Deprivation
and
discovery
motives
determine
how
it
feels
to
be
curious
Marret
K
Noordewier
and
Eric
van
Dijk
Curiosityisevokedwhenpeopleexperiencean information-gapbetweenwhattheyknowandwhattheydonot(yet)know. Curiouspeoplearemotivatedtofindtheinformationtheyare missing.Thismotivationhasdifferentcomponents:People wanttoreducetheuncertaintyofnotknowingsomething (deprivationmotive)andtheywanttodiscovernewinformation toexpandtheirknowledge(discoverymotive).Wediscuss recentresearchthatshowsthattheaffectiveexperienceof curiosityistheresultoftherelativestrengthofthedeprivation anddiscoverymotives.This,inturn,iscontingentonindividual differences,anticipatedfeaturesoftheactualtarget,and featuresoftheinformation-gap.
Address
LeidenUniversity,TheNetherlands
Correspondingauthor:
Noordewier,MarretK(m.k.noordewier@fsw.leidenuniv.nl)
CurrentOpinioninBehavioralSciences2020,35:71–76
ThisreviewcomesfromathemedissueonCuriosity(Exploreversus Exploit)
EditedbyDaphnaShohamyandRanHassin
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.07.017
2352-1546/ã2020TheAuthors.PublishedbyElsevierLtd.Thisisan openaccessarticleundertheCCBYlicense(http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Introduction
Curiosityistriggeredwhenpeopleareconfrontedwithan information-gap—a gap between what one currently knows and what one wants to know [1–3,4,5,6]. This canoccurin manysituations, rangingfromspecific gaps followingteasers,gambles,orquestions[2,6–9],tomore wide-rangingordiversivegapsfollowingintellectual chal-lengesor whenexploringthesurfacematerialsonMars [4,5,10].Cognitiveincongruencycanalsobeconsidered an information-gap, as on amore meta-level it is agap between incongruencyand thedesired state of congru-ency [5].Thismeansthat unfamiliaror unusualstimuli canresultincuriositytoward(unknown)informationthat explains how this fits with one’s current knowledge [11,12]1.
Curiosity is characterized by a powerful motivation to find currently missinginformation. Thismotivation has differentcomponents:Ontheonehand,peoplemaybe motivated to reduce the uncertainty of not completely knowingsomething(i.e.endknowledgedeprivation).On theotherhand,peoplecanbemotivatedtodiscovernew information to expand their knowledge (i.e. anticipate new knowledge [4,5,9,13,14,15,16]). The former motive may be seen as related to closing an informa-tion-gap;thelattermotivateismore focusedatopening upone’sinformationrepertoire.Differentiatingbetween these motives is important, as their relative strength affects howit feelsto becurious. This distinction may firstofallcontributetothedebateofwhether(andwhen) curiosity is a pleasant state or not; and whether affect should beincluded in the definition of curiosity [4,5]. Moreover, it helps to explainindividual and situational differences in pleasure and voluntary exposure to curiosity.
Inthefollowing,wediscussrecentresearchthatsupports the notion that how it feels to be curious depends on whether people have a deprivation or discovery motive. More specifically, this review showsthat the subjective experience of curiosity depends ona) individual differ-ences, b) anticipated features of the actual target, and c) features of the information-gap—which all can influ-encetherelativeimportanceof onemotivationoverthe other.
The
individual:
who
is
curious?
Curiosity is the result of an information-gap, but this information-gap may be perceived very differently dependingonindividualdifferences:Forsome,not know-ingsomethingisanexcitingtriggertodiscovernewthings; forothersthissameinformation-gapcanbeamore uncom-fortablesignofdeprivation,asonerealizesthattheworldis notcompletelyknownorunderstood[1,18,19].
Opennessandneedforstructure
Recentresearchforinstanceshowsthattheenjoymentof unusual orunknown stimulidependson individual dif-ferences in openness to experience and need for struc-ture. Higheropennessandlowerneed forstructure pre-dictedpreferencesfor schema-violatingimages—likean Inuit in the desert or a hipster on the moon [12,20].
