger [33]. We are in a constant flux between seeking
and satisfaction [34]. It is therefore peculiar that empirical
research has almost exclusively operationalized curiosity
either as a stable trait or as the product of inherent
qualities (e.g. novelty, complexity or perceptual ambigu-
ity) that make a stimulus interesting to most people
[35,36,33,37–39]. While some individuals are generally
more curious than others [40], and some stimuli generally
more curiosity eliciting than others, it also seems clear
that a topic can fail to capture our interest one day, yet
send us down the proverbial rabbit hole the next. This
may have more to do with the cognitive processes going
on in the moment [41] than with the qualities of the
stimulus or our personality characteristics. Yet, rarely has
curiosity been studied as a state that differs not only
between individuals but also from one moment to the
next [see Refs. 42,34].
A handful of studies examining how curiosity can be
evoked stick out as exceptions. Even though curiosity
is generally theorized to be an intrinsic motivation, studies
have found that framing a topic as having practical value
(e.g. being relevant to ‘important scientific and medical
breakthroughs’) makes people more curious about the
topic than introducing the topic matter-of-factly [43].
Similarly, people are more curious about questions that
are deemed more interesting by others [44]. However, it
remains unclear whether such cues of value trigger only
superficial curiosity or translate to deep, sustained inter-
est in a topic.
Other research has examined how engaging with infor-
mation by making guesses affects curiosity. In one set of
studies, participants were shown obscure words (e.g.
hispid) and asked how curious they were to learn their
meaning [45]. Participants were more curious when they
were asked to guess the meaning of the words before
seeing the answer. In another study, participants were
shown trivia type questions (e.g. ‘x out of 10 animals are
insects’) and were asked to either generate a relevant fact
about the topic (e.g. ‘ants are insects’) or guess the answer
[46]; guessing increased curiosity. One explanation for
www.sciencedirect.com
 Curiosity as a seed for creativity Gross, Zedelius and Schooler 79
the results is that making a guess requires effort and deep
engagement with the content, which in turn may increase
curiosity. Alternatively, making a guess may evoke curi-
osity because it motivates people to confirm whether they
were correct [41].
The few studies that have attempted to experimentally
induce curiosity, though promising, leave big questions
unanswered. For instance, once curiosity is triggered by a
cue, a question, or a guess, might it carry over to another
topic? Does asking questions or making guesses lead to
deep and sustained curiosity? And does the effectiveness
of such manipulations depend on moderating factors,
such as a person’s expectations, the perceived cost asso-
ciated with exploring information, or a person’s Openness
to Experience, need for closure or need for autonomy [see
Refs. 34,31]? And most critical to the present discussion,
do manipulations that increase curiosity subsequently
impact creativity? Finding the answers to these questions
will not only be valuable for our scientific understanding
of curiosity, but will be essential for interventions aiming
to boost curiosity for the benefit of learning and creativity.
Indeed, to the best of our knowledge, despite the highly
suggestive relationship between curiosity and creativity,
to date, only one published study has specifically dem-
onstrated an experimental link between induced states of
curiosity and creativity [15].
Assessing curiosity through behavior
As we take the next step toward experimental interven-
tions to boost curiosity, we will need to rely more strongly
on behavioral measures in addition to the usual self-report
measures, which raise issues of expectations and social
desirability. Thus far, this is the rare exception. A meta-
analysis of studies examining curiosity within educational
settings found that over 90% of the reviewed studies used
self-report measures. Aside from self-reports, neurobio-
logical and behavioral measures such as fMRI, pupil
dilation or exploratory eye movements have occasionally
been used to indicate curiosity [e.g. Refs. 46,7,37,33].
Furthermore, in at least one study, these indices have
been related to creativity. Specifically, Gross et al. [7]
observed that exploratory eye movements were associ-
ated with performance on a creative drawing task. How-
ever, measures such as exploratory eye movements are
indirect and can also be driven by salience attribution
processes not necessarily related to curiosity.
One behavioral curiosity measure that has been used in
several studies is a person’s willingness to pay points or
money in exchange for information [e.g. Refs. 47,48,37].
The elegance of measuring curiosity with willingness to
pay is that it is directly aligned with the definition of
curiosity as the desire to acquire information. Research
using this measure has shown that people are willing to
pay for information even when doing so does not have any
instrumental value other than satisfying a person’s
www.sciencedirect.com
curiosity [47,48]. A similar behavioral measure, likewise
based on the idea that curious individuals are willing to
