The curiosity drive as an engine of learning

Research on curiosity has experienced a resurgence in recent years, with most studies conceptualizing it as a personality trait that differs across individuals (e.g., Hardy et al., Reference Hardy, Ness and Mecca2017; Harrison et al., Reference Harrison, Sluss and Ashforth2011; Kashdan & Steger, Reference Kashdan and Steger2007; Litman & Spielberger, Reference Litman and Spielberger2003; Mussel, Reference Mussel2013). This approach focuses on natural variations in how people seek out and engage with new information, emphasizing how between-person differences relate to variations in attitudes and behavior.

Although valuable in its own right, the trait-based perspective only captures one (arguably small) dimension of curiosity. An alternative and more encompassing view characterizes curiosity instead as a dynamic drive—a motivational force that compels individuals to seek knowledge and resolve cognitive gaps (Berlyne, Reference Berlyne1960, Reference Berlyne1966; Loewenstein, Reference Loewenstein1994). Drive-based models present curiosity as a critical regulatory mechanism for intellectual growth and lifelong learning, allowing it to be understood not just as a personality trait but as an ongoing, self-perpetuating process critical for knowledge and skill acquisition. Through the lens of this framework, curiosity operates as an active, state-based process triggered by exposure to novel stimuli that expose knowledge gaps (Hardy et al., Reference Hardy, Day, Hughes, Wang and Schuelke2014; Hardy et al., Reference Hardy, Day, North and Rockwood2024; Lowenstein, Reference Loewenstein1994). Knowlege gap exposure drives individuals to resolve the discomfort of not knowing, much like how hunger drives the search for food (Berlyne, Reference Berlyne1974). This process compels action to restore cognitive balance by activating the brain’s reward circuitry, releasing dopamine, and encouraging exploratory behavior (Kang et al., Reference Kang, Hsu, Krajbich, Loewenstein, McClure, Wang and Camerer2009). By resolving knowledge gaps, individuals satisfy their curiosity and enhance their cognitive capacities through learning and problem-solving.

One significant strength of the drive-based model is its ability to account for curiosity’s self-reinforcing nature. Engaging with an information–knowledge gap and satisfying one’s curiosity produces a reward sensation that further fuels the desire to explore and learn (Gruber et al., Reference Gruber, Gelman and Ranganath2014; Hardy et al., Reference Hardy, Day and Arthur2019; Loewenstein, Reference Loewenstein1994). This cyclical process creates a virtuous loop, wherein curiosity continuously motivates individuals to seek new knowledge, resulting in long-term learning benefits, such as enhanced problem-solving capabilities and memory retention (Kang et al., Reference Kang, Hsu, Krajbich, Loewenstein, McClure, Wang and Camerer2009). In this way, curiosity serves as a catalyst not just for immediate, short-term learning but also for sustained intellectual growth, promoting continuous adaptation in a constantly evolving world.

The shift from a trait-based to a drive-based understanding of curiosity also addresses a key limitation of the trait-based model: its inability to account for situational variability (Loewenstein, Reference Loewenstein1994). By definition, state curiosity—that is, curiosity that arises in response to specific stimuli or contexts—is malleable, which creates opportunities for L&D professionals to develop interventions that activate curiosity at critical moments. Research shows this approach leads to deeper engagement and better learning outcomes, such as improved problem-solving and retention (Gruber et al., Reference Gruber, Gelman and Ranganath2014; Kidd & Hayden, Reference Kidd and Hayden2015). Even when organizational structures do not explicitly nurture curiosity, individuals can take charge of their learning by leveraging their own curiosity drive to seek out knowledge and experiences that fill cognitive gaps.

This view of curiosity as a drive is especially relevant in today’s rapidly changing work environments, as highlighted in the focal article by Beier et al., In an era where workers must continuously adapt and acquire new skills, curiosity can help sustain lifelong learning. A deep understanding of state curiosity will enable organizations to create dynamic learning environments that trigger curiosity, leading to more engaging and effective learning experiences. At the same time, individuals who understand curiosity as a personal motivator can leverage this drive to pursue knowledge independently, both within and outside organizational structures. In doing so, curiosity becomes a critical enabler of adaptability, innovation, and personal growth, which Beier et al., note is critical to helping individuals thrive in the face of uncertainty.

