Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis.  Permission is given for 
a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and 
private study only.  The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without 
the permission of the Author. 
 



C U R I 0 S I T Y AN D S i L F - C 0 N C E P ~ 

0 F S C II 0 0 L ADJUSTr•iENT 

A thesis prc..;cntc<l in partial fulfilment 

of the rcquirrmcnto for the de ·ree 

of Master of Arts in Education 

Michael Dennis Doyle 

1974 

at 

Massey Uni verai ty 



A D S T H A C T 

This study, ao a piece of descriptive resea rch , is an 

extension of a similar one done by J.law and Maw ( 1970) conccrninG 

the rclationnhip between curiosity and the Golf- concept . ilhereas 

they hypothesised that children hii;h in curiooi ty are also those 

who have successfully interacted with their environments , the 

general hypothesis for this study was that children who have 

positive self- concepts of th0.mselven in the school environment 

will also be ones who exhibit curiosity in that situation. This 

hypothesis was formula ted an a consequence of the writer ' s adherence 

to a theory of active intcllicence , and view of self-concept as a 

hiGhly task-specific construct . 

Measures of curiosity, .r;lob<il self-concept , and self- con :cpt 

of school adjustment were taken. In 6eneral terms curiosity w;,3 

defined as a preferred co,;-nitive strategy which is utilized to cope 

with challenginJ :;timuli and manifested in the way in which the 

individual is predisposed to achieve and resolve conceptual confli cts. 

Global self- concept wa:.; defined as an individual ' s perception of hi.1 

innate capacity to cope effectively with his environment. 3imilarly 

self- concept of school adjustment was defined as a student ' s 

perception of his innate capacity to cope effectively in the spec1 f 1c 

environment of the classroom. 

Each of these three variables was operationally defined in 

tenns of the instruments used to measure them. Where possible , th~ 

same instruments as used by f.Iaw and Maw in their study were used in 

this research. No new instruments were constructed for this study. 

Measures of curiosity were taken from Maw and Maw ( 1) Teacher ' s 

Rat ing Scale of Ourio~ity, (2) Self- appraisal of curiosity, 

(3) The Which to Discuss Test. Measures of global self-concept wr-1·0 

obtained from the following instruments: ( 1) Parts of the Califor:11 , 

Test of Personality (C. T.P. ) , (2) Par ts of the Children ' s Perso7 •· ..• 

Questionnaire (C. P. Q. ) . A measure of self- concept of school ad.Jl ... . : r •• 

was obtained from subjects r ecorded r esponses to factor 2 E : School 



Relationo , of the California '11cn t of Peroonali ty ( C. T. P. ) and 

from the tester ' s recorded observation on the Bristol Social 

Adjustment Scale : factor U (Unforthcomingess) . 

P. A. T. r e:ml ts for read in·; comprehension and maths were 

taken from school records. 

The subjects were 20 children from the senior room of a local 

two-teacher Gchool . There were ten boys and ten airb . It is felt 

that they arc representative of J:cw Zealand rural children. 

Administration and scorinr; o f the tests was done by the writer, who 

at the time of testine w~s al~o the children ' s teacher. 

The rcriu l t.;; of the :itudy did not support the t;cneral hypothesi s , 

and only p:l.rtly oupported N:l.w and Maw ' s (1970) findinas . However , 

some relationship between the variableo curiosity, self-concP.pt and 

self- concept of Gchool adJu::>trnr>nt wa;; shown to exist. Aloo a 

highly si.::;nificant relation.3hip was recorded between curiosity and 

school achievenent. A lack of si~nificant relationship recorded 

between the t eacher ' s rating of curiosity and the C. T. P. meanure of 

Total Personal Adjustment was taken to sug~est that either the tests 

in fact measure different thincs than curiosity and personal 

adjustment or, that there was error in administr:1tion or :;corinr; of 

at least one of the tests. Both of these factor a , as measured on 

the same tests , correlated siGrlificantly in the Maw and Maw study. 

Unfortunately the lack of correlation mentioned above also affected 

the recorded r elationship between the teacher ' s rating and the school 

adjustment measure from the C. 'r. P. 

One implication of these results is that curiosity as a task­

specific concept i s merely one aspect of cognition. The possibility 

of marker bias was di~cussed , but if this can be discounted then the 

s ignifi cant correlations which existed between curiosity, school 

adjustment and s chool performance can all be taken as evidence t hat 

curiosity is in fact connected with intelligence. Consequently , it 

would seem that better sohool adjustment is more r eadily found in 

higher a chievers. 



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

I wish to thank the followin& persons for their co-operation 

and assistance durine the course of preparation of this thesis. 

Dr Richard Sass (my supervisor) , for constant evaluation 

and advise provided. 

Mark Tulip (P. N. T. C. ) , for assistance with data i;athcring. 

Anne Doyle (my wife) , for patience and encoura5ement 

throughout the enterprise . 

Valerie Swan, for typi~ both the copies of tests used 

and this completed document . 



T A B L E 0 F CONT EN TS 

ACKNQ;-; LEDG EKl:.Wf .3 

LI:.:>T OF TABLES 

LIST OP FIGURES 

CHAP'l'ER 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

APPErIDIX A 

INTHOVUCTION AND NEED FOR THE STUDY 

LITZRA TURt.. RrN IJ::d 

HYPOTHEJES 

PROCBDUILES 

Instruments and their Characteristics 

Descript ion of SubJects 

Desi ;n of Stuuy and Data Collection Plan 

Treatment of Results 

RE3ULT::; 

COUCLUSI ONS 

IMPLICATIONS 

SUGGESTIONS FOR Ji'UHTHER RESEARCH 

Selected Items Used from the Which to Discuss Test 

APPENDIX B 

Teacher Rating Scale for Pupil Curiosity 

APPENDIX C 

About Myself. Self Appraisal of Curiosity 

Paec 

vi 

vi 

1 

5 

19 

22 

28 

39 

47 

51 



TABLE 

2 

3 

FIGURE 

2 

3 

4 

5 
6 

7 

L I S T 0 F T A B L E S 

Characteristic~ of the Class 

ProcresGive Attainment Test scores for 
Matha and Reading 

Standard Deviations and Means 

L I S T 0 F FIGURES 

Variable 1 ' Curiosity Picture Test 

Variable 2, Curiosity Teacher ' s Rating 

Variable 3, Curiosity Self questionnaire 

Variable 4, Factor U Bristol Social 
Adjuf3tmcnt Scale 

Variable 5, Tota l Personal Adjustment C.T. P. 

Variable 6, School Adjustment C. T. P. 

Variable 7, Childrens Personality Questionnaire 

Par;e 

25 

26 

28 

35 
35 
36 

3G 

37 

37 

38 



CHAPTER 1 

I N T R 0 D U C T I 0 N 

In attemptin._; to de termine whether high- curios1 ty boys differed 

from low- curiosity boys in their celf-concepts ~;aw and fliaw ( 1970) 

selected 15 hic;h curiosit.Y boys anj 14 low curiosity boys on the 

basis of a definition of curiosity. Several inotruments purporting 

to meaoure aspects or the ~el:-concept were then administered . All 

of thene indicated that hi1;h curiosity boys do have more positive 

self- concepts th.:i.n low curiosity boys. 

Their general hypothesis , tha.t children high in curiosity are 

also those who have succes.ifully interacted w1 th the1 r environmcn t:; , 

was supported by the results of their study. 

Purkey (1970) , in an analysis of the gro~.;th of the self concept 

mainfains that in his tre<ttmcnt of motivation, llni te ( 1959) ::mm;c.;ted 

that from infancy omrn.rd the clnld obtains a biologically given scr .;c 

of pleasure from becominG competent in mastering 11is environment ( 'j) . ?9) . 

From this it can be assumed that the development of the child's self­

conc~pt is dependent upon hiu success in copin; with his early 

experiences . Hamacnck (1965) pointed out that oubjecto produce 

different oelf-deocriptionu i n opccific contoxtu (p. ~65). Accordinely 

it is assumed by the writer that the child' s view of himself us a 

learner may be less favourable thnn that of himself as a peroon. 

The present study is intended to show that while a child may 

have a very Bood global self- concept the enhancement of curiodity as 

an intrinsic motive in the classrrom situation is dependent upon his 

perception of himself in that specific situation. 

Curiosity in this ~tudy will later be defined as a CO£.!?l1tivt 

activity, i n an information processing sense , which the child uses in 

coping with challenging stimuli. Accordingly it is acknowledcred th.t. 

curiosity is evoked by an interest in novelty when stimuli cannot be 

accommodated to the child' s existing schemata. 



2 

In the classroom the ea sie s t way for a child to gain positi ve 

aff ect from significant othcr0 is for him to show interest , work t o 

his capacity and , co- operate . Consequently it is sug;ested here thnt 

the classroom io an environmcn ~ which reinforces success. In striving 

to maintain favour and a pproval many children learn to give answer­

orientated r cspon$CS, ye t Shouknmi t h (1970) mainta ins tha t divergent 

thinkers are ones who are prepared to take risks . 

Consequently, althou~h schools very often profess to be 

encouraging creativity and curiosity it seems tha t both are too 

often stifled , (perhaps unwittinc ly) by the way in which teachers 

shape their pupil ' s r esponses . As Miller (1970) states : 

••• (expectancies)may cons train the child by prompting 
his withdrawal from potential informa tional acquisition 
and task involvements tha t are perhaps within his limits. 
(p. 184) 

The degree to which such withdrawal occurs will be dependent upon 

his previous and current succes s in similar situations . Gener a lly 

these will be confined to the classroom. It is not illogical then 

to conclude that the child with an already negative view of himself 

as a student will tend to avoid further damaging his self- concept 

by adopting protective avoidance strategies to cope with the 

situation. 

The present study, as a piece of descriptive research, is thus 

an extension upon that done by Maw and Maw. Although measures of 

global self- concept are taken, as they were by Maw and Maw, the 

emphasis is on a measure of the child 's self-concept of school 

adjustment. A measure more specific to the school environment. 

Hunt (1961) pointed out that 

The developing interest in novelty gives rise to the 
curiosity that motivates a continuing process of growth 
and change in the child 's central processes and in his 
relationship to his environment. (p. 145- 6) 

Further, Hunt argues th:d curiosity is evoked by an interest 

in novelty when stimuli cannot be accommodated to the child's 

existing schemata. If this statement is accepted then the implications 

are that boredom is a consequence of too easily attained accommodation. 



Certainly some of our brighter new entrants face this problem in 

being subjected to an unwarr~nted pre-reading programme . 

3 

The present study is conccrnctl with that which is above 

referred to as "existed schcm1.ta", \1h1ch is here seen ao the child ' s 

processed inform·ition in storac-e . That curiosity can be evoked by 

an interest in novelty is acceptell , antl the present stuJy will 

attempt to investigate how such a process can be encouraged. 

Piaget (1936, p . 274) said new objects or phenomena which 

are almost assimilable arouse an interest and an attempt at accommodation 

which is grea ter tho.n if they were assimilated immediately. Therefore 

it would seem that the presentation of too difficult material in the 

learnins situation will serve to inhibit rather than evoke curiosity. 

Curriculum planners have been influenced by Bruner ' s (1 967, 
p. 114) emphasis in which he secs curiosity as almost a prototype 

of the intrinsic motive. Consequently teachers are being increasingly 

appealed to to teach within a framework which pays reference to 

curiosity. Five year olds enter school in varyin~ stacca of readiness 

and just how receptive they are to learn to read depends in part , 

upon such cognitive factors as attitudes and interests . Similarly, 

many of them arrive at school with positive self-concepts. However , 

Purkey (1970, p. 7) pointed out that the self- concept is made up of 

many beliefs about oneself, each of which has its own negative or 

positive value. Accordingly he distinguishes between global self­

concept , which is the same notion of self-concept as mentioned above, 

and a variety of separate task specific self concepts. Consequently 

it follows that the teacher ' s influence in shaping the learner's 

atti tude towards school is considerable. The presentation of material 

of either too little or too great a degree of difficulty resulting in 

the fostering of a lack of interest . McReynolds (1970) stated : 

••• individuals tend to find most interesting, and hence 
to be most highly motivated to participate in activities 
that match their own reinforcement rate. (p. 37) 

The implications here are that it is quite conceivable that 

many children who possess positive global self- concepts develop 

negative attitudes towards school, and consequently negative self­

concepts in that specific situation as a result of an inappropriate 

present~tion of learning tasks . 