incur a cost in exchange for information, is willingness to
wait [10,49].
Other recent research has looked at people’s styles of
information-seeking by analyzing the contents of Wiki-
pedia entries participants explored in over 5 hours of
browsing [50]. The research found that individuals higher
in specific curiosity were more likely to explore a small
selection of tightly related content, whereas participants
higher in diversive curiosity were more likely to browse
loosely connected content. The strength of this approach
lies in the ecological validity of observing intrinsically
motivated and spontaneous exploratory behavior in a
naturalistic context. However, the method is time inten-
sive, and it is not clear to what extent it taps into
differences in trait curiosity or can capture the ebb and
flow of a person’s momentary curiosity.
Recently, we have developed another behavioral measure
adapted from economics research [51,52]—an effort task
in which participants can ‘work’ for information. This
work consists of moving sliders to target positions. The
task is effortful and time intensive, but self-paced and
extremely simple. Therefore, an argument can be made
that it captures a person’s willingness to exert effort for
information, independent of specific skills. A potential
advantage of using effort over monetary cost is that it
mimics ways of satisfying one’s curiosity in real life.
Acquiring knowledge usually requires effort, but rarely
do we directly exchange points or money for knowledge.
Our research has shown that participants exert more effort
for answers to trivia questions that they previously had not
been able to solve. We also found that effort in exchange
for answers to questions was predicted by self-reported
curiosity for those questions, and effort in exchange for
solutions to the problem of plastic waste was predicted by
self-reported concern for the environment. Effort on the
task also correlates with trait curiosity, though to a lesser
extent. Thus, the task is a good candidate measure for
future studies assessing the effects of experimental
manipulations of curiosity.
Several questions remain to be explored. To what extent
do effort-based measures overlap with or have (dis)advan-
tages compared to self-reports and willingness to pay or
wait? One potential benefit of using effort over self-
reports or willingness to pay is that a self-report or
payment in exchange for information provides only a
snapshot of an individual’s curiosity at one time. Effort
is more dynamic. A given person may initially invest high
effort into obtaining information but quickly lose moti-
vation and give up. Another person may persist in exert-
ing effort over a long stretch of time. Both individuals
might have named the same high price if asked how much
they are willing to pay for the information, but the first
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 2020, 35:77–82
80 Curiosity (Exolore versus Exploit)
person exhibits less curiosity in their behavior over time
compared to the second person. This dynamic aspect also
makes the effort task more closely resemble real-life
behavior, which is typically extended in time. Only
willingness to wait is a similarly dynamic measure. How-
ever, willingness to wait may be more difficult to experi-
mentally control compared to an external task like the
effort task, because the subjective cost of waiting may
depend in part on what is going on in a person’s mind.
Waiting may feel less costly to a person who is engaged in
an interesting daydream [53]. In this case, a greater
willingness to wait may not necessarily reflect eagerness
to get information, it may simply reflect greater tolerance
toward waiting. Thus far, however, these arguments
remain speculative, and future research should directly
compare real effort to self-reports, willingness to pay, and
willingness to wait.
Another open question is how effort tasks can be designed
to distinguish different types of curiosity. Depending on
the type of information participants ‘work for’, might
versions of the task be suitable to capture the aversive
state associated with specific (or deprivation) curiosity or
the appetitive state associated with diversive (or interest)
curiosity? In our studies, effort tended to be more strongly
associated with diversive than with specific curiosity.
However, in our studies, participants worked for a chance
to satisfy their intrinsic curiosity about a broad topic (i.e.
ways to protect the environment). Different results may
emerge when individuals work for answers to trivia ques-
tions or answers that have more instrumental value for
solving a very specific personal problem. Further research
into these design considerations is needed along with
experimental manipulations that evoke the different
types of curiosity.
Concluding remarks and future directions
Many theoretical discussions have linked curiosity to
creativity and innovation, but empirical evidence directly
supporting this link is currently extremely scarce.
Although research on each respective construct indicates
mechanistic links, more research is necessary to deter-
mine how different aspects of these two constructs are
related. Are perceptual and epistemic curiosity under-
scored by the same attentional and motivational pro-
cesses? Are these same processes linked with visual