1Notethatthiscouldalsoinvolveinterest.Forarelevantreflectiononwhetherandhowitispossibletodifferentiatebetweencuriosityandcuriosity
Similarly,whenaskedtoexplorecomplexstimulilikeart, philosophical quotations, or complex problem-solving tasks,highopennessparticipantsreportedinterestwhile also being confused. In contrast, low openness partici-pantswerelesslikelytoassociateconfusionwithinterest [11]. Thus, complex, unusual, or unknown stimuli are more appreciatedbythose who areopen to the experi-ence of not knowing something, relative to those who preferclarityand structure[12].
Deprivationversusinterestintraitcuriosity
Thesefindingsmimictraitcuriosityscalesthat differenti-atebetweencuriosityasfeelinginterestedversuscuriosityas feelingdeprived[1,19,21,22,26].Particularlyrelevantisthe recentfive-dimensionalcuriosityscale(5DC),which incor-poratesthefactorsjoyousexploration,thrillseeking, dep-rivation sensitivity, stress tolerance, and social curiosity [24,25].Corroboratingtheideathatpeopledifferinhow theyperceivelackofinformation,studies[24]showedthat peoplewho scoredhighonjoyousexplorationandstress tolerancealsoreportedrelativelyhighmotivationfornew knowledge (e.g. stretching, openness, flexibility). Thrill seeking was better described by a motivation for the pleasureandadventureoftheunknown(e.g.itcorrelated with sensation seeking and embracing novelty). These findings fit with the notion that information-gaps can motivate(some)peopletoexplore.
Results[24]alsorevealedthatpeoplehighindeprivation sensitivityscored quite differently.They seemed more motivated to reduce the tension of notknowing some-thing(e.g.itcorrelatedwithneedforclosureandanxiety). These results fit with the notion that information-gaps can motivate (some) people to reduce the uncertainty. Importantly, these differential perceptions may deter-minetheaffectiveexperienceofcuriosity.Itseemsmore pleasant to be a joyous exploration type that has high stresstolerancethantobeanindividualthatissensitiveto deprivation[24].
Traitcuriosityandwell-being
These dispositional tendencies and experiential corre-lates can also translate into more general well-being effects. The positive relation between trait curiosity and happiness/well-beingis well-established [23,27,28]. Itisexplainedbyahigherprobabilityofpleasurableand meaningfulmomentsinlife[23]andhigheropennessto thingsthat are unknownor difficultto understand—for instance, when viewing art [29], acquiring reading and mathcompetence[30],engagingwithcontradictory polit-icalinformation[31],ordealingwithrejection[32].While these studies do not typically focus on the affective experienceof curiosityperse, theyshow thatacurious disposition is a positive predictor of positive feelings. Interestingly, this curiosity-happiness link seems more likely among those who can enjoy lack of information without feeling stressed and deprived [24, but see
Ref.33].Atentativeconclusionmightbethatdifferential affective experiences also connect to the underlying motivationswe distinguished, suchthat (individual dif-ferences in) discovery motivation might be more con-nectedtopositivefeelingsthan(individualdifferencesin) deprivationmotivation.
Insum,dependingonindividualdifferences,an informa-tion-gapcaneitherbeassociatedwiththejoyand/orthrill of discovery, while it can also be an uncomfortable deprived feeling that one’s knowledge of the world is incomplete.
The
target:
curious
about
what?
Inadditiontotheimpactofindividualdifferencesonhow itfeelstobecurious,italsoseemstomatterwhatpeople arecuriousabout(thetarget).Whilecuriouspeoplelack definiteinformation abouttheexact information thatis missing,theyoftenhavesomecluesandideasaboutwhat itmightbe.Thiscanrangefromveryconcrete informa-tionaboutpossible outcomes(e.g.theprizethey might wininalottery)tomoregeneralideasaboutthevalence or value of information (e.g. whether it will be nice or useful). In addition to the expected reward of closing theinformation-gap[2,4,5,7,9],thesevalenceandvalue anticipationsare likelyto influenceaffect.
