Curiosity and Expectations

An interesting article on an area of research I have been thinking about lately. From Science Curiosity and Political Information Processing by Dan M. Kahan, et al.

This paper describes evidence suggesting that science curiosity counteracts politically biased information processing. This finding is in tension with two bodies of research. The first casts doubt on the existence of “curiosity” as a measurable disposition. The other suggests that individual differences in cognition related to science comprehension - of which science curiosity, if it exists, would presumably be one - do not mitigate politically biased information processing but instead aggravate it. The paper describes the scale-development strategy employed to overcome the problems associated with measuring science curiosity. It also reports data, observational and experimental, showing that science curiosity promotes open-minded engagement with information that is contrary to individuals’ political predispositions. We conclude by identifying a series of concrete research questions posed by these results.

There are all sorts of deterministic theories about how and why individuals/companies/groups/cities/cultures/nations turn out the way they do. Popular deterministic theories include IQ determinism (individual and group), Biological determinism, Technological determinism, Resource determinism, Institutions determinism, Geographical determinism, Culture determinism, Path Dependency determinism, Random Chance, Great Man determinism, Religious determinism, Government structure determinism, Economic system determinism, etc.

I am pretty certain no single-variable deterministic theory is accurate. I believe that all of these variables play a greater or lesser role depending on the circumstances. I have a sneaking suspicion that sequencing is likely much more important than is ever discussed. For example, while China has in ancient times displayed great technological innovation, they often failed to incorporate the technological innovation into the broader economy. They innovated before they had the political and economic systems mature enough to benefit from and propagate the innovations.

Lately I have been mulling two additional factors. What role does familial expectations play in creating prospective paths for children, and what role does curiosity play in driving societal/economic/cultural change? As an example: While the economy has been flat for the past decade, the absolute income is still much higher than it was twenty and thirty years ago. Why do millennials appear to be having such a hard time kick-starting their lives, marrying, starting families, buying homes, etc. Yes, flat economy doesn't help but as I say, things are cheaper and absolute income levels are higher than a generation or two ago.

I wonder whether part of it might be absence or discontinuities in familial expectations. It is notable that the biggest struggles are among those originating out of the bottom one and two income quintiles who also have very high levels of family fracturing, growing up with a single parent or multiple parental combinations over time. In those circumstances, I wonder if part of the young adult challenge is that they did not receive consistent and sustained familial expectations in a way that children from the upper quintiles do?

I suspect familial expectations and native curiosity are important factors in development and life outcomes but the research is skimpy and as topics they don't garner much attention.