and verbal creativity, or Scientific and artistic creativity?
Future investigations should aim to determine the over-
lap between the processes that underlie the many facets
of these two incredibly broad and multi-dimensional
constructs.
This review largely focused on epistemic curiosity; how-
ever other types of curiosity exist. Kashdan et al. [21]
identified at least five distinct factors of curiosity. Two
map onto epistemic curiosity (deprivation sensitivity and
joyous exploration); additionally, social curiosity, thrill
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 2020, 35:77–82
seeking, and stress tolerance were revealed as distinct
types of curiosity. These types may be relevant for
creativity, yet they have almost never been examined
in that context. For example, stress tolerance—the ability
to handle the distress or anxiety inherent in novel experi-
ences—may be relevant to creativity. In the real world,
creative endeavors are often risky, thus an ability to
handle the stress of creative pursuits could be important.
The current lack of experimental research leaves open
many other possible pathways for linking curiosity and
creativity. One important consideration is the role curi-
osity may play in the relationship between other person-
ality traits and creativity, most notably Openness to
Experience. There is abundant evidence linking Open-
ness to creativity [22–25]. Most measures of Openness
have subdimensions that map onto curiosity; the NEO
PI–3 ideas dimension [26], the BFAS intellect dimension
[27], Woo’s curiosity dimension [28], and the HEXACO
inquisitiveness dimension [29]. Future research is neces-
sary to determine whether the relationship between
Openness and creativity is driven especially by its curi-
osity related subdimensions. Similarly, boredom prone-
ness has been found to predict both creativity and curi-
osity [30], while flow states have also been suggested to
connect curiosity to creativity [31]. Measures such as
these should be included in future research to tease
out the active ingredients that may drive this relationship.
Our understanding of the curiosity–creativity relationship
is limited, and there are many intriguing future directions
for examining this topic. However, such research is ham-
pered by methodological limitations, particularly the
scarcity of state and behavioral measures, as well as
experimental manipulations evoking states of curiosity.
Initial evidence relating epistemic and perceptual curios-
ity to creative behavior and performance largely relies on
correlational designs. Therefore, we do not know conclu-
sively whether curiosity is really a cause of curiosity, or
whether engagement in creative acts may lead to curios-
ity, or whether curiosity is linked to creativity through
some other factor(s). Future experimental research
exploring how or even whether it is possible to promote
creativity via curiosity will surely open up many more
fruitful avenues for research and further our understand-
ing of how to harness the benefits of curiosity.
Funding
This work was supported by a grant from the John
Templeton Foundation [#60844].
Conflict of interest statement
Nothing declared.
References and recommended reading
Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review,
have been highlighted as:
www.sciencedirect.com
 Curiosity as a seed for creativity Gross, Zedelius and Schooler 81
 of special interest
 of outstanding interest
1. Karwowski M: Did curiosity kill the cat? Relationship between
 trait curiosity, creative self-efficacy and creative personal
identity. Eur J Psychol 2012, 8:547-558.
This study used confirmatory factor analysis to explore the correlations
between curiosity (CEI-II), creative self-efficacy (CSE), and creative per-
sonal identity (CPI). The CEI-II has two subscales, stretching (indicating a
desire to seek out novel experiences) and embracing (the ability to accept
what is unknown). It was found that both creative self scales were strongly
correlated to both subscales of the curiosity scale (the higher order
factor).
2. Karwowski M, Lebuda I, Wisniewska E: Measuring creative self-
efficacy and creative personal identity. Int J Creat Prob Solving
2018, 28:45-57.
3. Puente-Dı́az R, Cavazos-Arroyo J: Creative self-efficacy: the
 influence of affective states and social persuasion as
antecedents and imagination and divergent thinking as
consequences. Creat Res J 2017, 29:304-312.
In Study 1, the researchers show that curiosity is positively associated
with creative self-efficacy and creative imagination. General curiosity was
measured using the curiosity and exploration inventory-II [54]; creative
self-efficacy was measured using the short scale of creative self (SSCS;
Karwowski, [1]); and creative imagination was measured using the
Imagination index [55].
4. Peljko Z, Jeraj M, Savoiu G, Maric M: An empirical study of the
relationship between entrepreneurial curiosity and
innovativeness. Organizacija 2016, 49:172-182.
5. Celik P, Storme M, Davila A, Myszkowski N: Work-related
curiosity positively predicts worker innovation. J Manage Dev
2016, 35:1184-1194.
6. Chang YY, Shih HY: Work curiosity: a new lens for
understanding employee creativity. Hum Resour Manage Rev
2019, 29:100672.
7. Gross ME, Araujo DB, Zedelius CM, Schooler JW: Is perception
 the missing link between creativity, curiosity and schizotypy?
