Appraisal components and emotion traits: Examining the appraisal basis of trait curiosity

By Paul J Silvia. 2008

151 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Individual differences related to emotions are typically represented as emotion traits. Although important, these descriptive models often do not address the psychological dynamics that underlie the trait. Appraisal theories of emotion assume that individual differences in emotions can be traced to differences in patterns of appraisal, but this hypothesis has largely gone untested. The present research explored whether individual differences in the emotion of interest, known as trait curiosity, consist of patterns of appraisal. After completing several measures of trait curiosity, participants read complex poems (Experiment 1) or viewed simple and complex pictures (Experiment 2) and then gave ratings of interest and interest's appraisal components. The effect of trait curiosity on interest was fully mediated by appraisals. Multilevel analyses suggested that curious people differ in the amount of appraisal rather than in the kinds of appraisals relevant to interest. Appraisal theories can offer a process-oriented explanation of emotion traits that bridges state and trait emotional experience.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5a6f774a7fa1f183842f983a5badd56669893f87

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Disentangling Curiosity: Dimensionality, Definitions, and Distinctions from Interest in Educational Contexts (2014, methodology): “Although the call to differentiate interest and curiosity and to examine their relations has received continued attention (Arnone et al. 2011; Bowler 2010; Reio et al. 2006; Silvia 2008), no review has explicitly addressed this commonly noted entanglement.”
An appraisal account of individual differences in emotional experience (2010, background): “…(Kuppens & Van Mechelen, 2007; Kuppens et al., 2008), trait curiosity is associated with perceived ability to understand complex materials (Silvia, 2008), and individuals high in neuroticism are more likely to appraise events as unpleasant and harder to cope with (Gunthert, Cohen &…”
Are the sources of interest the same for everyone? Using multilevel mixture models to explore individual differences in appraisal structures (2009, methodology): “Many recent studies have shown that novelty complexity and coping potential predict the experience of interest, both in experimental designs, between-person correlational designs, and within- person correlational designs (see Silvia, 2005a, 2005b, 2006a, 2008a).”
A Case for Domain-Specific Curiosity in Mathematics (2019, background): “If awareness of an information gap is not matched by a confidence in one’s own ability to resolve that gap, curiosity is unlikely to result (Silvia 2008).”
Interesting things and curious people: Exploration and engagement as transient states and enduring strengths. (2009, background): “To date, this line of work has found strong evidence for the roles of novelty–complexity and comprehension in the experience of interest: each appraisal significantly and independently predicts interest (Silvia, 2008a, 2009; Turner & Silvia, 2006).”
Curiosity and Interest: The Benefits of Thriving on Novelty and Challenge (2009, background): “A tacit assumption is that states and traits are psychologically equivalent (see Fleeson, 2001): Trait curiosity manifests in the frequency or intensity of state experience (Silvia, 2008).”
Interest—The Curious Emotion (2008, background): “Because people will interpret a situation differently, they will have different emotions in response to the situation (see Silvia, 2008).”
The five-dimensional curiosity scale: Capturing the bandwidth of curiosity and identifying four unique subgroups of curious people (2018, unknown): “…captured these two dimensions of curiosity (e.g., Litman, 2005), additional manifestations warrant inclusion: the perceived potential to cope with the new (Silvia, 2008a, 2008b), Social Curiosity (Litman & Pezzo, 2007; Renner, 2006), and Thrill Seeking (Arnett, 1994; Farley, 1991; Zuckerman, 1994).”
Artistic Training and Interest in Visual Art: Applying the Appraisal Model of Aesthetic Emotions (2006, methodology): “In each experiment, participants completed measures of individual differences in a class of curiosity traits (sensation seeking, openness to experience, trait curiosity; see Silvia, 2005a).”
The Curiosity and Exploration Inventory-II: Development, Factor Structure, and Psychometrics (2009, methodology): “Without an ability to handle appraised novelty–complexity , curiosity and exploration is squelched with avoidance often serving as the replacement (Kashdan, 2007; Silvia, 2006).”
Homo Curious: Curious or Interested? (2019, background): “That is, comprehensibility is an essential requirement for situational interest (Kintsch 1980; Silvia 2008) whereas incompleteness and ambiguity are important sources of curiosity as they produce gaps in an individual’s knowledge.”