4 

It is the purpose of the present study to investigate the 

r elationship between how the child secs himself in the lea rning 

situation and his mani festeu cunooi ty. It i s expected that there 

wil l be some discrepancy between his i;lobal view of self and his 

view of himself as a learner. AsnuminG this is the case it is al s o 

expected that tho:::e children who will be shown to have positive 

self- concepts but ne~ntive attitudes to school will also score low 

on measures of curiosity. Similarly , it is expected that those who 

have negative global self- concepts will also score poorly on measures 

of curiosity. 



CHAPTER 2 

L I T E R A T U R E R~VIEW 

White (1959) , sta ted that motivation is inherent in the 

cont inual strive to attain some stanuard of competence . 

All behaviours have a common biological significance : 
they all form part of the process whereby a child learns 
to interact effectively with his environment • 

• • • behaviour i s directeJ, selective and persistent , 
and it i s contrived not because it serves primary drives, 
••• but because it satisfies an intrinsic need to deal 
with the environment. (p. 318) 

Like McClelland ' s ( 1953) theory, this implies that the child 

needs to work with progressively more complex s ituations to gain 

pleasure from achievement situations . Similar conclusions can be 

drawn from Piaset ' s (1936) statement that new obj ects or phenomena 

which are almost ass i milable arouse an interest and an attempt at 

accommodation which is greater than if they were assimilable 

immedia t ely, and Hunt ' s (1961) cla im that the child ' s interest in 

the novel is increased by the deGr ee to which he has been forced to 

accommodate to a varie ty of stimuli . Hunt (1970) stated : 

••• individuals tend to find most interesting, and 
hence to be most highly motivated to participate in 
activities that match their own rein£orcement rate. 
(p. 14) 

In other words , a person will become curious about that which 

he is interested in, and is working towards gaining competence in. 

White ' s hypothesis serves as a usef'ul point from which to 

view the intrinsic motive curiosity. However , in the cognitive 

sense it becomes obvious that the process of interaction with the 

environment is also that which s hapes one ' s self- concept . At the 

Nebraska Symposium on Motivation Hunt (1965) suggested that 

manifested differences in cur iosity moat likely have one basis i n 

genotypi o constitutions , and : 



• • • that (they) are aloo likely to be a function of the 
rant;e of matters on which the individual has cultivated 
standards of attitude and opinion and in which he has 
achieved some skill. (p. :>58) 

To achieve such standards of attitude , and consequently 

develop competence it would sc"m that gradual yet moderate 

motivation is more suitable . 3trong motivation reinforcing 

learning only i n a narrow sphere . 

So far this review h:1s been confined to non-research 

literature , the intention bein:; to establish a frame-of- reference 

fo r the theoretical position of this thesis . A synthesis of this 

section of the r~view now follows . 

6 

From White ' s and Hunt'n comments it seems that tho development 

of a level of competence is dependent upon the way in which the 

individual copes with his environment . Further, this same level of 

competence acts as an inner standard against which incoming stimuli 

are continually compared. Mismatch produces conflict ·md precipitates 

an accommodative r esponse . Informition about the self in storage 

then directs behaviour, or more simply, the self- concept a 

cognition. In this sense the child comes to "know" his own capacity, 

acqui r ing a act of opinions , ideas and beliefs about the world in 

which he lives . Consequently he realises hat he can expect of 

others and of achievement situations and, accordingl y often learns 

to employ copiflG or defendinG strategies to protect his self- image . 

Of particular relevance t o this study is an exam1nat1on of 

Maw and Maw ' s (1970) research regarding Self- Concept s of H1gh­

and Low- Curiosity Boys. On t he basi s of an earlier obtained 

defini tion of curiosi t y (Maw and Maw 1964, pp . 25 - 31) 224 boys 

se l ected from several f ift h grades i n public school u i n Delaware 

wer e classified into high and low cur iosity groups. 

Tests intended t o measure aspect s of sel f - conceptualization 

wer e administ er ed t o all groups. These wer e composed of i tems from 

t he Califo rnia Test of Personality (Thorpe , Clarke and Tiegs 1953) , 
parts of t he Chi l dr en ' s Per sonali t y Questionnair e (Por ter and 

Cat tell 1960), and severa l tests developed by Maw and Maw. Finally 

each chi l d r a t ed himself on Maw and Maw' s own Childr en ' s Rat ing Scale 

of curios i ty. 



7 

With the exception of the te:5ts designed by Maw and Ir.aw to 

measure self- conceptunliz ition the present otudy includes the above 

tests in its selected battery. 

Maw and J.:aw conclude 1 th ~1.t the rcuul ts of the tests they 

ad.ministered supported their hypothesis that children hi0h in 

curiosity arc also those who have successfully interacted with their 

envirorunents , and as a r e:::ml t have Good self- concepts. (I·iaw and lfaw 

1970, p. 124) . Hi[;h curiooity boys a:3 a Group showed si(J?lificantly 

better overall per3onal adjustment than low- curiosity boys. 

Maw and l·iaw' s r esults have indicated that it is possible to 

identify groups of boys who may develop problems in tryin(j to meet 

the demands of the school. However , as they provide no definition of 

" self- concept" in their r escn.rch r eport it must be concluded that they 

were not concerned with any task-specific conceptualiz~tion of self 

but rather with what Purkey ( 1970) describes as , "global-self- concept". 

Considering this with reference to drawing implications f or this present 

study attention is drawn to the fact that their results indicn.ted 

clearly, (on 12 of a possible 13 differences, four of which were 

significant at the 0. 01 level and eight at the 0.05 l evel) , that 

there is in fact a positive correlation between how one sees himself 

and his measured curiosity. 

The present study is concerned wi th measuring curiosity and 

how the child sees himself in the specific environment of the 

classroom. 

Mahone (1960) in a study designed to determine whether fear 

of failure in collec;e students is a determinant of unrealistic 

vocational aspiration classified subjects as "realistic" or 

"unrealistic" in vocational aspiration in terms of each of four 

criteria on his Vocational Infomation Questionnaire. (Mahone 1960 , 

p. 254) . Measures of both achievement motive and achievement-rela t ed 

anxiety were then taken . His results indicated that significantly more 

subjects who were low i n achievement motivation and high in achievement 

related anxiety were classified as unrealistic, than subjects who were 

high in achievement motivation and low in achievement-rola.ted anxiety. 

The implication from this for the present study is that it seems that 

a person who has a low estimate of himself is strongly motivated to 

avoid failure . 



8 

In discu~cin~ earlier n:~e~rch with which he was aooociatcd , 

on per..;onality correlates of curiosity, ~iaw (1970) describos how a 

r ecent co- worker l•:il.::;oon, in applyini; further anal ysis to the exieting 

data, added to the findin~G that childr en with high curiosity have 

qualities of pcr3onality not found , or found to a less degree , in the 

l ess curious, that there ii:; a link CJetween curiosity, capacity, and 

creativity. l•;a1.., ( 19'(0) quote:J from a note received from Magoon 

• • • more curious is more intelligent • • • more 
curious also have a hit,;her sense of per sonal worth , 
feel mo r e secure • • • tend to be more socially 
co-operative (p. 96) 

The present study sees cur iosity as a preferred cognitive 

strategy, being di r ectly r elated to intelligence. Langevin (197 1) 

in a~kinG if curiosi ty is multifactored found that there i s a positive 

correlation between curiosity and i ntelli gence . This is hardly 

surpris ing as it would seem th~t the more intelligent child is better 

able to use his prior experience and knowledge to successfully impose 

order on his envi ronment . Conuequently by way of utilization of 

prior experience curiosity acto as something of a mediating response 

mechanism. Fowler ( 1971) arGUes that in this sense curiosity can be 

seen as a learned anticipatory reaction. 

For the mature or11anism with its "established" and yet 
varied existence there exists or develops a set of 
situations in which the organism can learn to anticipate 
a change in stimulation generally. (p. 185) 

Further, he synthesises that we may expect that enriched 

environments providing a wide array of experiences will foster a 

high level of general curiosity and therefore a greater amount of 

" inforrnation seeking". However , this will only occur where the 

child feels at ease wi~h the task, appr~ciating that he is bringing 

sufficient to the learning situation to enable him to cope competently 

with challenging stimuli. The implication to be drawn for this study 

is that his appraisal of self in that instance must be favourable . 

Beswick (1971) defines curiosity as : 

••• an individual ' s readiness or prediuposition to 
seek, maintain and resolve conceptual conflicts (p. 456) 



The present study would argue that this "readiness or 

predisposition" depends upon the child ' s perception of himself 

9 

in specific learninG situations. Due to his continual interaction 

with his environment the learne: is con3tantly driven to evaluate 

his competence in different task-specific situations. 

De int; based in part on a critical evaluation of White ' a ( 1959) 

theory of competence motivation this study has been influenced by a 

view which sees the self as one aspect of cot;nition. The rationale 

for thiR thesis is certainly affected by an interpretation of the 

literature wnich sees the self as providing an inner standard 

(competence) against which incoming stimuli arc compared. Consequently 

it is here argued th~t the self in so actin~ as a cosnition may 

operate so as to maintain dis3onance when an appropriate mismatch is 

evidenced. This it iG advoc:itcd , is the role of curiosity, and this 

inner standard of competence is consciously manifested in certain 

situation3 as task- specific aspects of the self- concept. Consequently 

this present study relates the self to self- concept . Accordingly 

an examination of the self, particularly as it relates to classroom 

learni~ now follows . 

In parallelling the self-concept to an inner standard of 

competence it is here suggested that it is in fact a standard based 

on infonnation about the self in storage . New stimuli will then be 

most curiosity arousing at an intermediate stage of familiarity. If 

they a r e too unlike anythine with which the subject is acquainted the 

symbolic response tendenciesarousedwill be too few and too feeble to 

provide much conflict , while too much familiarity will have removed 

conflict by making the particular combination an unexpected one. 

Coopersmith (1967) maintains that by providing the assurance 

that one ' s judgement iR worthy and one ' s abilities sufficient to the 

task, favourable self-attitudes lay the foundation for stable, anxiety 

free performance 

By generating the expectation that one ' s efforts will 
be followed by success and one ' s judgement borne out by 
subsequent events high self-esteem enhance~ the likelihood 
of exploratory and independent activities. These convictions 
and expectations appear to be closely related, if not 
inherent, in the level of esteem the individual holds 
of himself. (p. 63) 

l 'B":.ARY 
MA£-_Y UNrnRSITY 



10 

Purkey (1970) in a detailed review of literature and 

examination of self-concept as it affects school achievement gives 

the followine definition of self ·) .,_ 

••• a complex dynamic system of beliefs which an 
individual holds true about lumself , each belief with 
a corresponding value . (p. 7) 

The important point arisinG from this definition is that 

self-concept is dynamic in that it is a system of beliefs rather 

than merely one general belief. Certainly global measures of self 

have proved useful to r e::;earchcr a in the past, however as Borislow 

(1964) points out self-evalu~tion may be specific in nature . 

Further he su~gests tha t certain subjects produce different self­

descriptions when asked to view themselves in a general way than 

they do when asked to view themselves within a specific context. 

