Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Curiosity can influence metacognitive processes
View through CrossRef
Abstract
Prior research suggests a link between curiosity and metacognition, but how curiosity is involved in two key metacognitive processes – metacognitive monitoring (i.e., assessing one’s cognitive states and performance) and metacognitive control (i.e., adjusting decisions and behaviors) – remains unclear. In three experiments (N = 264) participants first saw a general knowledge question and answer options on each trial. In Experiment 1, participants selected an answer and rated their curiosity and confidence. In Experiment 2, participants rated their curiosity and, instead of rating confidence, could either select an answer or opt out; at the end, they answered the previously skipped questions. Participants showed lower confidence (Experiment 1) and were more likely to opt out (Experiment 2) on trials where they provided incorrect rather than correct answers. In both experiments they reported greater curiosity on incorrect-answer trials. These findings suggest that curiosity signals metacognitive monitoring and drives control. Experiment 3A and 3B further examined the impact of curiosity on metacognitive control and showed that exposure to others’ curiosity influenced participants’ metacognitive control. Together, these results provide initial direct evidence that curiosity actively guides metacognitive processes. They also highlight that curiosity helps align individuals’ metacognitive experiences with those of others thereby further impacting their own metacognitive processes.
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Title: Curiosity can influence metacognitive processes
Description:
Abstract
Prior research suggests a link between curiosity and metacognition, but how curiosity is involved in two key metacognitive processes – metacognitive monitoring (i.
e.
, assessing one’s cognitive states and performance) and metacognitive control (i.
e.
, adjusting decisions and behaviors) – remains unclear.
In three experiments (N = 264) participants first saw a general knowledge question and answer options on each trial.
In Experiment 1, participants selected an answer and rated their curiosity and confidence.
In Experiment 2, participants rated their curiosity and, instead of rating confidence, could either select an answer or opt out; at the end, they answered the previously skipped questions.
Participants showed lower confidence (Experiment 1) and were more likely to opt out (Experiment 2) on trials where they provided incorrect rather than correct answers.
In both experiments they reported greater curiosity on incorrect-answer trials.
These findings suggest that curiosity signals metacognitive monitoring and drives control.
Experiment 3A and 3B further examined the impact of curiosity on metacognitive control and showed that exposure to others’ curiosity influenced participants’ metacognitive control.
Together, these results provide initial direct evidence that curiosity actively guides metacognitive processes.
They also highlight that curiosity helps align individuals’ metacognitive experiences with those of others thereby further impacting their own metacognitive processes.
Related Results
Curiosity as a metacognitive feeling
Curiosity as a metacognitive feeling
Curious information-seeking is known to be a key driver of learning, but characterizing this important psychological phenomenon remains a challenge. In this article, we argue that ...
Contributions of age and clinical depression to metacognitive performance
Contributions of age and clinical depression to metacognitive performance
AbstractBackgroundPivotal for adaptive behaviour is the ability to judge whether our performance is correct or not, even in the absence of external feedback. This metacognitive abi...
Metacognitive awareness levels of pre-service teachers
Metacognitive awareness levels of pre-service teachers
The effectiveness of teachers' use of their metacognitive skills is closely related to the success of the learning process. Nowadays, it is imperative for students to use self-regu...
Metacognitive training facilitates optimal cognitive offloading
Metacognitive training facilitates optimal cognitive offloading
Cognitive offloading refers to the use of physical action and the externalenvironment to reduce cognitive demand. Offloading strategies such as creatingexternal reminders instead o...
Metacognition in speech and language therapy for children with social (pragmatic) communication disorders: implications for a theory of therapy
Metacognition in speech and language therapy for children with social (pragmatic) communication disorders: implications for a theory of therapy
AbstractBackgroundMetacognition is a significant component of complex interventions for children who have developmental language disorders. Research into how metacognition operates...
EFL University Students’ Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategy and Its Correlation with Their Reading Comprehension
EFL University Students’ Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategy and Its Correlation with Their Reading Comprehension
Metacognitive awareness of reading strategy has a tremendous impact on the educational process, especially in acquiring a second language. It is concerned with not only what they s...
The many facets of metacognition: comparing multiple measures of metacognition in healthy individuals
The many facets of metacognition: comparing multiple measures of metacognition in healthy individuals
AbstractMetacognition is important for successful goal-directed behavior. It consists of two main elements: metacognitive knowledge and online awareness. Online awareness consists ...
Learning Reinforces Curiosity
Learning Reinforces Curiosity
Human curiosity is often seen as a dynamic process, constantly shifting its focus. However, the principles governing these fluctuations remain debated. Here, we test two competing ...