Evidence from spontaneous eye-movements and responses
to auditory oddball stimuli. NeuroImage 2019, 202:116125.
The authors examine the links among creativity, curiosity, and schizotypy
using both self-report questionnaires and performance-based measures
of creativity. Both perceptual and epistemic curiosity are measured. They
further examine similarities in perceptual behavior between these traits
using eye tracking metrics. They find that both curiosity and creativity are
characterized by exploratory eye movements (increased entropy and
number of regions fixated).
8. Litman JA, Spielberger CD: Measuring epistemic curiosity and
its diversive and specific components. J Personal Assess 2003,
80:75-86.
9. Collins RP, Litman JA, Spielberger CD: The measurement of
perceptual curiosity. Personal Individ Diff 2004, 36:1127-1141.
10. Kashdan TB, Fincham FD: Facilitating creativity by regulating
curiosity. Am Psychol 2002, 57:373-374 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0003-066X.57.5.373.
11. Harrison SH, Dossinger K: Pliable guidance: a multilevel model
of curiosity, feedback seeking, and feedback giving in creative
work. Acad Manage J 2017, 60:2051-2072.
12. Hardy JH III, Ness AM, Mecca J: Outside the box: epistemic
 curiosity as a predictor of creative problem solving and
creative performance. Personal Individ Diff 2017, 104:230-237.
One of the only studies to test the association between trait curiosity and
performance-based creativity. Here they found that diversive but not
specific curiosity was predictive of solution originality and quality. Infor-
mation seeking in the early stages of the creative process was also found
to mediate the relationship between trait curiosity and creative
performance.
13. Kaufman SB, Quilty LC, Grazioplene RG, Hirsh JB, Gray JR,
Peterson JB, DeYoung CG: Openness to experience and
intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts
and sciences. J Personal 2016, 84:248-258.
www.sciencedirect.com
14. Litman JA: Curiosity as a feeling of interest and feeling of
deprivation: the I/D model of curiosity. Issues Psychol Motiv
2007:149-156.
15. Hagtvedt LP, Dossinger K, Harrison SH, Huang L: Curiosity made
 the cat more creative: specific curiosity as a driver of
creativity. Organl Behav Hum Decis Processes 2019, 150:1-13.
One of the first and only series of studies to induce curiosity experimen-
tally and examine causal effects on creativity. In study 1, researchers
induced specific curiosity by creating a situation where Ps became
curious to solve a specific puzzle (i.e. specific curiosity). This leads to
more creative solutions to the puzzle. Study 4 determines that the
mechanism for this effect may be idea linking, a sequential process of
ideation whereby early ideas become input for subsequent ideas.
16. Zabelina DL: Attention and creativity. In The Cambridge
Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity. Edited by Jung RE,
Vartanian O. Cambridge University Press; 2018:161-179.
17. Zabelina D, Saporta A, Beeman M: Flexible or leaky attention in
creative people? Distinct patterns of attention for different
types of creative thinking. Mem Cognit 2016, 44:488-498.
18. Gottlieb J: Understanding active sampling strategies:
empirical approaches and implications for attention and
decision research. Cortex 2018, 102:150-160.
19. Gottlieb J, Oudeyer PY: Towards a neuroscience of active
sampling and curiosity. Nat Rev Neurosci 2018, 1.
20. Risko EF, Anderson NC, Lanthier S, Kingstone A: Curious eyes:
individual differences in personality predict eye movement
behavior in scene-viewing. Cognition 2012, 122:86-90.
21. Kashdan TB, Stiksma MC, Disabato DJ, McKnight PE, Bekier J,
Kaji J, Lazarus R: The five-dimensional curiosity scale:
capturing the bandwidth of curiosity and identifying four
unique subgroups of curious people. J Res Personal 2018,
73:130-149.
22. Christensen AP, Cotter KN, Silvia PJ: Reopening openness to
experience: a network analysis of four openness to experience
inventories. J Personal Assess 2019, 101:574-588.
23. Kaufman SB, Quilty LC, Grazioplene RG, Hirsh JB, Gray JR,
Peterson JB, DeYoung CG: Openness to experience and
intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts
and sciences. J Personal 2016, 84:248-258.
24. McCrae RR, Costa PT: Conceptions and correlates of openness
to experience. In Handbook of Personality Psychology. Edited by
Hogan R, Johnson J, Briggs S. Elsevier Science: Academic Press;
1997:825-847.
25. Silvia PJ, Nusbaum EC, Berg C, Martin C, O’Connor A: Openness
to experience, plasticity, and creativity: exploring lower-order,
high-order, and interactive effects. J Res Personal 2009,
43:1087-1090.
26. McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr, Martin TA: The NEO–PI–3: a more
readable revised NEO personality inventory. J Personal Assess
2005, 84:261-270.
27. DeYoung CG: Openness/intellect: A Dimension of Personality
Reflecting Cognitive Exploration. 2015.
28. Woo SE, Chernyshenko OS, Longley A, Zhang ZX, Chiu CY,
Stark SE: Openness to experience: its lower level structure,
measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. J Personal
Assess 2014, 96:29-45.
29. Lee K, Ashton MC: Psychometric properties of the HEXACO
personality inventory. Multivar Behav Res 2004, 39:329-358.
30. Hunter JA, Abraham EH, Hunter AG, Goldberg LC, Eastwood JD:
Personality and boredom proneness in the prediction of