Anticipatedvalenceandvalue
this material may have. We do not know of studies directlytestingthis,butstimuliusedinmorbidcuriosity researchareverysimilartothoseusedtotriggernegative affect or emotions like fear [36,41]. Anticipating the discoveryofsuchmaterialsmaythenresemblenegative feelingsasfoundinthecontextofawaitingbadnews[42] or anticipatinganegativeconsumerexperience[43]. Whilecuriosityaboutpositiveoutcomeswillgenerallyfeel more positive, this does not mean that curiosity about negativethingswillalwaysfeelbad.Whenpeopleperceive value inthe discovery ofthisinformation, curiositymay become associated with positive feelings. For instance, whenpeoplearelookingforapossiblethrilloradisruption from boredom, anticipating negative materials may be exciting[24,44].Moreover,disturbingartcanbeenjoyed whenpeoplecandistancethemselvesfromitandembrace it[45].Finally,peoplearenotonlymotivatedtofeelgood; they can also be motivated to form accurate beliefs [14,17,46].Thediscoveryofnew (negative)information maygivepeopleabetterrepresentationoftheir environ-mentandforthesereasons,peoplemightappreciateit(for predictivecodingconnections,seeRefs.[47–49];foramore elaborate discussion onmotives underlying curiosity for negativity,seeRef.[50]).Thisperceivedvalueofnegative informationcanalsoexplainwhenandwhycuriositycan outweighavoidancemotivation[13,40,51,52].
Insum,affectiveunderpinningsofcuriosityarenotonly determinedbytheexpectedrewardofendingdeprivation butalsobytheanticipatedvalenceandvalueoftheactual content. Expectancies about how the resolution will impact people and what this means to them can make curiosity lessormore pleasant.
The
information-gap:
what
is
missing
and
how
long
will
it
last?
Evenifindividualdifferencesandoutcomeanticipations wouldbeheldconstant,featuresof theinformation-gap canalsoaffecttherelativestrengthofdeprivationversus discoverymotives.Relevantinthiscontextarethe spec-ificity and size of the information-gap [1,4,54] and the time ittakestocloseit[15].
Specificityofinformation-gap
First,thedistinctionbetweendeprivationanddiscovery canbeconnectedtospecificanddiversivecuriosity([53]; seealsoinformationsamplingversussearch[54]).Specific curiositymeansthatpeoplehaveaclearinformation-gap, (e.g.notknowingthecontentsofabox[55])andfinding the missing information would resolve this curiosity. Diversive curiosity refers to exploring for the sake of exploration (e.g. wandering an unknown city) and involves a more generic motivation, where people dis-coverinformationwithoutaspecificend-pointinmind.In these contexts, people maybe more likely to focus on rather undefined discovery and as a result, appreciate
each new piece of information they encounter. With specific curiosity,however,itis morelikelythatpeople focusonthemissinginformation.Inaccordancewiththis, we would predict that people enjoy diversive informa-tion-gapsmore thanspecificinformation-gaps.Thisalso fits with scholars who connect diversive curiosity to fascination with learning new information and specific curiosityto moredeprivation-focused curiosity[56].
Sizeofinformation-gap
Similarly, the amount of information that people have versustheamounttheymissseemstoimpacttherelative focus on deprivation or discovery. Studies show that smaller information-gaps (i.e. having more information) result in more curiosity [1–3]. Information-gap theory argues that a small (versus big) information-gap makes peoplefeelclosetoclosingthegap,whichintensifiesthe focusonwhatismissing(likeafocusonmissingpiecesin ajigsaw puzzle,whenthepuzzleisnear tocompletion; [2]). A small (versus big) information-gap is therefore predicted to increase therelative impact of deprivation (versusdiscovery)feelings.
In line with this, a study presented participants with questionsafterwhichtheycouldratewhethertheanswer was‘atthetipoftheirtongue’(TOT)orwhethertheydid not know (representinga small versus big information-gap;[57]).Resultsshowedcorrelationsbetweencuriosity as deprivation and ratings of TOT-states and between curiosityasinterestand‘Idon’tknow’states[57].Note, however, that this TOT-effect has recently also been connectedtopositivefeelings[58],whichisexplainedby thefactthatTOT-statesareassociatedby‘feelingwarm’ orclosetothediscoveryofthenewinformation.Future research should establish the exact relations between information-gap size and affective consequences, but thesefindingsindirectlysupportthatafocuson depriva-tionislesspleasant thanafocusondiscovery.
