Pages

Monday, 12 August 2024

Curiouser and Curiouser



From the US -


How can scientists better understand, promote, and support childhood curiosity?

In a recent review published in the journal Nature Reviews Psychology, researchers explore current research on childhood curiosity, its definition, its variability across age, contexts, and culture, its long- and short-term benefits, and the ideal means to support its development.


Okay, I didn't read much further than this before skimming down to a section called Future Directions.


Future directions

Given the highly beneficial role of curiosity in childhood growth and development across both information-gathering and emotional spectrums, future research should focus on elucidating novel metrics for measuring the characteristic, thereby allowing for comparisons between studies and, in turn, the discovery and optimization of methodologies to foster/promote its persistence across childhood.

The present review suggests three primary means by which to achieve this goal. Firstly, metacognition frameworks should be further developed to operationalize internal curiosity in isolation or combined with external curiosity/interest. Secondly, research questions should be refined to more adequately explore curiosity across different physical and social contexts. Finally, curiosity should be assessed in non-US populations and particularly in minority communities to broaden our understanding of the cultural determinants and variability in the characteristics.



We're doomed.

7 comments:

Doonhamer said...

Hey! I understood that last sentence.
I am sure a little AI could fix that.

dearieme said...

Musta been written by AI, don't you think?

Tammly said...

Future Directions?! Applying a blindfold will do the job just as well, at a fraction of the cost.

Anonymous said...

When I was a child, I was curious about how things worked and spent many hours in the Reference section of my local library.My sons were also of an inquisitive nature and I encouraged them to ask, or to dig out the information for themselves .That is all that is required, wind them up and let them go. No need for all this long winded bullshit, but then a simple answer does not impress academics does it.

Peter MacFarlane said...

Ref the post below also... a curious population is the last thing the PTB want. People thinking for themselves? That would never do...

Doonhamer said...

These wordsmiths need to "interface" with some normal little darlings / horrors. How long could they stay cool when every wise, considered, and convoluted statement is met with that standard response, "Why?" . Followed up with, "Yes, but why?" accompanied by a direct probing eye contact. ? Children I have known are not short of curiosity. They can also enjoy innocently winding up the poseur with whom they are interfacing. Dontcha love it?

A K Haart said...

Doonhamer - that sounds like an error on their part, I don't think anyone outside their clan is suppose to understand it at all.

dearieme - could be, although the AI output I've seen so far is better than that. If trained on specialist twaddle though - what else would it come up with but twaddle?

Tammly - and sacking those who produced it would save even more.

Anon - "That is all that is required, wind them up and let them go."
That's it, introduce youngsters to seaside rockpools, show them a little of what's in there and away they go.

Peter - yes, the default role of mainstream media is to limit curiosity. It's how they retain an audience.

Doonhamer - it seems to be a natural phase kids go though, the "why?" phase. Then a little later they suddenly know everything.