creativity and curiosity. Think Skills Creat 2016, 22:48-57.
31. Schutte NS, Malouff JM: Connections between curiosity, flow
and creativity. Personal Individ Diff 2020, 152:109555 http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109555.
32. Schutte NS, Malouff JM: A meta-analysis of the relationship
 between curiosity and creativity. J Creat Behav 2019 http://dx.
doi.org/10.1002/jocb.421.
Calculated effect sizes for associations of curiosity with (a) self-reported
creativity and (b) rated creativity, as well as associations of creativity with
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 2020, 35:77–82
82 Curiosity (Exolore versus Exploit)
(c) exploration curiosity, and (d) deprivation curiosity. All of the curiosity
assessments in the studies included in the meta-analysis were based on
self-report. There were stronger effect sizes for the association between
creativity and exploration, versus deprivation curiosity, as well as a
stronger relationships of curiosity to self-reported creativity, versus
judge-rated (performance-based) curiosity.
33. Lau JKL, Ozono H, Kuratomi K, Komiya A, Murayama K: Hunger
for knowledge: how the irresistible lure of curiosity is
generated in the brain. bioRxiv 2018:473975.
34. Murayama K, FitzGibbon L, Sakaki M: Process account of
curiosity and interest: a reward-learning perspective. Educ
Psychol Rev 2019, 31:875-895.
35. Berlyne DE: Novelty and curiosity as determinants of
exploratory behavior. Br J Psychol 1950, 41 68–50.
36. Berlyne DE: Conflict, Arousal, and Curiosity. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill; 1960.
37. Jepma Marieke, Verdonschot Rinus G, Van Steenbergen Henk,
Rombouts Serge AR, Nieuwenhuis Sander: Neural mechanisms
underlying the induction and relief of perceptual curiosity.
Front Behav Neurosci 2012, 6:5.
38. Silvia PJ, Kashdan TB: Interesting things and curious people:
exploration and engagement as transient states and enduring
strengths. Soc Personal Psychol Comp 2009, 3:785-797.
39. Silvia PJ: Confusion and interest: the role of knowledge
emotions in aesthetic experience. Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts
2010, 4:75-80.
40. Ainley M: Curiosity and interest: emergence and divergence.
Educ Psychol Rev 2019:1-18.
41. Gruber MJ, Ranganath C: How curiosity enhances
hippocampus-dependent memory: the Prediction, Appraisal,
Curiosity, and Exploration (PACE) framework. Trends Cognit
Sci 2019, 23:1014-1025.
42. Grossnickle EM: Disentangling curiosity: dimensionality,
definitions, and distinctions from interest in educational
contexts. Educ Psychol Rev 2016, 28:23-60.
43. Dubey R, Griffiths TL, Lombrozo T: If it’s important, then I am
curious: a value intervention to induce curiosity. Proceedings
of the Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2019.
44. Mehta H, Dubey R, Lombrozo T: Your liking is my curiosity: a
social popularity intervention to induce curiosity. CogScience
2018.
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 2020, 35:77–82
45. Potts R, Davies G, Shanks DR: The benefit of generating errors
during learning: what is the locus of the effect? J Exp Psychol
Learn Mem Cognit 2019, 45:1023-1041.
46. Brod G, Breitwieser J: Lighting the wick in the candle of
 learning: generating a prediction stimulates curiosity. NPJ Sci
Learn 2019, 4:1-7.
Participants are presented with numerical facts and asked to generate a
prediction of the solution or an example. Participants are more curious
when they generate a prediction, indicating the intrinsic desire to know
whether a prediction holds true may boost state curiosity.
47. Brydevall M, Bennett D, Murawski C, Bode S: The neural
encoding of information prediction errors during non-
instrumental information seeking. Sci Rep 2018, 8:6134.
48. Cabrero JMR, Zhu JQ, Ludvig EA: Costly curiosity: people pay a
 price to resolve an uncertain gamble early. Behav Processes
2019, 160:20-25.
This study revealed that humans, like animals, are driven to seek
advanced information, even when the information is not useful. Human
participants were even willing to pay to see advanced information about
upcoming rewards in this gambling paradigm.
49. Marvin CB, Shohamy D: Curiosity and reward: valence predicts
choice and information prediction errors enhance learning. J
Exp Psychol Gen 2016, 145:266-272.
50. Lydon-Staley DM, Zhou D, Blevins AS, Zurn P, Bassett DS:
Hunters, Busybodies, and the Knowledge Network Building
Associated with Curiosity. 2019.
51. Gill D, Prowse V: A structural analysis of disappointment
aversion in a real effort competition. Am Econ Rev 2012,
102:469-503.
52. Gill D, Prowse V: Measuring costly effort using the slider task. J
Behav Exp Finance 2019, 21:1-9.
53. Franklin MS, Mrazek MD, Anderson CL, Smallwood J,
Kingstone A, Schooler J: The silver lining of a mind in the clouds:
interesting musings are associated with positive mood while
mind-wandering. Front Psychol 2013, 4:583.
54. Kashdan TB, Gallagher MW, Silvia PJ, Winterstein BP, Breen WE,
Terhar D, Steger MF: The curiosity and exploration inventory-II:
Development, factor structure, and psychometrics. J Res
Person 2009, 43(6):987-998.
55. Liang C, Hsu Y, Chang CC, Lin LJ: In search of an index of
imagination for virtual experience designers. Int J Technol
Design Edu 2013, 23(4):1037-1046.
www.sciencedirect.com
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 DREAM.

