Humans are avid explainers: We ask “why?” and derive satisfaction from a good answer. But humans are also selective explainers: Only some observations prompt us to ask “why?” and only some answers are satisfying. This article reviews recent work on selectivity in explanation-seeking curiosity and explanatory satisfaction, with a focus on how this selectivity makes us effective learners in a complex world. Research finds that curiosity about the answer to a “why” question is stronger when it is expected to yield useful learning and that explanations are judged more satisfying when they are perceived to support useful learning. Although such perceptions are imperfect, there is nonetheless evidence that seeking and evaluating explanations—in the selective way humans do—can play an important role in learning.
BerlyneD. E. (1978). Curiosity and learning. Motivation and Emotion, 2(2), 97–175.
2.
BjorkR. A.DunloskyJ.KornellN. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.
3.
BrockbankE.WalkerC. M. (2022). Explanation impacts hypothesis generation, but not evaluation, during learning. Cognition, 225, Article 105100.
4.
ChiuJ. L.ChiM. T. H. (2014). Supporting self-explanation in the classroom. In BenassiV. A.OversonC. E.HakalaC. M. (Eds.), Applying science of learning in education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum (pp. 91–103). Society for the Teaching of Psychology.
5.
CorriveauK. H.KurkulK. E. (2014). “Why does rain fall?” Children prefer to learn from an informant who uses noncircular explanations. Child Development, 85(5), 1827–1835.
6.
CraikK. J. W. (1952). The nature of explanation (Vol. 445). CUP Archive.
7.
DanovitchJ. H.MillsC. M. (2018). Understanding when and how explanation promotes exploration. In SaylorM.GaneaP. (Eds.), Active learning from infancy to childhood (pp. 95–112). Springer.
8.
DanovitchJ. H.MillsC. M.SandsK. R.WilliamsA. J. (2021). Mind the gap: How incomplete explanations influence children’s interest and learning behaviors. Cognitive Psychology, 130, Article 101421.
9.
DubeyR.GriffithsT. L. (2020). Reconciling novelty and complexity through a rational analysis of curiosity. Psychological Review, 127(3), 455–476.
10.
DubeyR.GriffithsT. L.LombrozoT. (2022). If it’s important, then I’m curious: Increasing perceived usefulness stimulates curiosity. Cognition, 226, Article 105193.
11.
DubeyR.MehtaH.LombrozoT. (2021). Curiosity is contagious: A social influence intervention to induce curiosity. Cognitive Science, 45(2), Article e12937.
12.
GopnikA. (1998). Explanation as orgasm. Minds and Machines, 8(1), 101–118.
13.
HeiderF. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley.
14.
LiquinE. G.CallawayF.LombrozoT. (2020). Quantifying curiosity: A formal approach to dissociating causes of curiosity. In DenisonS.MackM.XuY.ArmstrongB. C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 309–315). Cognitive Science Society.
15.
LiquinE. G.LombrozoT. (2020a). A functional approach to explanation-seeking curiosity. Cognitive Psychology, 119, Article 101276.
16.
LiquinE. G.LombrozoT. (2020b). Explanation-seeking curiosity in childhood. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 35, 14–20.
17.
LiquinE. G.LombrozoT. (2022). Motivated to learn: An account of explanatory satisfaction. Cognitive Psychology, 132, Article 101453.
LombrozoT. (2006). The structure and function of explanations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(10), 464–470.
20.
LombrozoT. (2012). Explanation and abductive inference. In HolyoakK. J.MorrisonR. G. (Ed.), Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 260–276). Oxford University Press.
21.
LombrozoT. (2016). Explanatory preferences shape learning and inference. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(10), 748–759.
22.
LombrozoT.CareyS. (2006). Functional explanation and the function of explanation. Cognition, 99(2), 167–204.
23.
MillsC. M.DanovitchJ. H.RowlesS. P.CampbellI. L. (2017). Children’s success at detecting circular explanations and their interest in future learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(5), 1465–1477.
24.
Rittle-JohnsonB.LoehrA. M. (2017). Eliciting explanations: Constraints on when self-explanation aids learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(5), 1501–1510.
25.
RotheA.LakeB. M.GureckisT. M. (2019). Asking goal-oriented questions and learning from answers. In GoelA. K.SeifertC. M.FreksaC. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 981–986). Cognitive Science Society.
26.
RozenblitL.KeilF. (2002). The misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth. Cognitive Science, 26(5), 521–562.
27.
RuggeriA.XuF.LombrozoT. (2019). Effects of explanation on children’s question asking. Cognition, 191, Article 103966.
28.
ScharrerL.BrommeR.BrittM. A.StadtlerM. (2012). The seduction of easiness: How science depictions influence laypeople’s reliance on their own evaluation of scientific information. Learning and Instruction, 22(3), 231–243.
29.
VasilyevaN.WilkenfeldD.LombrozoT. (2017). Contextual utility affects the perceived quality of explanations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(5), 1436–1450.
30.
WalkerC. M.BonawitzE.LombrozoT. (2017). Effects of explaining on children’s preference for simpler hypotheses. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(5), 1538–1547.
WilkenfeldD. A.LombrozoT. (2015). Inference to the best explanation (IBE) versus explaining for the best inference (EBI). Science & Education, 24(9), 1059–1077.
33.
WilliamsJ. J.LombrozoT.RehderB. (2013). The hazards of explanation: Overgeneralization in the face of exceptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(4), 1006–1014.