Whentoclosetheinformation-gap
participantsweremorecuriousimmediatelyafterthetest than after a more extended period [59], which was explainedin termsof greatersalienceofinformation. Insum,thesizeandspecificityoftheinformation-gapand the time it takes to resolve it impacts the strength of deprivation versus discovery motives. The smaller and morespecifictheinformation-gapandthenlongeritlasts, themore likelyit is thatpeople feel deprived, andthe moreunpleasantcuriositygets.
Conclusion
Curiosityfeelsverydifferentdependingonwhether peo-plefocus on theuncertainty of notknowing something (deprivation motive)or the possibility of attaining new knowledge(discoverymotive).Afocusondeprivationis less pleasantthan a focuson discovery and therelative importanceof thesecomponents depends on individual differencesandfeaturesofthetargetandthe information-gap.Specifically,aninformation-gapisanenjoyable trig-gertodiscoverforsome,butamoreuncomfortablesignof deprivation for others. In addition, anticipating positive andvaluable informationmakes curiosity feelgood, but themorepeoplefocusontheinformation-gap(becauseit issmall,specific,andittakesawhiletoresolve),themore unpleasant curiosity gets. Thus, the experience of an information-gap is thecore of curiosity and therelative strengthofdeprivationanddiscoverymotivesunderliethe affective experienceof curiosity. Thisimpliesthatboth motivesarelikelytobepartoftheexperienceofcuriosity, butwhichonedominatesisdeterminedbyfeaturesofthe individual,thetarget,andtheinformation-gap.
Taken together,this review highlightstherelevance of incorporatingaffectasadimensionofcuriosity[4,5],asit showed that affective components systematically vary depending on deprivation versus discovery motives. Future research could more systematically incorporate thesemotivationalcomponents,touncoverpredictorsof (continuous)enjoymentofcuriosity.Moreover,itwould be interesting to study combinations of features of the individual,thetarget,ortheinformation-gap:For exam-ple,anticipatingnegativeoutcomesmayfeelparticularly uneasyto those who seecuriosity as deprivation; anda more diversive information-gapcould be extraenjoyed whenittakesawhiletoresolve.
Conflict
of
interest
statement
Nothingdeclared.References
and
recommended
reading
Papersofparticularinterest,publishedwithintheperiodofreview, havebeenhighlightedas:
ofspecialinterest
1. LitmanJA:Curiosityandthepleasuresoflearning:wantingand likingnewinformation.CognitEmot2005,19:793-814http://dx. doi.org/10.1080/02699930541000101.
2. LoewensteinG:Thepsychologyofcuriosity:areviewand reinterpretation.PsycholBull1994,116:75-98http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0033-2909.116.1.75.
3. KiddC,HaydenBY:Thepsychologyandneuroscienceof curiosity.Neuron2015,88:449-460http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. neuron.2015.09.010.
4.
MurayamacuriosityandK,FitzGibboninterest:aL,reward-learningSakakiM:Processperspective.accountEducof PsycholRev2019,31:875-895 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09499-9.
Theauthorspresentaprocessaccountoncuriosityandinterest.They arguethatitisimportanttofocusontherewardassociatedwith knowl-edgeacquisition.Thisrewardreinforcesthevalueoffurtherinformation, which strengthens furtherinformation-seeking behavior. The authors connectthismodeltoeducationalpsychology.
5. PekrunR:Themurkydistinctionbetweencuriosityand interest:stateoftheartandfutureprospects.EducPsychol Rev2019,31:905-914 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09512-1.
6. SilviaPJ,KashdanTB:Interestingthingsandcuriouspeople: explorationandengagementastransientstatesandenduring strengths.SocPersonalPsycholComp2009,3:785-797. 7. MarvinCB,ShohamyD:Curiosityandreward:valencepredicts
choiceandinformationpredictionerrorsenhancelearning.J ExpPsycholGen2016,145:266-272http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ xge0000140.