I dreamt that, standing on a height,

I wished to plunge me in the sea,
When, lo! a spirit of peace and light,
This wondrous song sang unto me:
‘Await the spring! I’ll soon be here;’
I’ll say, ‘Again let manhood rise!’
The mist from clouded brows I’ll clear,
And dreary dreams from heavy eyes.
Back to your Muse her voice I’ll give,
And once again you’ll find the days
All blessed—as you bind the sheaf—
Reaping your unmown upland ways.
 A SICK MAN’S JEALOUSY.

A heavy cross, the lot Fate laid upon her—

“Suffer! be silent! weep not! feign the smile!”
And he, to whom her love, her youth, her will,
Her all, she’d given, her torturer proved the while.

For years no greeting with a friend knew she;

Subdued, in sadness, and in trembling fear,
Bitter, unreasoning, sarcastic jeers,
Without a murmur, ’twas her lot to hear.

“Hush! tell me not you’ve lost your youth for me—

That you’re distracted by my jealousy;
Nay, tell me not! My grave is close at hand,
While you are fresher than spring’s blossoms be.

“That day, the day when you at first loved me,

And heard from me, ‘I love,’ in whispered breath,
Curse not that day! The grave is near for me!
I will right all, redeem all, by my death.

“Cease! Tell me not the days for you are sad;

This invalid a jailor cease to name.
For me remains the cold gloom of the grave;
For thee the embraces of another flame.

“Full well I know thou dost another love.

To spare, to wait, this seemed a tedious plan.
Oh, wait awhile! my grave is very near!
Let Fate end that which Fate in me began!”
Such cruel, torturing, insulting words—
Lovely, yet pale as chiselled marble—she
In silence heard, and only wrung her hands.
What could she answer to such jealousy?
 THE LANDLORD OF OLD TIMES.
(Loquitur.)

Before the Emancipation of the Serfs.

To whom I like I mercy show,

And whom I like I kill;
My fist—my only constable,
My only law—my will.
A blow from which the sparkle flits,
A blow that knocks the teeth to bits,
A blow that breaks the jaw!