Brookover, Thomas and Patterson (1964) add support to 

Bor islow ' s view by maintaining tha t as the student role is composed 

of severa l sub-roles , includin& one involving academic achievement 

similarly the student self is a complex of several segments , including 

self- concept of ability. 

Self- concept can not then be described as either global nor 

fixed . Gergen (1971, p. 33) concludes that one ' s identity is 

situationally dependent . 

That the self- concept is acquired as a consequence of 

interaction is logical. Consequently, as this learning t akes place 

in specified situations it follows that these situations will 

continue to serve as stimuli for the cognitive and behavioural 

responses learned. The implications for the fonnation of " positive" 

self are important here when it is realised that the initial stimulus 

situation may have taken on untypical characteristics on that 

particul ar occasion. So the five year old finds that his new teacher 

is unfriendly and threatening although significant others know that 

normally this is untrue. Similarly the new stimulus situation will 

vary in i ts perceived attrat iveness from one child to the other 

purely as a resul t of their previous r einforcement histories . 



11 

However, it follows that as the child becomea exposed to the 

stimuluo situation one of two things mny happen. Where the 

environment fails to alter si(,Tlificantly his expectancies of it will 

be further reinforced , or his self- concept further stabilizes. But 

should he find the situation to vary with each exposure to it then 

it follows that his learned velf- expect ancies will be constantly in 

a state of uncertainty. 'rhus it is obvious that such situationally 

dependent self- concepts are cipable of being modified. 

Consequently, should the child come to gain confidence in the 

clasvroom situation he will aloo develop a positive self- concept in 

that situation. How he cornea to 6ain this confidence may vary. 

Davidson and Lang (1960) chowed that tho student ' s perceptions of 

his teachers ' feelincs towards him correlated positively with his 

self- concept. Similarly Brookover, Erikson and Joiner ' s (1968) 

hypothesis that students perceptions of the evaluations of thei r 

academic ability by others , (teachers , parents , friends) are 

associated with self- concept of academic ability was confirmed. 

Of particular relevance to this study however is Rosenthal and 

Jacobson ' s (1968 ) report that r andomly selected children reaarded by 

teachers as bri&h t improved in self- concept and were rated by their 

teachers as more curious. This could SUCTgest that curiosity is no 

more than an acquired cognitive str ategy exhibited for positive 

approval and that it is positively correlated with self- concept of 

school adjustment . 

The present study i s based on an acceptance of both 

explanations . Presumably finding himself being treated r espectfully 

the child refer red t o i n the Rosenthal and J a cobson study comes to 

f eel s ecure enough to engage in more divergent activities . Thus it 

seems that the teacher holds an often t remendous influence over his 

pupil ' s development of sel f - concept . 

Staines (1958) demonstrated the i mportance of self image as 

a factor i n learnine notill{; that teachers were able to modify self­

concept and produce great er adjustment i n pupils. Similarly, 

Davidson and Lang (1960) found that children ' s percepti ons of teacher s ' 

feelings t owa rds t hem correlated pos i tively and significantly with 



12 

their persona l self-images. Further , in a study designed to measure 

the effects of stress rcsul tin~ from academic failure Gibby and 

Gibby (1967) found tha t under the strcos of failure children tended 

to regard thems elves l es s hi (;hl,y , and believed that they were not 

regarded as highly by sicnifi c~nt others. 

Finally, from an ext ens ive r eview of research Rushton (1966) 
found tha t 70fa of resea rcher s established that stability or 

adjustment is positively correl a t ed to academic achievement. 

Earlier it was sta t ed thJ t the self acts as a cognition and 

that curiosity is the manifes tation of a preferred cognitive 

strategy. Both of the se presumptions are central to the rationale 

for this study. 

Discus sing the r esults of the ir resea rch (that children 

high in curiosity were t hose who had successfully interacted with 

their environment s) Maw and l·iaw ( 1970) susc;ested that this means, 

either that a child with a negative self-concept has a relucta nce 

to exhibit exploratory behaviour, being afraid to risk further 

damaging the self by attempting tasks beyond his range of competence , 

or, that l a cking curiosity he fails to reach out successfully into 

his environment. 

In t aking the l•:avr and Maw study a step further, this research 

is influenced by the first proposed explana tion which ties curiosity 

to competence. The act of informa tion seeking, it should be 

remembered, is necessary for the further development of the child's 

intellectual and emotional self. Being self-directed this is 

positively rewarding. Curiosity then i s enhanced by a positive view 

of inner competence. 

Bexton, Heron and Scott (1954) found that after three days in 

an unchanging envirorunent subjects exhibited E. E. G. records 

indicating an abnormally low level of arousal. From an analysis of 

their data, plus independent study, Hebb (1955) theorized that the 

direction of behaviour must b~ a function of the level of arousal, 

and that there must therefore be an optimum level of arousal which 

i s a l so the di vider of approach from withdrawal and plea sure 



13 

from displea3ure. The prcncnt study accepts this notion of arousal 

as further explanation that curiosity is nothing more than an aspect 

of active intelli0cncc. Lackinc a positive view of one's capacity 

in specific situ~tions results in a lowering of the optimum level of 

arousal . Or , in the frnme-of-rcference of this present study the 

fear of failure , and further dama5e to the self results in a reluctance 

to exhibit exploratory behaviour. 

Hunt too has been influenced by Hebb ' s (1955) theory. In 

explaining his notion of the "match" he stresses the need for a 

continual attempt to prevent too strong or too weak an amount of 

new stimulation. Hunt (1961) states : 

When envirorunental stimulation (input) and existing 
internal central process match perfectly the r esult is 
stultifying boredom in which development fails . (p. 268) 

The present study would argue that the child needs encouragement 

to develop strateeies to maintain adequate dissonance, and that 

curiosity can serve this purpose provided a positive self- attitude 

towards the task exists . 

Considerin& that curiosity and self-concept are task and 

situation specific (Brookover 1967, Purkey 1970, Gergen 1971) it 

follows that in experiencing frustration some children will come 

to view school as a threatening envirorunent even though they may be 

well adjusted and in possession of a positive global self- concept . 

So in order to maintain the global view of self avoidance str ategies 

are developed to eliminate the cause of the frustration. Often this 

may be a consequence of insufficient stimulation, but it can occur 

equally from excessive cognitive dissonance. 

Consequently, in developing a task- specific self- concept 

related to his view of himself as a learner in the classroom it 

follows that a child who appears to be lacking in curiosity will 

differ from more curious children also in many other affective, 

co~itive, personal and social aspects of his life . Thus children 

who show different levels of curiosity ar e also different in their 

personality structures . 



Intellit;cnce has been shown to correlate with curiosity. 

(J.law and Maw 1970, Lansevin 1970) . J.law (1970) stated : 

The evidence indic<ltes that there is a link between 
curiosity capacity and crc J.tivi ty, all three of which 
reflect the feelincs of security and self- worth of the 
individual. (p. 90) 

Similarly, Thomas (1973, p. 13) reports research by Andrews that 

showed that children of lower than aver~e ability have more 

difficulty than others in caining feelings of achievement and 

developing favourable self-concepts. 

So as adaptation levels and expectations are derived from 

previous experience they must also come to provide the standard 

for the incon0ruity or concrruity of new inputs. In this way the 

child comes to know his capacity in specific situations. 

14 

Consequently his manifentation of curiosity in these situations will 

vary accortlins ly, and the act of infonnation seekina necessary for the 

further development of his intellectual and emotional self is self­

di r ected and positively rewarding. Tne pre~ent study argues Lnat 

the more competent ~he child 1cels in a situation, the more curious 

he is likely to appear. 

Thi s would imply that all motivation is intrinsic. Accordingly 

it is not suprising that Brookover ( 1967) found that self-concept of 

ability is a better predictor of success than is overall self­

concept. 

So far it has been argued that curiosity and self- concept are 

task specific and it is realised that curiosity cannot be taught , the 

student role being composed of several sub- roles , including one 

i nvolving academic achievement. Thus a measure of the child' s 

attitude with which he views the school may be useful in determining 

how capable he feels . 

Hunt (1965) is referrina to this when he states that differences 

in curiosity 

• • • are likely to be a function of the range of matters 
on which the individual has cultivated standards of attitude 
and opinion, and in which he has achieved some skill. (p. 258) 



15 

It Gcem:; then that th1' student ' G attitudes limit the lovel 

of his achievement in school. Often of course , because what the 

school io uoinc seemo irrelev nt to him::>elf and his world. Purkey 

(1970, p. 37) r cpo:-ta r e3carch by ShaH and McCuen which indictted 

that in male underachiever::; Lhc predispooi tion to underachieve was 

present when they entered school . 

Prevention of this m~y be possible . Certainly there i s a need 

for each child to know his capacity. Festinger (1957) basis his theory 

of cognitive dis:5onance on th(' need for inJ. ividuals to hold correct 

opinions about their ab1liti~n , knowinG precisely what they enable 

them to do . Thus the chilJ. who has dealt l es3 competently with his 

environment is more concerned with protecting a damaged self than 

with "reachin,_; out" . Consequently, he employs cognitive strategies , 

such as " co[;ni tive diaoonance" to reduce challenging stimuli to a 

manageable level. 

At this staee a summary of the main points of the chapter is 

offered together with gener al definitions , arrived at from the 

literature , of t he vari~bles measured in the study. 

Although thio specific r e::>earch deals solely with examinins 

the r elationship between curiosity and self- concept of school 

adjustment its impetus comes from the writer ' s interest in intrinsic 

motivation. Consequently, the basic rationale for this study comes 

from the theories of Hunt , Hebb , Piaget and White. Accordingly 

competence , as r eferred to in this study, is taken from i'/hite's 

(1959) theory of competence motivation, but is seen as a concept 

very similar to that which Piaget (1936) describes a s "active 

intelligence" . Alt hough competence is not an independent variable 

in this study it is a variable referred to in specific context. For 

this reason it is here defined in general terms, no operationa l 

definition being included. 

Hunt (1965 p. 212) stated that the self- concept may be seen 

to correspond to a 'standard ' bas~d upon informati on about the self 
~ 

in storage . White ( 1959, p. 318) argues that competence is a 

motivational concept in that its enhancement satisfies an intrinsic 

need to deal with the environment. From these author' s comments and 

a general review of literatur e competence in this study is defined in 



general t erms as : - an inn1.•r r; lanrlard of knowledge of capacity, 

acquired as the product of cun111l;1t ive learnine and against which 

all incoming stimuli ar c comp:1rcd . 

16 

In that the :rnlf provid,.n an inner standard of competence 

n.i;ainnt which incomin:; stimuli arc compared it is he r e ar~ed that 

it so acts as a cognition. Conr;equcntly, tho act of information 

seeking necessary for the development of the self must be positively 

r ewarding and self-directed. !•'or this to occur an optimal level of 

cognitive conflict (opportunity for information - processing) needs 

be maintained. Perhapo the earn est way of achievine this is by the 

deployment of Gelf-directed co;,nitive strategies which oper ate to 

maximize the process of inter~c tion with the envirorunent. 

Curiosity in this study i s seen as one of these cognitive 

strateGies , all of which arc acquir ed from previous learning. 

Gagne' ( 1971) stated : 

• • • reinforcement mo,lula tes the infonnu. ti on flow in 
various components of the memory process , essentially 
by directill(; t he learner ' s attention to one aspect of 
the situa tion. (p. 346) 

In adherinG to Gagnea reasoning this study would ar~e that 

as these cognitive str ategies are s elf-directed so too they can be 

encouraged. 

When a learner has difficulty codint; new information into his 

category system conceptual conflict occurs . (Berlyne 1960, Beswick 

1971 , Hebb 1955) . The assumpt i on here i s that each ind ividual has a 

conceptua l " system" for encodinc and organizing the stimuli he 

experiences. The curious per son, it is argued, can capitalize upon 

this situation by allowing himself the pleasure of achieving and 

r esolving a certain amount of this conflict by placing his category 

system in slight confusion by allowing it to experience an arr ay of 

stimulation sliehtly above its coding potential. 

