Over the last decade, research on curiosity – the desire to seek new information – has been rapidly growing. Several studies have shown that curiosity elicits activity within the dopaminergic circuit and thereby enhances hippocampus-dependent learning. However, given this new field of research, we do not have a good understanding yet of (i) how curiosity-based learning changes across the lifespan, (ii) why some people show better learning improvements due to curiosity than others, and (iii) whether lab-based research on curiosity translates to how curiosity affects information seeking in real life. In this talk, I will present a series of behavioural and neuroimaging studies that address these three questions about curiosity. First, I will present findings on how curiosity and interest affect learning differently in childhood and adolescence. Second, I will show data on how inter-individual differences in the magnitude of curiosity-based learning depend on the strength of resting-state functional connectivity within the cortico-mesolimbic dopaminergic circuit. Third, I will present findings on how the level of resting-state functional connectivity within this circuit is also associated with the frequency of real-life information seeking (i.e., about Covid-19-related news). Together, our findings help to refine our recently proposed framework – the Prediction, Appraisal, Curiosity, and Exploration (PACE) framework – that attempts to integrate theoretical ideas on the neurocognitive mechanisms of how curiosity is elicited, and how curiosity enhances learning and information seeking. Furthermore, our findings highlight the importance of curiosity research to better understand how curiosity can be harnessed to improve learning and information seeking in real life.

Recent years have seen a considerable surge of research on interest-based engagement, examining how and why people are engaged in activities without relying on extrinsic rewards. However, the field of inquiry has been somewhat segregated into three different research traditions which have been developed relatively independently --- research on curiosity, interest, and trait curiosity/interest. The current talk sets out an integrative perspective; the reward-learning framework of knowledge acquisition. This conceptual framework takes on the basic premise of existing reward-learning models of information seeking: that knowledge acquisition serves as an inherent reward, which reinforces people’s information-seeking behavior through a reward-learning process. However, the framework reveals how the knowledge-acquisition process is sustained and boosted over a long period of time in real-life settings, allowing us to integrate the different research traditions within reward-learning models. The framework also characterizes the knowledge-acquisition process with four distinct features that are not present in the reward-learning process with extrinsic rewards --- (1) cumulativeness, (2) selectivity, (3) vulnerability, and (4) under-appreciation. The talk describes some evidence from our lab supporting these claims.

Recent years have seen a considerable surge of research on interest-based engagement, examining how and why people are engaged in activities without relying on extrinsic rewards. However, the field of inquiry has been somewhat segregated into three different research traditions which have been developed relatively independently -- research on curiosity, interest, and trait curiosity/interest. The current talk sets out an integrative perspective; the reward-learning framework of knowledge acquisition. This conceptual framework takes on the basic premise of existing reward-learning models of information seeking: that knowledge acquisition serves as an inherent reward, which reinforces people’s information-seeking behavior through a reward-learning process. However, the framework reveals how the knowledge-acquisition process is sustained and boosted over a long period of time in real-life settings, allowing us to integrate the different research traditions within reward-learning models. The framework also characterizes the knowledge-acquisition process with four distinct features that are not present in the reward-learning process with extrinsic rewards -- (1) cumulativeness, (2) selectivity, (3) vulnerability, and (4) under-appreciation. The talk describes some evidence from our lab supporting these claims.

Animals are motivated to acquire knowledge. A particularly striking example is information seeking behavior: animals often seek out sensory cues that will inform them about the properties of uncertain future rewards, even when there is no way for them to use this information to influence the reward outcome, and even when this information comes at a considerable cost. Evidence from monkey electrophysiology and human fMRI studies suggests that orbitofrontal cortex and midbrain dopamine neurons represent the subjective value of knowledge during information seeking behavior. However, it remains unclear how the brain assigns value to information and how it integrates this with other incentives to drive behavior. We have therefore developed a task to test if information preferences are present in mice and study how informational value is imparted on stimuli. Mice are trained to enter a center port and receive an initial odor that instructs them to either go to an informative side port, go to an uninformative side port, or choose freely between them. The chosen side port then yields a second odor cue followed by a delayed probabilistic water reward. The informative port’s odor cue indicates whether the upcoming reward will be big or small. The uninformative port’s odor cue is uncorrelated with the trial outcome. Crucially, the two ports only differ in their odor cues, not in their water value since both offer identical probabilities of big and small rewards. We find that mice prefer the informative port. This preference is evident as a higher percentage choice of the informative port when given a free choice (67% +/- 1.7%, n = 14, p < 0.03), as well as by faster reaction times when instructed to go to the informative port (544ms +/- 21ms vs 795ms +/- 21ms, n = 14, p < 0.001). The preference for information is robust to within-animal reversals of informative and uninformative port locations, and, moreover, mice are willing to pay for information by choosing the informative port even if its reward amount is reduced to be substantially lower than the uninformative port. These behavioral observations suggest that odor stimuli are imparted with informational value as mice learn the information seeking task. We are currently imaging neural activity in orbitofrontal cortex with microendoscopes to identify changes in neural activity that may reflect value associated with the acquisition of knowledge.