After the Emancipation of the Serfs.

The mighty chain is snapped in twain,

Is snapped and bounds asunder.
The landlords clutch one broken end;
At t’other peasants blunder.

The fields remain unploughed and bare;

The seed is left unsown;
No trace of order anywhere,
O mother-land, our own!
Not for ourselves thus sorrow we;
We grieve, O native land, for thee!
Oh, true-believing peasantry!
Russia’s your mother small;
The Tsar’s your little father.
And that for you is all!
THE RUSSIAN SOLDIER.

Then up there comes a veteran,

With medals on his breast;
He scarcely lives, but yet he strives
To drink with all the rest.
“A lucky man, am I,” he cries,
And thus to prove the fact he tries.
“In what consists a soldier’s luck?
Pray, listen while I tell.
In twenty fights, or more, I’ve been,
And yet I never fell.
And, what is more, in peaceful times
Full meal I never knew;
Yet, all the same, I have contrived
Not to give Death his due.
Again, for sins both great and small,
Full many a time they’ve me
With sticks unmercifully flogged,
Yet I’m alive, you see!”
FROM MAIKOF.
 A MIDSUMMER NIGHT’S DREAM.

For a long time last night I for sleep vainly yearned.

I arose, my room window wide throwing;
The night with its silence oppressed me, and burned,
O’er me odours intoxicant blowing.

Of a sudden the hedge ’neath my window-sill shook;

My curtain blew back with a shimmer;
And in floated a youth with a beaming look,
Just as if from the moonlight a glimmer.

Gliding up to my couch, came my wonderful guest,

Whispered he, as a smile his lips parted,
“Why from me, with your cheek ’neath the pillow prest,
Like a startled wee fish, have you darted?

“Look up! I’m a god—god of visions and dreams,

Secret friend of the innocent maiden;
And for thee, my own queen, for the first time, I ween,
With a bliss from on high come I laden!”

He spoke—and his hands my face lovingly seek;

From its nook he it tenderly presses;
Then a burning kiss fell on the curve of my cheek,
And his lips sought my lips in caresses.

Neath the breath of his mouth my strength seemed to have flown,

From my breast unclaspt arms I extended,
And there breathed in my ears, “You’re my own! you’re my own!”
Distant notes, with harp’s melody blended!
Swiftly glided the hours; when I opened my eyes,
Rosy dawn through my chamber was streaming;
Alone, locks dishevelled, I trembling arise,
And I know not the drift of my dreaming.
 WHO WAS HE?
A STORY OF PETER THE GREAT.

Upon the mighty Neva’s bank,

Along the winding woodland way,
A Horseman rode, in forest wilds
Of elm, of pine, of mosses grey.

Before him rose a Fisher’s hut;

Beneath a pine, by the blue stream,
An aged, bearded Fisherman
Was mending his boat’s broken beam.

The Horseman said, “Grandsire! Good-day!

God help thee, friend! how liveth thou?
Doth thou catch much? and tell me, pray,
Where doth thou sell thy takings now?”

The old man answered sullenly,

“Are fishes in the river few?
And other market have I none,
Except the town, there, close to you.

“And how am I to fish to-day?

What kind of turmoil’s here, you see!
You fight; and, in the fight, a shell
Has smashed my fishing-boat for me!”

The Horseman bounded from his horse,

Without a word the tools he grasped;
And in a twinkling planked the boat,
The rudder in the stern set fast.
“See, now, old friend, thy boat’s all right!
Out on the water boldly set;
And, in the name of Peter’s luck,
Cast forth into the deep thy net.”

He vanished. Mused the stern old man:

“I wonder who the de’il was he!
In every inch he looked a king,
But plied the hatchet splendidly.”
 THE EASTER KISS.[8]

Soon “the Sun-bright Feast-day” cometh,

I will claim my Easter kiss.
Others, then, will stand around us;
Pray, my Dora, mark you this!

Just as if I never kissed you,

Blushing red before the rest,
You must kiss, with downcast eyelids;
I will kiss, with smile represt.