8. RuanB,HseeCK,LuZY:Theteasingeffect:an underappreciatedbenefitofcreatingandresolvingan uncertainty.JMarkRes2018,55:556-570http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1509/jmr.15.0346.
9. VanLieshoutLL,VandenbrouckeAR,Mu¨llerNC,CoolsR,de LangeFP:Inductionandreliefofcuriosityelicitparietaland frontalactivity.JNeurosci2018,38:2579-2588http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2816-17.2018.
10. GrotzingerJP:Analysisofsurfacematerialsbythecuriosity Marsrover.Science2013,341http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ science.12442581475–1475.
11. FaynK,SilviaPJ,DejonckheereE,VerdonckS,KuppensP: Confusedorcurious?Openness/intellectpredictsmore positiveinterest-confusionrelations.JPersonalSocPsychol 2019,117:1016-1033http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000257.
12. GocłowskaM,BaasM,ElliotAJ,DeDreuCKW:Why schema-violationsaresometimespreferableto
schema-consistencies:theroleofinterestandopennessto experience.JResPersonal2017,66:54-69http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jrp.2016.12.005.
13.
GolmanpreferencesR,LoewensteinregardingtheG:Informationpresenceandgaps:absenceatheoryofof information.Decision2018,5:143-164http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ dec0000068.
Theauthorsuseexpectedutilitytheorytoidentifypredictorsofacquiring oravoidinginformation.Theydifferentiatebetweentheinformation-gap andinformation,and identify curiosityas themotivation toclose an information-gaptoloweruncertainty.Theanticipatedvalenceinformation drivesacquisitionversusavoidancechoices,wherepeoplehavea gen-eralpreferenceforpleasurableoverpainful.
14.
Kobayashi,DiversemotivesRavaioliforS,humanBaranescuriosity.A,WoodfordNatHumM,BehavGottlieb2019,J: 3 :1-11http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0589-3.
Theauthorsfocusondifferentmotivesthatunderliecuriosityandshow variationincuriosityaboutprobabilisticevents,dependingonthe uncer-taintyoftheoutcomeversusthevalueoftheoutcome.Followingthis, theyarguethatinadditiontotheexpectedrewardofresolvingcuriosity, theanticipatedutility oftheoutcome isan important determinantof curiosity.
15.
NoordewierknowingtoMK,almostvanknowing.DijkE:CuriosityCognitEmotandtime:2017:1-11fromhttp://dx.not doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2015.1122577.
soon, they focus moreon acquiring information and they feel more positive.
16. OudeyerP-Y,GottliebJ,LopesM:Intrinsicmotivation,curiosity, andlearning:theoryandapplicationsineducational technologies.ProgBrainRes2016,229:257-284http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2016.05.005.
17. vanLieshoutLLF,deLangeFP,CoolsR:Motivesunderlying humancuriosity.NatHumBehav2019,3:550-551http://dx.doi. org/10.1038/s41562-019-0565-y.
18. KashdanTB,SilviaPJ:Curiosityandinterest:thebenefitsof thrivingonnoveltyandchallenge.In HandbookofPositive Psychology,edn2.EditedbySnyderCR,LopezSJ.NewYork,NY: OxfordUniversityPress;2009:367-374.
19. LitmanJA:Interestanddeprivationdimensionsofepistemic curiosity.PersonalIndividDiffer2008,44:1585-1595http://dx.doi. org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_1645.
20. GocłowskaMA,BaasM,CrispRJ,DeDreuCKW:Whethersocial schemaviolationshelporhurtcreativitydependsonneedfor structure.PersonalSocPsycholBull2014,40:959-971http://dx. doi.org/10.1177/0146167214533132.
21. KashdanTB,GallagherMW,SilviaPJ,WintersteinBP,BreenWE, TerharD,StegerMF:Thecuriosityandexplorationinventory-II: development,factorstructure,andpsychometrics.JRes Personal2009,43:987-998http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jrp.2009.04.011.
22. MahmoodzadehM,KhajavyGH:Towardsconceptualizing languagelearningcuriosityinSLA:anempiricalstudy.J PsycholinguistRes2018,48:333-351http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10936-018-9606-3.