However, for curiosity to thrive, the environment must support it. Environments rich in novelty, complexity, and psychological safety encourage curiosity, whereas rigid or overly structured environments tend to suppress it (Berlyne, Reference Berlyne1960, Reference Berlyne1966; Loewenstein, Reference Loewenstein1994). For L&D professionals, this underscores the importance of designing learning environments that stimulate curiosity, enabling individuals to ask questions, explore new ideas, and engage in self-directed learning without fear of failure. When nurtured in such environments, curiosity can be a potent driver of learning, fostering deeper engagement and greater creativity in the workplace. Yet, despite their good intentions, many modern organizational structures are not set up to support curiosity-driven learning—often to their detriment.

Barriers to curiosity in organizational structures

Organizations often claim to value curiosity as a driver of innovation and adaptability (Lievens et al., Reference Lievens, Harrison, Mussel and Litman2022). However, as discussed in the focal article, many of these same companies inadvertently create environments likely to suppress it. Rigid hierarchies, prescriptive roles, and an unrelenting focus on short-term productivity often discourage the kind of exploratory thinking and self-directed learning that curiosity drives (Amabile, Reference Amabile1998; Baer & Oldham, Reference Baer and Oldham2006; Csikszentmihalyi, Reference Csikszentmihalyi1996; Deci & Ryan, Reference Deci and Ryan2000; Spreitzer, Reference Spreitzer1996). This presents a significant challenge for professionals working within systems prioritizing efficiency over learning.

Hierarchical structures that centralize decision-making also discourage employees—particularly those in lower level roles—from asking questions or challenging the status quo (Beier et al.; Kashdan et al., Reference Kashdan, Goodman, Stiksma, Machell, Kleiman and Monfort2013). The pressure to conform to rigid processes stifles both curiosity-driven exploration and innovation, hindering individual learning and growth (Gruber et al., Reference Gruber, Gelman and Ranganath2014). Moreover, overly prescriptive management styles that limit employee autonomy further suppress curiosity by constraining the freedom needed for self-directed learning (Kang et al., Reference Kang, Hsu, Krajbich, Loewenstein, McClure, Wang and Camerer2009). As the focal article suggests, fostering curiosity requires environments that promote psychological safety, where individuals feel free to experiment, fail, and learn without fear of punishment (Edmondson, Reference Edmondson1999). In such settings, curiosity thrives, driving both personal development and organizational innovation. The focal article is quite correct that creating flexible, supportive environments that encourage continuous learning is essential for realizing curiosity’s full potential. In this, L&D scholars are uniquely positioned to advocate for changes that support curiosity. Organizations can unlock curiosity’s full potential by promoting psychological safety, designing roles that encourage exploration, and fostering a culture where curiosity is valued and rewarded. This aligns with the focal article’s call for more inclusive and adaptive learning environments, paving the way for both personal and organizational growth.

Curiosity’s inherent inclusivity and its role in lifelong learning

A drive-based conceptualization of curiosity also highlights one of its most compelling features: inclusivity. Unlike many constructs defined by ability, job roles, or educational backgrounds, curiosity is something experienced and available to everyone (Von Stumm et al., Reference Von Stumm, Hell and Chamorro-Premuzic2011), from a seasoned professional navigating complex decisions to a new employee stepping into their first role. This inclusivity positions curiosity as a powerful catalyst for continuous development, making it accessible to individuals at all stages of their careers. Whether through formal training or self-directed learning, curiosity can inspire individuals to explore new areas of knowledge, pushing beyond their current skill set.

As today’s workplace increasingly places the responsibility for learning on individuals, curiosity provides a natural mechanism for adapting to this shift. Rather than passively waiting for organizational support, workers empowered by curiosity can take charge of their own development, identifying skill gaps and pursuing opportunities to upskill. The focal article underscores the importance of learner initiative in enabling individuals to proactively meet the changing demands of their roles, particularly as industries continue to evolve. In this sense, curiosity fuels the autonomy and intrinsic motivation necessary for self-directed learning.

Moreover, curiosity’s inclusivity offers the potential to democratize access to learning and development across sectors. This is especially relevant for workers in less structured environments, such as the gig economy or informal sectors, who may not have access to traditional training programs. Curiosity enables these individuals to engage in autonomous learning, helping them stay relevant and competitive in their fields despite the lack of formalized support structures. The curiosity drive is necessary to bridge the gap between structured organizational learning and the informal, self-directed learning required to thrive in today’s dynamic work environment. This ability to drive learning outside formal systems makes curiosity essential to fostering lifelong learning in diverse professional contexts.