FOOTNOTES:
[8] It is the custom in Russia for all friends meeting on Easter
morning (known as “Sun-bright Feast-day”) to exchange kisses
three times in the name of the Trinity.
 ON LOMONOSSOEF.[9]

God chose him from his earliest years;

Revealed, ’mid glittering icebergs stood,
In northern light, in gleam of stars,
In roar of wave, in hum of wood,
And bade him leave his Fisher’s net,
And led him forth from town to town,
That “Rus”[10] to him from gloomy cot
To sparkling palace, might be known;
And led him to famed Western climes,
That there his genius might obtain
All knowledge, from the earliest times
Made known to mighty chosen men;
That, from their torch of knowledge, he
Might light his own, and, with right hand
Uplifted high that all might see,
Illume with it his native land.

FOOTNOTES:
[9] Lomonossoef—the first great Russian scholar—was the son
of an Archangel fisherman.
[10] Ancient name of Russia.
 PROPRIETY.

Ferdinand, the King, was courtly!

Pink of nice refinement he;
All the naked plasts of Venus,
Placed he under lock and key.

But the Herculean statues,

Left he in their places bare!
Men he did not mind offending;
Hurt the ladies? He’d not dare!
 THE SINGER.

Beautiful I’m not, I know;

Useless I in fight;
How to men and maids am I,
Such a dear delight?
Songs, like sounds that ’mid strings stray,
Fill this breast of mine,
Smiling round my lips they play,
In my eyes they shine!
 A LITTLE PICTURE.
AFTER THE PROCLAMATION OF THE 19TH FEB., 1861,
FREEING THE SERFS.

See, in peasant’s cottage, flickering

Shines a little fire,
Where, around a little maiden,
Draws a circle nigher.

And from word to word her finger

Slowly pointing leads,
As, with effort, to the peasants
She a paper reads.

Deep in thought, intently listening,

They a silence keep;
Save when some one bids the women
Hush the babes to sleep.

Mothers soothe their crying infants

With the teething toy,
While they, too, to catch the reading
All their ears employ.

Seated in the chimney corner

Now for many years,
With bent head the grandsire gazes,
Though he nothing hears.

Is the maiden clever, that they

Thus to her give heed?
Nay! but simply in that household
She alone could read:
And her lot it was to read out,
To the peasants old,
The glad news of longed-for freedom,
Which the paper told.

The full meaning of the message

Knew not she nor they;
But all, darkly, felt the dawning
Of a better day.

Brothers! see, the day-dawn flushes!

Darkness yields its place,
Sons of yours, ere long, will look on
Daylight face to face.

More and more let darkness lighten!

Day arise in might!
Even now, in vision, see I
Rays of rising light.

They are shining on the forehead,

Gleaming in the look,
Of that thoughtful little maiden
With her little book.

Freedom, Brothers! This is only

First step on the way
To the kingdom, where, in knowledge,
Shines eternal day!
 THE ALPINE GLACIER.

Dank the darkness on the cliff-side;

Faintly outlined from below,
In their modest maiden gladness,
Glaciers in the dawn’s blush glow.

What new life upon me blowing,

Breathes from yonder snowy height,
From that depth of limpid turquoise
Flashing in the morning light?

There, I know, dread Terror dwelleth,

Track of man there is not there;
Yet my heart in answer swelleth
To the challenge, “Come thou here!”
 THE MOTHER.

Little sufferer—all on fire!

All’s to him so trying!
On my shoulder lean thy head,
On my bosom lying!
I will walk about with thee,
Sleep, my own sweet dearie.
Shall I tell a little tale?
“Once there lived a fairy”—
No? Thee likes not silly tales?
P’r’aps a song will take thee!
“Pine-wood rustling dark and dank,
Big fox, wee fox, wakes he.
In the dark pine-wood will I——”
Is my own pet sleeping?
“Gather blackberries for thee
Brimful baskets heaping.
In the dark pine-wood will I——”
Hush! he fast is sleeping.
Open wide his feverish lips,
Like a wee bird, keeping.

“In the dark pine-wood will I,”

Walks the mother, singing—
Till the long dark night declines,
Back the day-dawn bringing.
Singing—while her weary arms
With dull pain are tingling—
Walks the mother; with her sighs
Frequent tears are mingling;
And scarce stirs the restless child,
Tossing in its fever,
Ere again that song resounds,
Soft and low as ever.
With thy scythe depart, O Death,
Spare the tender blossom!
Fierce the fight ere she will yield
Baby from her bosom.
With her whole soul will she shield,
E’en though sore affrighted,
That mysterious flame of life
Which from her was lighted,
For scarce rose that little flame,
Ere to her revealed was
What of love,—of wondrous power,—
In her breast concealed was.