Beswick (1971) defines the trait of curiosity as 

An individual ' s readineaa or predisposition to seek, 
maintain and resolve conceptual conf'licts. (p. 456) 



17 

Hebb (1 955 ) parallel s conflict to a drive, arguine that it io 

eliminated as the unfamiliar brcomes familiar, and th~t thiG is 

positively r cinforcin:;. S(\ hr <ir u'Ues we arc provided with an 

explanation for the reward-va lue of investizati~ thill{;s that nre 

puzzlin,; and the learnin::; of kno~lcdge r ccml tine from this 

investigation. Berlyne (195~ (a) ) in formulating a theory of 

human curiosity stated : 

••• that if patterns arr too unlike anythinG with which 
the subject is acquainted , the symbolic response 
tendencies arou::;ed will be t oo few and too feeble to 
provide much conflict , while t oo much familiarity will 
have r emoved conflict by makinc the particular combinat i on 
an unexpected one . (p. 189) 

It seems then that the curious pcroon has learned a Gt r ategy 

which facilitates conflict , Hhile a per:::;on with low curiosity has 

l earned an avoidance stra te.::y. Accordin11ly curiosity for this s tudy 

is generally defined as , a preferred C06flitivc strategy which is 

utilized to cope with challentiin; stimuli and. manifested in the way 

in which the individual is predisposed to achieve and resolve 

conceptual conflicts . ,\n opcn.Lional defin1 tion in terms of t he 

instruments used in this study will follow later. 

The pr esent study i s baned on the reasoning t hat there is a 

clear distinction to be made between global self- concept, and self­

concept of school achievement. But, as it i s acknowledged that self­

concept is very much situation-dependent and t ask specific (Gergen 

197 1, Purkey 1970) it is aloo accepted that any measure of sclf­

concept of school adjustment will also be in part a measure of global 

self- concept. Self- concept of school adjustment being recognised as 

only one aspect or manifestation of global self- concept . 

an analysfo of White ' s , Piaget ' s and Hunt ' s collective 

theories it seems tha~ the chi l d ' s predisposition to seek maintain 

and resolve conflicts depends upon his perception of himself in 

specific learni~ situations . Consequently, in accordance with the 

definit ions so far outlined, curiooity is proportional to the learner' s 

self-perception of his inner standard of capacity. The self being here 

seen as something of an organiser of cognitions. Competence provides 

the baseline , but the individual ' s conscious knowledge of its 



threshold and potcnti <Ll is more important . This is his self- concept . 

Earlier it was mentio1wd th-it Pur key ( 1970) has pointed out that 

this knowlcdce of Gelf i c V<'ry much the product of a dynamic system 

of beliefs rather t hnn one t;<'neral belief. 

For the purpose of tht' prcscn t study global self-concept is 

defined in acneral terms as : an individual ' s perception of his 

innate capacity to cope cffer.t ively with his environment. In that 

self- concept of school adju.;trncnt must also , like global self­

concept, be task and situation dependent , it is here defined in 

general t erms for t he purpoGco of this study ao a student ' s 

perception of his innate capacity to cope effectively in the specific 

environment of the classroom. 

These general defin1i1ons have been included in this section 

to BiVC SOr.IC indication Of thP Writer ' S frame-of- reference in Which 

the problem of this ctudy is viewed. All three variables , curiosity, 

&lobal self- concept and self- concept of school adjustment arc 

operationally defined in terms of the instruments used to measure them 

in this study, in the section Instruments and their Characteristics, 

(Chapter 4). 



CHAPTER 3 

H Y P 0 T H E S E S 

As mentioned previous l y , this research i s an extension of that 

done by Maw and Jfaw (1970) . Connequently a restatement and 

consideration of t heir 6eneral hypothesis seems relevant at this 

point . 

From t he ir findin,:;s thnt it i s possible to identify groups of 

children who differ in t heir l evel of what may be defined as curios ity 

(Maw and l1iaw 1964) they ansumcd that they may also di ffer on variables 

other than curiosity. Draw in{; support from l·iahone ' a ( 1960) r e::iearch 

in the field of self- concept a nd Hhite ' s (1959) theory of competence 

motivation Maw and l·iaw ( 1970) hypothesized that 

Children high in curiosity are also those who have 
successful ly interacted with thei r environments, and, 
as a result , have good self- concepts. (p. 124) 

In their study, the hypothesis was limited to groups of boys 

differing in decirec of curiosity, and the r esults of their tes ts 

indicated that high-curiosity boys as a group show better overall 

personal adjustment than low- curiosity boys. In discussing these 

r esults they suggest that this may be due to one of the fo~lowing 

causes. 

Firstly, it may be that boys wi th low self- concepts will tend 

not to exhibi t curiosity because they expect failure , or secondly 

that lacking curiosity low- curiosity boys fail to reach out 

successful ly into their environments. Finally , as a possible cause 

they suggest that the conditions in the development of low- curiosity 

boys which create low self- concepts are also the conditions which 

pr omote low curiosity. 



20 

The pre.Jent study is b:\•1cd on rationale which favour::; the 

Gum;ention that boyr; with low :1Pl f-concepts expect failure . In 

accordance with the aims of lli 1 :' rl':1c;i.rch this may be phraoed more 

npccifically that there is a 1· ·luctmce for childr~n with low Gelf­

conccpts to reach out ::mcces.· ru ll,Y into their environments. 

Consequently , they develop co ··n lt1Vl' a.vo1d~ncc stratc~1e:J which are 

employed to avoid a further r1rk of cn.usint; dam~e to already neGative 

self- imat;es . Such children will not welcome challent;ing stimulation 

at the same level an their oth0r more curious peers. Consequently, 

their manifested curiosity is omti nually low. 

However , this study is intended to illustrate that there is a 

positive relationship between ·i child ' s measured curiosity and his 

perception of himself in t he specific environment of the school. 

The general hypothesis of this study is : -

that children who have po3itive self-concepts of 

themselves as learnern in the school envirorunent 

will abo be ones who exhibit curiosity in that 

situation. 

Further specific hypotheses which follow from this eeneral 

one and should be considered are : 

(1) Thnt children possesGin& positive global self­

concepts are likely to possess positive situation 

depen<lent self- concepts of themselves as learners 

in the school environment. 

(2) That children who score highly on tests of 

global self- concept will also score hishly on 

t ests of curiosity. 

Consequently for the group of subjects selected, this study 

is designed to measure : 

(1) Global self- concept 

(2) Specific self- concept as a learner in school. 

Thia has been referred to as self- concept of 

school adjustment. 

(3) Curioei ty. 



21 

It ia not expected that Lhc instruments used are nufficicntly 

accurate to 6ivc exact indic \L iono of individual ' s scorco . Rather 

i t is intended that correlations will be shown for the above t hr ee 

listed variables amon;st the Group ' s observud measur ements. 



CHAPTER 4 

P R 0 C E D U R E S 

In::;trument3 an•l their Characteri stics 

Com;iderin:; that this i~ tndy i s a piece of descriptive research 

modelled as an extennion of tit ' t done by ;.:aw and Maw ( 1970) every 

attempt wa.J made to u::;e the ::; ·110 0 instruments as used by them. This 

was possible in obta ining a mr- 1:-iure of self- concept and partly so 

for curiooity. Instruments d<' niGned to measure the way in whi ch the 

child sees himself in the school environment were sought independently. 

No instruments were sp~r.1fically des igned for the present 

s tudy. 

Global self- concept 1::; lt<'re operationally defined in terms of 

the t ests used to measure aspc r.t::; of self-conceptualization. These 

are the followintJ parts of th0 California Test of Personality (Thorpe, 

Clark and Tiegs 1953) , (a) self-reliance ; (b) senoe of peroonal worth; 

(c) sense of personal freedom; (d) feeling of belonging; (e) with­

drawing t cndencieo; and (f) total personal adjustment. The following 

parts o f the Children' s Personnlity Questionnaire (Porter and Cattell 

1960) (a) e1;0 atrcnr,th ; (b) h1r;h er{jic t ension; o.nd (c) strong 

oelf- sentiment. 

These tes t s formed the b;iois of Maw and Maw' s battery designed 

t o measure self- concept. 

Curiosity is here operationally defined in terms of the tests 

used to measure curiosity. Thcae are : 

(a) The self- appraion.l of curiosity (Maw and Maw 1968). 
This is a 41 item self- r a t ing instrument developed to measure 

the curiosity level of chil dren. (Maw and Maw ' s estimate of 

r eliability obtained was 0. 91). The instrument is reported 

as being useful in identi~ying groups of children differing 



in curiosity levels , but js probably not sensitive 

enough for the succe::;sfo l identification of individuals. 

(A copy of this ratine r.n le appears in Appendix B. ) 

(b) A ·reacher ' s n:i I.in,-; Scale of Curiosity (Maw and 

¥.aw 1970 ) . This instruw·nt was desi..:;ned by Maw and Maw 

specifically for thei.r 1070 study. (See Appendix C) 

( c) Partially as n.n attempt to gain a more accurate 

measure of curiosity, and as it is felt that there may be 

a certain amount of marknr bias (see Design of Study and 

Data Collection) it wa:; rl"cided to use an aspect of "The 

\'/hi ch to Discuss Test" 1 i · :iw and r.;aw ( 1966) . The aspect 

considered consists of five pictur es which are shown to 

the child. (These picturPn are included as Appendix A. ) 

The measure of curiosity is assit;ned according to the 

number of ques tions the i111bject asks. 

23 

It is stated above that every attempt has been made in the 

experimental design of this study to gather data using instruments 

which were also used in the M:-tw and Maw study. However, as self­

concept of school adjustment i8 a variable peculiar to this study 

the tests used to measure it were selected from other sources . 

Accordin&ly a r ationale for th~ir selection is given below. 

Although many children arc in possession of positive global 

self- concepts they come to view the school as a threatenine 

environment . This is certainlJ due in part , to the fact that too 

sudden an exposure to an amount of cognitive conflict above a child' s 

customary activation level (lladdi 1970) will result in frustration. 

Hunt (1961) refers to this phenomena in his theory of the "match" , 

pointin& out that the effort to assimilate challenging stimuli leads 

to the discovery of object properties and relationships which cannot 

be reduced to the child ' s own schemata. Consequently he may create 

a task specific self- concept which can be rated as negative. 

Gergen (1971) , in summarizing the litera ture , concluded that 

self-concept is situationally dependent . This suggests that 

personality factors relate to any self- concept of school adjustment. 

Brophy and Good (1974) report Schmuck ' s comments r ega:Niing the results 

of hi s research concerning the relationship between personality and 

school ~justment and achievement . Hi s findings indicated that 



24 

••• children h'ho pcrcci veil themselves to be unpopular 
with their clasGmatcs ( whdhcr or not they actually were) 
tended to be underachiever~: , to have negative self­
concepts, and to have c;cnrrally negative attitudes 
towards school . (p. 19) 

Consequently the followin; tc:; L:; which purport to measure pcroonali ty 

factors r .J lated to school adj11:; t.mcnt were chosen for the present 

study. Each test ' s au thor' s da ternents of what the specifio factors 

of the tests themselves are supposed to measure are included below. 

This has been done partly to provide justification for their use here, 

and secondly to provide an opc>r:itional definition of self- concept of 

school adjustment as it applies to this study: 

Test 1. California Toot of Personality : 

Factor 2 E. School Relations. 

The authors , {Thorpe , e t al 1953) interpret this factor 

in terms of : 

The s1:udcnt who is satisfactorily adjus ted to 
his school i s the one who feels that his teachers 
like him, who enjoys being with other students, 
and who finds the school work adapted t o his level 
of intere~t and maturity. (p. 4) 

Test 2. Bristol Social Adjustment Scale 

Factor U. Unforthcomingness. 

