Curiosity Is Better Than Being Smart?
I am a curiosity/intelligence researcher, AMA. (Seriously, I am.)This article reads like un-researched folk psychology rather than science, which is fine I guess, but I would take it all with skepticism.I'll note that based on my and others' research, it seems to be better to have state curiosity (curiosity about the task at hand) rather than trait curiosity (as in, claiming to be a person with a high curiosity personality trait). Trait curiosity gets you almost nothing: no better learning outcomes, no better performance, and no better recall (in complex problem solving anyway; results are sometimes different in trivial pursuits, but who cares about that [edit: I shouldn't say it that way. I was being glib. From a scientific knowledge standpoint, of course we are curious about how curiosity works in trivial matters!]).I don't believe there is a way to boost your state (task) curiosity. I'd also be skeptical that you can boost your trait curiosity.Anyway, one of the main problems with curiosity research is the difficulty in even defining curiosity to a high degree of consensus. I would suggest that as you read this thread, you will see various meanings.Is curiosity a desire to gain knowledge? Is it a desire to see if you are right or wrong? Is it a drive to test existing hypotheses? Is it a motivation sparked by novelty or uncertainty?I would genuinely be interested in knowing what you, dear reader, think curiosity really is. :)