23. KashdanTB,ShermanRA,YarbroJ,FunderDC:Howarecurious peopleviewedandhowdotheybehaveinsocialsituations? Fromtheperspectivesofself,friends,parents,and unacquaintedobservers.JPersonal2013,81:142-154http://dx. doi.org/10.1037/a0021786.
24.
KashdanKajiJ,LazarusTB,StiksmaR:TheMC,five-dimensionalDisabatoDJ,McKnightcuriosityscale:PE,BekierJ, capturingthebandwidthofcuriosityandidentifyingfour uniquesubgroupsofcuriouspeople.JResPersonal2018, 73:130-149http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.11.011.
Theauthorsdevelopedanewcuriosityscalethatdifferentiatesbetween five distinctfactors:Joyousexploration, deprivationsensitivity, stress tolerance,socialcuriosity,andthrillseeking.Thesefactorssystematically relatetopersonality,emotion,andwell-beingmeasuresandthescale canbeusedtodescribedifferenttypesofcuriouspeople—forinstance thosewhoarefascinatedbynewknowledgeversusthosewhorather avoidit.
25. BirenbaumM,AlhijaFN-A,ShiltonH,KimronH,RosanskiR, ShahorN:Afurtherlookatthefive-dimensionalcuriosity construct.PersonalIndividDiffer2019,149:57-65http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.05.038.
26. PowellC,NettelbeckT,BurnsNR:Deconstructingintellectual curiosity.PersonalIndividDiffer2016,95:147-151http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.037.
27. SheldonKM,JosePE,KashdanTB,JardenA:Personality, effectivegoal-striving,andenhancedwell-being.PersonalSoc PsycholBull2015,41:575-585 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00484.x.
28. LydonStaleyDM,ZurnP,BassettDS:Within-person variabilityincuriosityduringdailylifeandassociationswith well-being.JPersonal2019,77:1-17http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ pen.2018.3.
29. FaynK,SilviaPJ,ErbasY,TiliopoulosN,KuppensP:Nuanced aestheticemotions:emotiondifferentiationisrelatedto knowledgeoftheartsandcuriosity.CognitEmot2017,32 :593-599http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.02.007.
30. LechnerCM,MiyamotoA,KnopfT:Shouldstudentsbesmart, curious,orboth?Fluidintelligence,openness,andinterest co-shapetheacquisitionofreadingandmathcompetence. Intelligence2019,76:101378http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. intell.2019.101378.
31. KahanDM,LandrumA,CarpenterK,HelftL,HallJamiesonK: Sciencecuriosityandpoliticalinformationprocessing.Political Psychol2017,38:179-199http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023253.
32. KawamotoT,UraM,HirakiK:Curiouspeoplearelessaffected bysocialrejection.PersonalIndividDiffer2017,105:264-267 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.006.
33. GarrosaE,Blanco-DonosoLM,Carmona-CoboI, Moreno-Jime´nezB:Howdocuriosity,meaninginlife,andsearchfor meaningpredictcollegestudents’dailyemotionalexhaustion andengagement? JHappinessStud2016,18:17-40http://dx. doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9715-3.
34. LeeYH,QiuC:Whenuncertaintybringspleasure:theroleof prospectimageabilityandmentalimagery.JConsumRes2009, 36:624-633http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/599766.
35. HseeCK,RuanB,ScholteHS:Thepandoraeffect:thepower andperilofcuriosity.PsycholSci2016,27:659-666http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/0191-8869(86)90107-8.
36. OosterwijkS:Choosingthenegative:abehavioral demonstrationofmorbidcuriosity.PLoSOne2017,12: e0178399http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178399.
37. OosterwijkS,SnoekL,TeKoppeleJ,EngelbertL,ScholteHS: ChoosingtoViewMorbidInformationInvolvesRewardCircuitry. Advanceonlinepublication;2019http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/ 795120.
38. KrugerJ,EvansM:TheparadoxofAlypiusandthepursuitof unwantedinformation.JExpSocPsychol2009,45:1173-1179 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.009.