The authors, (Scott and Sykes 1962) interpret this factor 

as 

••• inhibited lack of confidence before any 
difficulty or new situation, a defect of natural 
assertiveness and curiosity. (See Child in School: 
Dia.gnostic Form) 

In concluding this section it has been hypothesised that as 

the above two factors ~re intended to measure how the student feels 

about achool and whether or not he lacks confidence in new situations 

then it follows that they are nlso concerned with the variable self­

concept of school adjustment which is central to the general hypothesis 

of this study. 



Description of Subject~ 

Twenty children of th1· senior room of a local two tea cher 

school served as subject..; for the study. At the time of testing 

the writer was their t eacher. 

25 

Becaur;e of the limi t0d 13ize of the school from which the 

subjects were taken it wa~ not possible t o carry out sampling 

procedures . lTe i ther was it possible to assert with any certainty 

that the class is r epresent.alive of New Zealand children, although 

it will be suggested that th~ class shows signs of being representative 

of New Zealand rural primary chi ldren. 

TABLE 1 : Char acteriutics of the Class 

Age (in years) boys girls 

13 1 

12 2 1 

11 2 2 

10 2 2 

9 1 2 

8 

7 1 1 

Of these 20 chi l dren two entered the class in June, otherwise 

the rest were together from the beginning of the year to the time of 

testing. 

P. A. T. tests were admini stered earlier in the year. The results 

of these tests for the two recentl y admitted children were obtained 

from their previous teacher. 

An examination of the two P. A. T. r esults in reading comprehension 

and maths indicates a typical ra nge of ability for New Zealand rural 

school children. (Mean of ma ths scaled score ::: 23. 35. ) Similarly, 

they indica te that there are both bright and dul l chi l dren as members 

of the class . (Standard devintion maths scal ed score= 13. 19. ) 



TABLE 2 Pror,re.>oi vc fl t I • i rvnf'n L Te.;t Geo res for 

Ma ths and Reacb n.; _Comprehen3ion 

Sub j ect 
r,, hi; : Readin~ Comprehenoion 

Seal• d scores Percentile 

001 " ' 68 ' '· 
002 10 00 
003 ,.,") , ' 23 
004 1 'l 14 
005 10 14 
006 H 53 
007 1::' 29 
008 , •I 25 
009 ~)Fi 79 
010 I ) 20 
011 J;' 68 
0 12 11 '} I• 100 
013 '1 ·, 94 
014 ,, ~ 79 
015 00 00 
016 0'1 21 
017 v, 84 
0 18 1M 80 
019 30 43 
020 ?6 07 

26 

There is no r en3on for t.hc school they are drawn from to be 

considered atypica l of rura.l nchools as far as t he socio-economi c 

back.;rounJs of the children nr~ conce rned. Similarly, it seem~ that 

as the class contains an equal number of boys and crirls of va rying 

a3es , who possess an obviouoly wide r an,;e of mental ability, the 

selection of these children for the purposes of this study was not 

inappropriate. 

Finally, because at the time of testing the writer was in fact 

the children' s teacher it is felt that anxiety free t esting procedures 

were able to be effected with r elative ease. 



Desir,n of Stud.v and D:ita Collection Plan 

The study was de::>it,"llf'd lo yield d1ta from a battery of six 

te:::ts . Ao, at the time of dn t. 1 collection, the wri t er wao tho 

t eacher of the claJs from whirh tho subjects wore drawn it is 

ari.;ued tha t organizationally I.he eGtablishment of optimum tooting 

conditions was straightforward . 

The three written teuk wore ad.mini s tered by the writer on 

succeocive mornings from 10. 30 a . m. until completed. In each case 

the quea t ions were r ead aloud t,o a group of four children who have 

r eadin& di fficultieo . The Tcu~hf'>r ' s Rati ng Scale of Curiosity, a nd 

the Bristol Social AdjuotmcnL mn\sure were both done by tho writer. 

Obvious ly, the r elationnhip which existed between t eoter a nd 

subJects was one which could precipitate bias in marking. Particularly 

where the Tea cher ' s Rating 3c,l~o were beinc completed. In an 

attempt to build in a correction factor to counter this effect, a 

'reacher ' s College student , who wao on section durin.; the time of 

teotin5, was trained in the administration of the Picture Te::;t of 

Curiosity. This was the l ast test administer ed, the tester working 

alone with each chi ld, readinG the specific instructions of each item 

to all children. 

Trea t ment of Results 

To assess the degree of relationship between each of the 

nine variables the Pearson product moment correlation technique 

was used. As percentile scor eu for P. A.T. reading comprehension 

were used no histogram nor mean nor s t andard deviation is shown 

for that measur e . 



C HAP'J'BR 5 

RF:3ULTS 

Table 3 indicates Stawl :u·d Deviations and Means for variables 

measur ed. 

TABLE 3 Standard Deviations and f.:eans 

Vari able mc~sured Cases Mean S. D. 

1. Curiosity Picture Te r; t 20 14. 75 9. 11 
2. Curiosity Teacher ' s Ila ting 20 31 . 25 9. 51 
3. Curiosity Self Que:; tionnaire 20 58 . 15 9. 61 
4. Factor U BriGtol Soci "l l 

Adjustment :Jcale 20 17 . 10 24. 07 
5. Total Personal Adjustment C. T. P. 20 48.85 13. 63 
6. School Adjustme~t . C.T.P. 20 7. 55 2. 94 
7. Children ' s Personality ·~uestionnaire 20 9. 25 1. 88 
8. Scaled Score : P. A. T. i·ia ths 20 23. 35 13. 19 

Note : Variables 1 - 3 relat e to the construct curiosity. 
Variables 4 and 6 relatn to the construct self- concept 

of school adjustment . 
Variables 5 and 7 relate to the construct global self­

concept. 

Table 4 indicates that ther e were significant correlations 

between two of the curiosity measures and the Bristol Social 

Adjustment f actor: the Child in School. Picture Test of Curiosity 

and Bristol factor (r = 0. 44; p < 0. 05) , Teacher' s Rating of Cur iosity 

and Bristol factor (r = - 0. 65; p<0. 001) . 

However, there was no significant correlation between 

either the Picture Test of Curiosity, the Teacher's Rating of 

Curiosi ty nor t he Curiosity Questionnaire and var iable 6, the 

C. T. P. measur e of school adjustment. 



TABLE 4 : Correl;it i on l:atrix 

Var . 1 

Vari able 1: 
Variable 2: 
Variabl e 3: 
Variable 4: 

Variable 5: 
Variable 6: 
Variable 7: 
Variable 8: 
Var iable 9: 

Curios i ty 
Curionity 
Curiosity 
Fac tor U 

The Child 

l'1ctu rc •res t 
Teacher s Rating 
J"lf '<.uc:;ti onnai r e 
Bri stol Socia l Adjus tment Scale . 
tn School 

Tot~l PcrRon 1l AdJUJtmcnt : C. T. P. 
School Adju :Lmcnt : C. T. P. 
Chi ldr cns Personality Ques tionnair e 
Scal ed 3cor<' : P. :1 . T. maths 
Per centile : P. A. T. reading compr ehension 

Var. 2 Var. 3 Var. 1l Var . 5 Var . 6 Var. 7 Var. n 

o. 67*** 0. 30 - 0. 44* - 0. 13 - 0. 21 0. 29 O. u}'t 

29 

Vnr . 9 

0. 56 • 
Var. 2 0. 29 - 0. 65°• 0. 06 • 13 . 18 • 67*** • 10•_** 
Var. 3 . 07 . 46* . 14 . 43• -. 03 • 11 
Var. 4 . oo . 16 . 12 -. 25 -. 34 
Var . 5 . 73*** • 31 . oo . 20 
Var. 6 • 23 . 02 . 05 
Var. 7 • 12 -. 04 
Var . 8 · 11*** 

(N = 20) 
*p < 0. 05 

• *p < 0. 01 
***p < 0. 001 

Thus it cannot be sai d that t he findi~s of thi s s t udy support 

the genera l hypothesis : 

That children who have positive self- concept s of 

t hemse l ves as lea rners in the school environment 

will also be ones who exhibit curios i t y in that 

s ituation. 

Si milarly t her "? was no pos i tive correla tion bet ween either t he 

Pictur e Test of Curi os i ty or the Teacher ' s Rating of Curios i ty and 

either of t he global sel f - concrpt measur es , var iabl e 5, t he Cal i fornia 

Tes t of Personality measur e of Tot al Personal Adjustment and v~riable 

7, the Childr en ' s Personali t y Questionna i r e measur e . However, t here 

was a significant corr elation between the Curiosi t y Questionnair e and 

both of t he global self- concept measures. Table 4 Curios ity Questionnaire 



and Total Person1.l Adjustmr'nt, C. 'l' . P. (r = 0.46; p<0.05) . 

Curiosity Que.>tionn:i.ir•! ani C.l'. 'l · measure (r = 0. 43; p<0. 05). 

30 

Conoequently, in tint. pn •1 itive correlations were recorded 

between only one of lhe curJ o•· 1 l.y measureG aml the included measures 

of global self-concept the fi 11• 11 nas of this stud.jr only partially 

support Maw and l·:aw' s ( 1970) h,vpo thesis that : 

Children hiGh in curionity are also those who have 
successfully interacted wiLh their environments and, 
as a result , have good self-concepts. (p. 124) 

However, from the abov'' , some relationship between the variables 

curiosity , self- concept and s~1f-concept of school adjuotment has been 

shown to exist. 

Further examination of r"sults indicates a hi&hly significant 

relationship between curiosity :rncl school achievement. Table 4, 

Curiosity Picture Test wilh n~,lcd score : P. A. T. maths (r = 0. 63; 

p <0. 05) , Curiosi ty ?icture Tl"~;t with P. A. T. reading comprehension, 

(r = 0. 56 ; p < 0. 05) . Cur1on1 l.y Teacher ' s lhtin~ with P. A. T. maths 

( r = 0. 67 ; p <0. 001) , Curio r: il,y Teacher ' s Ratin& with P. A. T. 

reading comprehension (r = 0. 70 ; p < 0. 001) . These results are 

important and will be consider"~ later, both in thi s chapter , and 

when discussing the implications of the results. 

The above results will now be considered in two parts. 

Aa expected there was a highly significant degree of 

correlation (r = 0. 67 ; p <0.001) between the Picture Test of 

Curiosity and the Teacher ' s Rn.ting Scale of Curiosity. However 

corelation of either of these teots with the third measure of 

cur i osity (Maw and Maw ' s Curiosity Questionnaire) was not significant. 

There is no clear expl~nation for these results although it may be 

that the group of academical ly slower children within the sample t o 

whom the tester read the questions of the Curiosity Questionnaire 

answered in an " expected" direction. Consequently i n acti?lff to 

avoid appear ing t o lack abi l ity they may have answered the test 

incorrectly, t hus gaining high scores although they scored less 

highly on the Picture Test of Curiosity and wer e r ated as low in 

curi osity on t he Teacher ' s Rating Scale. 



In considerinl; thl1 co rr«'la tion of curiosity with global 

self- concept anti specific sl"l f-concept of school adjustment the 

followiJl{; results are worth <'n1inider ition. 

31 

It has been mentioned ·1hovc that the Bristol School Adjustment 

factor showed 01gnif1c~nt COi r 0 lation with tho Picture Te~t of 

Curiosity (- 0 . 44; p<0. 05) , . 11\Cl the TeC1cher ' s Rating Sc: le of 

Curiosity (- 0. 65 ; P< o. 001) . In both c:i..;es the correlation io 

negative. This is in the h,vpothesised di r ection; high numerical 

scores on the te..;ts of curioi:j ty represent high curiosity, whereas 

low scores on the Bristol JcilP indicate positive adjustment . 

Althou&h signific~nt correlations between the Picture Test 

of Curiosity and t he Bristol facto r , and between the Te~cher'a 

Rating of Curio~ity and the UrjsLol factor support the hypothesis 

that the more curious child is one who is better adjusted , there 

was no significant correl;ition between either of thc0e two tests 

of curiosity and variable u , Lhe C. T. P. mea~ure of school adJuatment . 

As variable 6 was simply on<' f:l.cto r (School Atljustment) from the 

Californian Test of Personality a positive correlnt1on with v~riable 

5 which was composed of sev"r, l other factoro from the same test 

was expected. :5ignificantly f rom Table 1 r = 0. 73; p< 0. 001 • 

However, this provide::; no h<'lp in interpreting the lack of rel:i.tion­

ship recorded between School Adjustment: C. T. P. and the two 

curiosity tests . From l•:aw ;inri 1.:aw ' s results it should have followed 

tha t the Teacher' s RatirlB of Curiosity would have correlated 

positively with the C. T. P. measure of Total Personal Adjustment . 

Has this occured then it should a lso have followed that there would 

have been a positive correl~tion between the Teacher ' s Rating and 

the School Adjustment measure from the C. T. P. 

This l ack of relation~hip between Tea cher's Rat inB and Total 

Personal Adjustment (r = 0. 06; p<.0.5) sugBests that either the tests 

ar e in fact measurill6 diffcrPnt things than curiosity and personal 

adjustment or, t hat there Wf\'.J error i n the admi nistration or scoring 

of at leas t one of the teotn. The writer sees no evidence to support 

the first proposed explanation for insi;nificant correlation. The 

que~tion of possible er ror in administration and scoring however, will 

be discusned l ater, with particular reference to the Teacher ' s Rating 

Scale_~ 



32 

There was no silrflifi ,, 111 t correlation between the Curiosity 

Questionnairl' and either me ·1·:urc of school adjustment. However, 

positive correlations with t.liio measure of curiosity were recorded 

with both Total Personal Ad.Ju:-;tment (r = 0. 46; p<0. 05), and the 

Children ' s Personality Quest i nnnuire ( r ::: O. 43; p< O. 05) . On the 

basis that all of these teut r; were used by Maw and Jr.aw these rcsul ts 

a re in the hypothesised dirc~tion. Significantly too they support 

their r esults. 

Thus of the three tent~ of curiosity two correlate with one 

item of school- adjustment anrl the other with both items of global 

self-concept. 

Significantly correlations of both the Curiosity Picture Test 

and the Teacher's Ratint; Sc.ilP of Ouriosity with the two school 

achievement variables were ohr:crved. However , the self- concept 

measures did not correlate ai~nificantly with either of these 

variables. 

These results are con<i1::;tcnt with the contention by Langevin 

(1970) and Maw (1970), that cllriosity, being multifactored correlates 

highly with intelligence. 1!01·1cver, Rushton ' s ( 1966) review of research 

revealed that adjustment is positively connected with academic 

achievement . Similarly aelf-roncept and achievement have been observed 

to be positively correlated (Coopersmith 1959 , Piers and Harris 1964). 

The results of this study do not support their findings. 

Thus as no signific:m t correlations have occured between either 

the C. T. P. Total Personal Adj ustment measure against the Bri~tol 

Adjustment factor, or the P.A. T. maths or reading scores, or between 

the C. P. Q. measure against the C.T.P. School Adjustment factor , the 

Bristol or P. A. T. measures it would seem that either, these tests 

were inappropriate fo~ this study or that they were administered or 

scored incorrectly. The writer sees no reasons to justify any of 

these pos3ibilities. 

Further analysis of da ta from Table 4 indicate:> that there was 

no significant correlation obocrved between the variables proposed to 

measur e self- concept of school adjustment . Table 4, Bristol factor 

with School Adjustment C. T. P. (r ,,. 0. 16; p < 0. 25) . However it was 

expected that a highly positive relationship would have been shown. 



33 

Interpret ation of the rc t;ul tn lcado to the que.::;tion could it be that 

thcuc two factors in f act me·•·:11r1~ quite different things? 'l'hc other 

posnible explan.:ttion io that I h0 nature of the scorin.~ a ffected the 

results. Thin will be dL:crn·:·<>rl later. A hir;hly skewed diotribution 

of the Bristol data wao not nw'xpectcd. (Refer to Fi~res 1 - 7. ) 

As expected there Wll!J :1 hignly positive correl ation oetwcen i;he 

two C.T. P. variables tr= 0 .f \ i p<:u. u01) . Tnus it would be expected 

that variable 6, School J\dju : I w..:in t c. T. P. be consider ed valid for the 

purpose of measuring school :id .1ustment. However, no other significant 

correlations with this vari ·"' 1 n were r ecorded. 

To r eturn to a com;idrr:i tion of the fact that the Picture Test 

of Curiosity and the Teach".)r ' n Rating of Curiosity correlated 

significantly with the P.A. ·r. m'lths and reading scores it could be 

that as the pictures pre sen lrrl in the picture tes t of curiosity are 

somewhat " school orienta t ed" :rn are the instructions presented to the 

student : 

Example : 
THI~ . .>CIE!ITIST 

"This is a picture of a ocientist. What else 
would you like to know about this picture?" 

(Picture test of Curiosity: 
Appendix A) 

Then the children responded in an "appropriate" manner. As 

they did to the two achi evement tes ts. Transferring thib to a frame­

of- reference which sees cognition as a tuner of motiv~tion the 

interpretat i on is they employed similar cognitive coping strategies 

t o protect their self- images. This thesis argues tha t curiosity is 

such a strategy, employed i n a l l school situations. 

Finally, perhap3 one r enson for the unexpected results is the 

fact that the writer was the class teacher. This is of particular 

relevance in considerin& any correlation with the Teacher ' s a ting 

Scale and the Bri stol Social Ad.justment scale. It could be argued 

t hat wi thin such a frame- of- r efer ence it is very difficult for the 

t ester to r efra in f rom being i nf l uenced by his prior exper ience with 



34 

the subjects . Conaequcntly, "flnfnsion mny have boon oxporicnced in 

differenti:lti~ betwcun curio•:tty, ochool adjus tment a ncl academi c 

ability. 

In accordance with th 1 • rcn:.onini; ob::;c rvcd corrcl~t1on11 between 

the Teacher ' s tbtin~ of uno : tty and the following f;1ctoro are 

inter esting. r'r om Table ? , \I I t.h lhe Br istol fnctor (r = -0. 65 ; 

p<0. 001) , with tho P. A. T. rn 1 I h:; :;core ( r = o.67; p<0. 001) and with 

the P. A. T. reading comprehen :ion score (r = o. 70; p<0.001 ) . 

The f act th1.t :;uch hi •·l1l;t si511ificant correlations have 

occured in these a r eas coul i ln;rc re:;ul ted as a consequence of the 

marker' s awareness of the s11h.1•'cts academic potential . Al though 

their exact P. A. T. scores werr> not committed to memory they could 

have been fairly accur;-1tely r~timated . Thus it may well be that this 

knowledge was instrumental in influenci}l0 the tester ' s ratin~s of 

curiosity and unforthcomin,~" .. 0 , (the Bristol factor) . 

However , should this pn~.able te:icher bias be discounted 

then such significant correl l t 1 ons in<iic•tc that there is in fact a 

relationship between curiosi l.,'I , school adjustment and school 

performance. This relationship is supported by the observed 

correlations between the Pict11re Test of Cur iosity and the same 

adjustment a nd achievement f01do r s . 

Table 4, Picture Test of Curiosity with , the Bristol factor 

(r = - 0 . 44; p<'0. 05) , with scnled P. A.T. ma ths score (r • 0 . 63 ; 

p < 0 . 05) and , with P. A. T. reading comprehension (r "" 0 . 56; p < 0.05). 



8 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

r 
• I . 
' I 

. 
' I 
' 

4 I 
I 

I 
• 

I 

FiQlre 1 
Variable 1 

• 

• 

.. 

• 

• 

• 

. 
16 

Figur e 2 
Variable 2 

-
35 

·-r - l 

I I 

I I I 

I I 
I 

I I 
I I 
I I 

13 19 25 31 37 43 
14. 75 ~ 3 . 86 

Curiosity Pictur~ Test 

I ----- - .... ,_ - -1 
I l ' I 1 I 

I I J 

l I I 

21 26 31 36 41 46 41 
21. 74 31 . 25 40.76 

Curiosity Teacher s Rating 



11 

10 

9 

8 

1 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

. 

• 

' 

. 

' 

. 

. 
• 

• 

• 

• 

I 
1 

I 
I 
I 
' I 
I 
l 
I 
I 

15 
17.1 

39 

I 
I 
I 

I 
I 
I 
I 
I . 
I 
I 

43 
41.17 

57 71 

Figure 4 
Variable 4 : Factor U : Bristol Social Adjustment Scale 

36 

99 



6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

• 

• 

. 

. 

. 

• 

13 

Figure 5 
Variable 5 

1 J.-----A 

21 

r 
I 
I 
I 
I 
I 

29 39 
35 , 22 

- - -
I 
I ...._. -
I 
I 
I 
I 

45 53 
48. f'5 

-- ~, 

r 

I 
I 
I 
I -

61 69 

62. 48 

Total Personal Ad.jnfltment C. T. P. 

r 
J 

I 
J 

J 

- -, 
f 

J 

J f 

o --~~~~-'-·~--:-~-:-~~~f ~_._~--
6 8 10 

10.49 
12 2 

Figur e 6 
Var iabl e 6 

4 
7. 55 

School Adjustment C. T.P. 

37 



10 

9 

8 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

' 

. 

. r - - - ,-._ - 1 ' 

' I I 
J 

I ' l 1 
• I r I 
' 

I I I 
7 8 9 10 11 12 

7. 37 9. 25 11 . 13 

Fi@.lre 7 
Variable 7 Childrens personality Questionnaire 

38 

13 



CHAPTER 6 

C 0 H C L U S I 0 N S 

The ori~inal problem which served to provide the initial 

motivation for this study wa!: :\ belief that curiosity, as a separate 

motive or aopect of peroonal i t.v , does not exist. 

Rather , as Hunt (196 1) li:is suJgested that intrinsic motivation 

is motivation inherent in in forrn.i.tion processin,~ it has been implied 

here that curiosity is a co.-;n i I. i. ve coping strategy. Thus, it was 

suegested that children would n0t appear curious unless they felt 

competent in specific si tun.ti 01m . 

Certainly intrins ir. rnn Ii v:i.tion can be enhanced, but it would 

seem that the desire to expr,,r.•: oneself and search for the novel 

comes more freely to children who have favourable self- concepts. 

The results of this study ind i <' •. te that intelligence and past 

experiences are very important variables. 

The answer to this parti~1lar research question was not clear. 

However, in attempting to defend the rationale for the study it is 

arcued that the results indirntl'.!d that there were certain sif,Jlificant 

correlations , and consequently some relationships exist , between how 

the learne r sees himself in tho school environment and both his 

manifested curiosity, and his achievement in that situation. The 

confusion of results may also serve to indicate just how complex and 

dynamic both self-concept , ann curiosity as an intrinsic motive, are. 

Hence, it may bs that juot as it is argued that there is very 

little real value in attempting to isolate and identify curiosity, 

be it as a personality variable , or as an aspect of active intelligence, 

so too it is debatable that the measure "self- concept " is of value to 

teacher s . Rather it could be that a measure of "competence" would be 

of more relevance. This sugge~tion will be discussed briefl y in the 

following section of this chapter. 



40 

However , as a final :: I 1 tcmcnt of position on the reuenrch 

question the po::;itiv e corr"lal.ion between curiosity and achievement 

serves to sum~e3t tha t curjnc:1 L,y and intelligence arc clo::rnly linked. 