39. KetelaarPE,Van’tRietJ,ThorbjornsenH,BuijzenM:Positive uncertainty:thebenefitofthedoubtinadvertising.IntJAdvert 2018,37:256-269http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
02650487.2016.1231163.
40. GigerenzerG,Garcia-RetameroR:Cassandra’sregret:the psychologyofnotwantingtoknow.PsycholRev2017,124 :179-196http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/rev0000055.
41. HagenaarsMA,StinsJF,RoelofsK:Aversivelifeeventsenhance humanfreezingresponses.JExpPsycholGen2012,141:98-105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024211.
42. SweenyK,FalkensteinA:Iswaitingthehardestpart? Comparingtheemotionalexperiencesofawaitingand receivingbadnews.PersonalSocPsycholBull2015,41 :1551-1559http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.03455.
43. YangY,GuY,GalakJ:Whenitcouldhavebeenworse,itgets better:howfavorableuncertaintyresolutionslowshedonic adaptation.JConsumRes2016,6:747-768http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1509/jmr.12.0430.
44. BenchSW,LenchHC:Boredomasaseekingstate:boredom promptsthepursuitofnovel(evennegative)experiences. Emotion2018,19:242-254http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ emo0000433.
45. MenninghausW,WagnerV,HanichJ,WassiliwizkyE,JacobsenT, KoelschS:Thedistancing-embracingmodeloftheenjoyment ofnegativeemotionsinartreception.BehavBrainSci2017, 40:1-63http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X17000309.
46. WrightSA,ClarksonJJ,KardesFR:Circumventingresistanceto novelinformation:piquingcuriositythroughstrategic informationrevelation.JExpSocPsychol2018,76:81-87http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.12.010.
47. KiversteinJ,MillerM,RietveldE:Thefeelingofgrip:novelty, errordynamics,andthepredictivebrain.Synthese2017, 96:2847-2869http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1583-9.
48. FristonKJ,LinM,FrithCD,PezzuloG,HobsonJA,OndobakaS: Activeinference,curiosityandinsight.NeuralComputation 2017,29:2633-2683http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2012.00001.
50. NiehoffE,OosterwijkS:Toknow,tofeel,toshare?Exploring themotivesthatdrivecuriosityfornegativity.CurrOpinBehav Sci2020,35:56-61http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
cobeha.2020.07.012.
51. HertwigR,EngelsC:Homoignorans:deliberatelychoosingnot toknow.PsychollSci2016,11:359-372http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/1745691616635594.
52. CharpentierCJ,Bromberg-MartinES,SharotT:Valuationof knowledgeandignoranceinmesolimbicrewardcircuitry.Proc NatlAcadSciUSA2018,115:E7255-E7264http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1800547115.
53. DayHI:Themeasurementofspecificcuriosity.In Intrinsic Motivation:ANewDirectioninEducation.EditedbyDayHI, BerlyneDE,HuntDE.NewYork:Holt,Rinehart&Winston;1971. 54. GottliebJ,OudeyerP-Y,LopesM,BaranesA:
Information-seeking,curiosity,andattention:computationalandneural mechanisms.TrendsCognitSci2013,17:1-9http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tics.2013.09.001.
55. VanDijkE,ZeelenbergM:Whencuriositykilledregret:avoiding orseekingtheunknownindecision-makingunder
uncertainty.JExpSocialPsychol2007,43:656-662http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.06.004.
56. Hardy JHIII,NessAM,MeccaJ:Outsidethebox:epistemic curiosityasapredictorofcreativeproblemsolvingand creativeperformance.PersonalIndividDiffer2017,104:230-237 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.08.004.
57. LitmanJA,HutchinsTL,RussonRK:Epistemiccuriosity, feeling-of-knowing,andexploratorybehaviour.CognitEmot2005, 19:559-582http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699930441000427. 58. ClearyAM:Thebiasingnatureofthetip-of-the-tongue
experience:whendecisionsbaskintheglowofthe tip-of-the-tonguestate.JExpPsycholGen2019,148:1178-1191http://dx. doi.org/10.1037/xge0000520.