Accol'llin_;l ;1 , r eturnin; to" v1,..w of activ e intc llii;encc , which is tho 

overall frame of r eference l>,..h 1 nd this s tudy, i t can be a rgued that 

the more intelliGcnt clnld l · ,.,no who has ~ained more confidence in 

dealins with his cnvironrncn t., :incl is thus more predisposed to seek 

out the novel . 

Curios ity a nd self-cnn ,,•·pt a re then task specific purely as a 

cons equence of the fact that. Lhey are manifestations of an equally 

task specific concept; intc l 1 i t~c nce . 

I J,J I' L I C A T I 0 N S 

If, as has been sn:::;,~c d.r-d , it can be accepted that curiosity 

is in f a ct no more th;in a co,:111 t ive s tra tegy employed to enr1.ble the 

subject to co pe mor.:; compe t"n t l.v wi th his envirorunent then the 

que::;tion may 1·1011 be asl~ed : wh-it can be done to ensure tha t such 

cognitions arc fo rmed ade·ru "I. t" l y? Obviously they are shaped as a 

consequence of past cxperinnc""' • but it is essential that the 

developing child hau sufficfr11 ~ cognitiv e apparatus to deal with them. 

This is innately determined . 

Similarly as it is gcn0rally the rule that the current environrnent 

predominant in New Zealand school s is one which reinforces success 

it could follow that many chi lilren learn to give appropria te 

responses in achievement situations. Perhaps then what would normally 

be defined in such an environme nt as genuine curiosity, is 

unintentionally stifled . In t ,..rms of the self- concept the child is 

understandably reluct~nt to encourage criticism. Conoequently many 

children come to know their <lbility i n a chievement situations , yet 

through reinfo rcement principles have learnt inappropriate expecta ncies. 

This will apply for both the "defenders" (children in posseGsion of 

negative self- concepts) and for highly achievement motivated children. 

Thus full cognitive deve lopment is rest r ained. 



41 

Certair.ly as a rci-;u l t n r experience and learninff children 

develop expectancies to11ard o r away from all sorts of objectives or 

consequences . But , pre:;um;i lil .v the child ' s cognitive potential must 

have direct bearinG on the d";~ree of expectations formed . 

From an early aGe .:i.11 "hildren appear to exhibit some amount 

of curiosity, yet in the schn l environment this ap,1lies to a minimal 

number. Certainly in many c·1 .,,s this loss of curiosity may be 

attributed to the fact that rhi.ldren suddenly are confronted wi th a 

perplexing environment which rn:\kes unreconcilable demands upon them. 

But often it seems that many five year olds have already begun to 

develop negative ima0es of r:"lf, and consequently are overcome by 

the sudden new challenrre of t.h" school environment . 

Thus, althou_;h it wo11td seem logical to suggest that most 

children very certainly m:ini. f•,r-t intrinsic motivation from early 

i nfancy it c..1.n also be lheori :r."d that they will later learn to 

conceptualize rules that G1Ji'l" the development of appropriate 

expectancies . Unfortunately ,.-; Miller ( 1970) has swme~ted : 

Some children, howev,.r , will learn very different kinds 
of expectancies , those which can thwart cognitive progr ess 
because they may constr;iin the child by prompting his 
withd r awal from potenti~l information acquisition and taok 
involvement that are perh:-irs within his limits . (p. 184) 

It is the writer 's v jf'w that such children would not score 

highly on t est s of self- conc"rt. or curiosity. 

To say that the curiouo person is one with a preferred 

cognitive strategy is t o sur,f~<'r1t that he prefers to r emain in a 

state of conceptual conflict . " Cognizing11 on a situation he can 

go directly to that portion of the organized setting of past 

responses which is most relevnnt to the needs of the moment . The 

grouping into schemata of re~ponses learned at different times such 

that they can be recalled to6cther is due to the cognitive factors 

we call interests and attitudea. Hunt (1965) stated at the 1965 
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation that : 

••• individual differ~ncr:s in curiosity or i nterest 
in the nove l may also be a function of the level of 
commitment to a ttitudes and beliefs. The stronger 
these commitments the lesn the curiosity. (p. 258 ) 



42 

However , it is import.,,, L to appreciate that theuc snino 

learned responr:en c,n be h:o l ·1 t.0tl to be reused in their ori1~inal 

context. The implic'1tion h<>r• · is then that if it is accepted that 

motivational factor::; c;ln a.: ···11hlf:> schem: ... ta in novel combinations 

then it seemu that there in =• 1~re-iter possibility of breaking 

functional fixedne.;a. PcrlPI' .. Lhcn children can be t au(;ht to be 

curious. This po::rnibili ty w i l l be discussed later under 

Sui;Ge.:;tions for I•'urthcr Ro t;•· •' r.h . 

As the subjectG in th i •; otudy were country children it could 

be that their acquired "atti l.11•10" did in fact affect tho results. 

Attitude in this senr-e bc1 n1: • n ex:imple of mental " set" . 

Consequently, it could be :ir:,,,, I that they tended to modify their 

responses to seem appropri~t " to tho set . 

Al thouc,h the rcsul t .J n f thi a otudy do not support the ~cneral 

hypothesis it docs oecm tha I. rlnldrcn may learn expectancieo that 

will not serve to facilitat0 the enhancement of their self-concepts. 

It is locical to all?w that h.v unin·~ extrinsic rewards in the 

classroom teachers can crca tn motives by the manipulation of the 

learners concept of himself . Jimilarly coanitive strategies 

(curiosity) will only tend to he perpetuated by direct reinforcement. 

Thus there is a definite ne('il ~o ensure a wide and varied ran{;e of 

experiences. So too it has hPC"n argued (Hebb 1955 1 Bruner 1967) 
that over stimulation may re:~111 t in frustr;i.tion. 

The task then is to enRure that each child experiences 

continual success yet still f 1cls challenged. 

That curiosity is a potent force in the classroom is not 

denied, and conoequently any v;i.lid suggestions for its enhancement 

are welcomed. 

Maddi (1965) speaks of the need to build up a customary level 

of activation. This is in p~rt similar to Hebb ' s theory of optimal 

arousal , and Hunt ' s notion of the match. Basically he sum~ests that 

the higher the cuotomary lev<'l of activation the greater the 

proportion of time the pcrGon will spend trying to increase his actual 

level of motivation. Thus in order to ensure that actual activation 

I 



docs not fall below the cuat01 • 1·.v level , the pcroon, as he gaino 

in experience , muat Geck {;re" t • ,. tml creator dccrrees of novel ly. 

43 

As applied to the cltii:•tr·norn ni tuation this can be taken that 

prolon~cd stimulation loaes ii.: effect. Thus childr~n fail to remain 

motivatetl . This meano that tn 1·nlMncc curiosity novelty must be 

continually increased r ather t Inn remain static. 

In terms of the oricin:>I reocarch problem of this thesis the 

above theory seems relevant . f\lrcady it has been conceeded from a 

discussion of the results th;il. !10parate measures of self- concept 

and curiosity may be of littlr- V'tlue to teachers . Instead , it was 

suggested , a measure of comp" t "11c" could be more useful . 

If novel occurcnces do 11n t aeem threatenine to children then 

presumably hieher "cuotom::i.r:; :>pf iv Ltion levelc" would be more easily 

fostered . Presumably such chi ldrcn would then be identified as 

having more positive self-conr"pts . Particularly should they be 

encournecd to enc;.~c in crea t l "" enterpri oes for purely intrinsic 

satiofaction. Maddi later s111111 ·1·1 rises this position by saying: 

Maddi (1970): 

Build a high customar.1 l 0 vcl of activation in the 
younlJ (presumably by an enri ched environment) , and 
encourage a strone ::>elf-confidence concerning one ' s 
own creative capabilities. ( p. 90) 

His appeal for "enriched environmen ts" is hardly new or 

surpr ising. However, of partirntlar r el evance to this discussion 

is the notion of encouraging a strong sel f - confidence concerning 

one ' s creative capabilities. Thia it is her e argued is similar to 

a not i on of competence. 

As a consequence of r einforcement l earning the child builds 

up an inner base line of compe 1 ... nce against which incoming stimuli 

ar e compared. Novelty is es~ential for its development and it 

would seem that moderate is morn appropri ate than strong motivntion. 

The l ater reinforcing learning only in a narrow spher e . Thus a 

progr amme whi ch over-emphasiseR curiosi ty may not be relevant to 

t he needs of most childr en i n our primary school s . Rather, if the 

r ole of self as a motivat ing force is accepted t hen i t must be 



44 

allowed tha t individuals will differ in the range and persistuncc 

of their behaviours. 

Yet the re::mlt~ of this study did not indic1te th.'.lt children ' s 

self- perceptions (which must be rel,ted to their differin~ l evelc of 

competence) were a valid indic ~tion of their manifestations of 

curiosity. This could be due to the f ... ct that unlens frustrated 

by over stimulation the child will gener:.llly always be performin~ 

t o the full extent of his competence . However, once he comes under 

the control of an external :::ourcc of extrinsic motiv 1tion (the 

school) it may be that he no longer searches out novelty for his 

psychological development but pur ely for extrinsic reward. Thus 

competence gives way to achievement, which is not a reliable index 

of underlying potential . 

As the discussion ha;; moved away f rom curios ity and self­

concept it may be asked is there then any place in current 

motiva tional theory for Hhite's theory of competence motivation? 

The writer believ~s there may well be, but only in the sense 

that it may serve as a e-uideline and base on which to build. 

In concludin0 this section on implica tions from the r e:::earch 

it is argued that fir:;tly me;i:;ure::; of curiosity and se lf-conce pt are 

of limited use to teachers. Hather it is believed tnat the 

development of a test which could give teucheru a more accurate 

indication of what the child is really bringing to the learning 

situation would be more r elevant. This would be an indication of 

his competence at the time of tes ting. 

Secondly, in accepting that intrinsic motivation should be 

capitalized upon in the clasoroom, it seems that as the child' s 

search for novelty (manifested curiosity) is situationally 

dependent then our task as educators must be to create programmes 

which take adequate account of individual differences, in that they 

al low for a manageable match between curriculum and previously 

assimilated schemata. 

.· 

\ 



45 

However, although our current readinJ and to a lesJer de0ree 

math:;; schemes are structured on the premise that curiosity is in 

fact a motive well worth harneGsi.n.; it seems that many children are 

not in fact allo~ed to meet these subjects in the manner SU6gestcd 

above. Basically this is bec~use we still over emphasise group work. 

Thus a de-cmpha::;i;;; upon 0roup work and the adoption of a more 

task accepted mode of thinkin.; is advocated. This will encourage and 

allow children to develop at their own rates. Or, to return to the 

original research question, althouJh it is believed that the 

enhancement of the self-concept will improve the child ' s academic 

performance it is realised that it is difficult for self- esteem to 

grow in an environment where there is little or no freedom of choice. 

The teacher ' s influence here is enormous. 

S U G G E S T I 0 U S FURTHER 

R E S E A R C H 

It has been sugGested that the significant relationship which 

was shown to exist between curiosity and academic achievement points 

to tho influence of intellisence. However , if it can be accepted 

that curiosity exists as a cognitive stratec.y which is utilized as 

an aspect of active intelligence then it would seem 106ic1l that 

children may in fact be encouraged to be curious. If this can be 

done so as to de- emphasise academic achievement as the end result , 

and rather to encourage a search for the novel then it seemu that 

children will be less prone to experience functional fixedness . 

In other words training in curious behaviour must precipitate 

out the development of different cognitive styles. Hopefully, 

divergent thinking would be the outcome. 

Thus the sugge~tion is that there is scope for researchers 

to conduct longitudinal studies in this area by deliberately 

setting up optimum conditions for tho enhancement of curiosity and 

by making intrinsio motivation the long term goal. 



46 

Secondly it was carli•·r nucccs ted that there is perhaps a 

need to devise a test to mea··11 1·r> cor:ipctence . The su.:;ge;:;tion now 

is that althouc;h there is f u1 lhnr scope for research in this area 

immediate investigation3 could well be directed towards analysing 

the extent of relationship whirh may or may not exist between 

competence and curiosity. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Bcr lyno , l) . I<;. A Theory of II11r:nn Curioni ty. Bri ti::.ih Journa l 
of Pc:rh >l o :y, ~!r pp. H30 - 191 1954 (a) . 

Borlyne , D. E. An .::x,>•·rir .. c ru l ,, .uJy of Hur.nn Cu r io . .a ty. 
Dr iti::.ih_Jo·1rn -:l of P.~;/d 010:7, .12 1951i (b) . 

Berlyne, D. E. Con''licto , 1\ro11 :; ~ 1 and Curiouity. 1.;c;Gr.n-.-H1ll 
1960. 

Beswick, D. G. Co ··m t.ivc Proc" :i; 'l'hcory of Indiviciu :i.l iliffe renc~s 
in Curio.;1 ty , in Tn t r rn : it; i:otiv tion : A J:c-.; J i r "ctl on 
in . .. tuc ti on, "J,z:1po.a11r1, i,J. by Day, H. I . :.krl.i·rn• , • • ~. 
Hunt , J). ,;.; 1iolt , 1<ineh Lrt .. nd .in.;ton pp. 156 - no 1970. 

Beswick, D. G. ; Tn.llm·l<lcc , G. and i(;;i...; ten., 1lc- Ex:unin:.tion of the 
Two Le irnin-; ut~;le ,tu.lie::; in the Lich t of the Co 7ni tive 
ProcJ=-~ 'l'iwory of l:otiv tion. Journal of i::J.uc tlor "" l 
Psycholo 1;,;: •_?.; pp. 456 - 1b2 19/ 1. 

Bexton , I: . H. ; ih~ ron , I. 'l.nd uCO" , 'i'. H. 6ffcct..; of J ecrea~;cd 
v .:.lr iation in th·~ .;cnnor.J' environment . C n.:ui1an Journ".1.l 
of P0ycholoc£, ~, pp. 70 - 76 1954. 

Bori olow, B. ( 1964) ..iclf- ev-ilu t.ton ;i.n,l academic :ichicvement.. 
in ( ed) ii :.1 iciwk, D. ::. The :.,elf in Grat-1th ~ i..~ncr 1 n,:; 
m1d Le rm r ; , s~l~ctc d r c'1ding s . Prentice Hall 1'.) t>) . 
pp . 46ti - '17 4 

Br ookover, 'd . D. ; Thom'1s , ..; . and Pat"terson , A. Self- concept of 
ability nn i school aclncvement , ~ociolo;~y of i'.xluc: L 1on, 
JI : pp. 27 1 - 279, 1)64. 

Br ookover , ~-1 . B . ; ~rickson , B. L. :ind Joiner, L. M. (1967) 
.3olf- concept o f abili ty anJ. school aclnevcr:ient throuc;h 
studen tu ' ::;elf- conceptual enhancement. in Purko:1 , 11 • • ·:. 
Self- Concept ani School Achievement , Prentice Hall , 
P• 22 19"{0. 

Brophy , J . E. and Good , T. L. Teacher-student Relationshipc : 
Causes anl Conscquonccn, Holt , Rinehart and Hinston 197 4. 

Bruner , J . S. Toward a Theory of Instruction, Cambridge J(a::;s : 
Harvard University Pross, 1967 . 

Coopersmith , S. The Antcccdants of Sel f - esteem. San Francisco : 

Davidson, 

Day, H. 

W. H. Freem~ n , 1967. 

H. H. and L an3, G. 
t eacher ::; ' feo linJS 
school achieveme nt 
Education, ~: PP• 

Children' s perceptions of their 
towardo them r e l ated to self-perception , 
anJ behaviou r . Journal of Experimental 
107 - 118, 1960 

Rol e of Specifi c Curiooity i n School Achievement . Journal 
of Educationa l Psycholoc;Y, .22, : PP• 37 - 43 1968. 



Festi neer, L. The l :o t ivat in .; l~ff'cct of Cot;nitivc Di ::;:;onn.nce , 
in ( ed ) Harpe r , H. H. C. The Co;r.itive ?rocer:.~ec . 
Prentice-Hall Inc . New J cr :.;cy , pp. 509 - 52.3, 19btl . 

Fi nk, M. B. Sel f - concei>t a::; i t r d i tcs to academic achi evement . 
in (ed ) lfo.rnchel: , D. ~. The Sel f in Gro·,..th Te'l.chin,-; a nd 
Le'1.r nin -;, i:;el•·ctcu re hn ;:.; . Prentice Hall , 1964 
pp. 400 - )00. 

Fitzger ald, B. '!'. Leasur e of Opennei:;..; to Expe r i ence : J ou r n .1.l of 
Pc r ::;on"l.li t .y ::rn-i . ..;oci 111 Poycholocy, .4 : PP• 655 - 66.3 , 
1966 . 

Fowler, H. I mplic::i.tionn o " Sen:>ory Reinforcement , in (ed) Gla s .>cr, H. 
'11he I! .turc o f ikinforcemnn t , Ucw York Academic Preos , 
pp . 15 1 - 106 197 1. 

Ga,;,'"'71e , R. J:. :Jome Rclationc:lnp::> o f Re inforcement Theor.1 to 
Education , in (cd) Glaos e r , R. 'rhe I:atur e o f Heinf o r ccment . 
r ew York Aco.dcr:ii ~ Pre::;s , pp. 343 - .349 197 1. 

Gergen , K. J . The Concept o f Self, Holt , Rinehart and lhnston , 
197 1. 

Gibby, R. G. Snr. and Gi bby, H. G. Jr. The effects o f s tress r e:;ultinc; 
from .:ic o.dcmic f:n l u r c . Jour m l of Clini c.:il P::;ycholoc;r. 23 
pp. 35 - .37 1967 . 

Hamachek , D. ::: . 1rhc Sol f in GroHth 'i'eachinr, and Lear n i n ; , selected 
r eadin::;;:; . Pren~i.ce Hall , 19u5. 

Hebb , D. O. Drive::; and the C. 1! . S. (conceptual nervou::; ::;y3t em ) . 
Ps,ycholoi;ica l Rev ic·.·1 62 : pp. 243 - 254, 1955 . 

Hunt , J . l·:cv . Inte lliccncc .:i.ml l!:xperience . New York Hona l d Press , 
196 1. 

Hunt , J . r.;cv . Intrin!;ic f.·:ot iva tion and its Role in P::iycholo,~i cal 

Deve lopment , in ( cd) Levine , D. r~ebrasl:a S·rr.mo::num on 
l·:o t iva tion 1965 , .!l : University Nebraska Pre :Js , pp. 189 
282. 

Hunt , J. J:cv. Towa rt.13 a Hi ::i tory of Intr insic i•:otiva tion, in 
Intrin~ic l·:otiva tion : A lle11 Direction in Educ'lt i on, A 
SympoGium, Ed . by Day, H. I .; Ber lyne, D. E.; Hunt , D. E. 
Hol t Hinehart and \/inston, pp. 1 - 32 1970. 

La ngevin, R. Is Curios ity a Unitor y Cons truct? Ca nadi an Journal 
of Psycholocical Review 1971. 

Mackinnon, D. W. Cre~.tivity and !maces of the Self, in (ed) ilhite , H. W. 
The Study o: Lives , Pr entice Hall 1963. 

McReynolds , P. The Three Faces of Cocni t i ve l·'.otivation i n Int rinnic 
J:otivation : A Hew Direc tion in Edu cation , A 3ympo~num , 

Ed. by Vay, II. I .; Berlyne, .U. l!:.; Hunt , D. E. Holt , 
Rinehart and ~lini:>ton PP• 33 - 45 1970. 

Maddi , s. n. Motiva tiona l aspects of cr eativ ity. J ourna l of 
Peroonality 33 : pp . 330 - 347 1965. 

)laddi, S. R. Comments on liunnally ' s and Suchman ' s Papc r :J , i n 
Intr insic Motiva tion : A New Direction in Educ"l.tion , A 
Sympos ium, F.d.. by Day , H.I.; Ber l yne , D. E.; Hunt , D. E. 
Holt , Rinehart and ~'linston PP• 83 - 90 1970 . 



Mahone , c. H. F'car of failure anJ. unreal istic voc.J.tional a::;pirationu . 
Journ:ll of Abnomal and :_jocial PsycholO£i.Xr 60 : pp. 253 - 26 1 
1960. 

Maw, H. H. Differences in ~he pcrsonali ticrn of children differin& 
in curiosity, in (ed) Day, H. I . ; Berlync , D. E.; Hunt , lJ . E. 
Intrin.; i c i:otivi.ti.on : A re·..r Direction in i•:duc:"ttion , A 
.Jyrnpo .. nun, Holt , ilinc:nrt anri .; inston pp. 91 - 98 1 ~/{0 . 

Maw, H. H. and l·:a~oon , J . A. The curiosity dimension of fifth- gracle 
chilclren : a facto:-i •l d1scr imin.J.nt analysis . Child 
Devclop~cnt , .1?_ : pp. 2023 - 203 1 1971 . 

Maw, \·l . H. anJ r:aw, E. '1. Differences Between Childr en with Hi;h and 
ar.d Lm1 Curiosi tv. A Sum ,ary; l·:oravia, New York Chronicle 
Guid.J.nce Public'.ltions , 1965 - 66 . 

Maw, W. H. and I:a w, E. :·l . An attempt to measure curiosity in 
clementarj' ochool children. Ameri c::in Educa tional Research 
Journal , ~ : pp. 147 - 465 1966. 

Haw, W. H. and l·:v:.-~ E. H. 0elf- appr aisal of curiosity. Journ<i. l of 
Educ·itiom.l Re.;earch , 61 : pp. 462 - 465 1968. 

~iaw , W. H. and l·ia·.-1 , .c. ;1 . ....ielf- Concepts of High and Low Curiosity 
Boys . Child Dcve lopmcn t . ,!l ( 1) pp. 123 - 129 , 1970. 

Mehler, 

Miller, 

Niss en, 

Piaget , 

Piers , 

Porte r, 

J . and Bever , T. G. The study of competence in co,rp1i tivc 
psychology. Intcrn.:.i.tional Journal of Psychology : ]., 
pp. 273 - 280 1968. 

M.B. Intrinsic motiva tion : unlea rned, learned and mo<iifiable, 
in ( cd) Day, H. I .; Bcrlyne , D. E.; Hunt , D. 1•:. Intrinr;ic 
J.:otivation : A lre· .. 1 Direction in Education, A Symposium, 
!Iol t , iUnehart uncl i'linnton pp. 171 - 185 1970 

H . ~"f . The nat~re of the Drive a s Innate Det erminant o f 
Behuvioural Orcanization, in (ed) Jones , J.; . R. 
Nebraska Sympocium on Motivation Lincoln University of 
Nebraska Press pp. 28 1 - 321 1954. 

J . 1936. The Origins of Intelligence in Children. Trans . 
by Margaret Cook. New York: International University Press 
1952. 

E.V. and Harris , D.B. Age and other corre l a tes of s elf­
concept in children, Journa l of Educational Psycholoey, 
~. 1964 pp. 9 1 - 95. 

R. B. and Cattel l , R. B. Children' s personality questionnaire 
Champaign, Elinois. : Institute for Personality and Ability 
Testing, 1960. 

Prentice, W. C.H. Some cogni t ive aspects of Motivation, in (ed) 
Harper, R. H. C. The Cognitive Processes. Prentice - Hall 
PP• 400 - 41 1 1964. 

Purkey, W. W. Self- Concept a!'li School Achievement , Prentice - Hall 
pp. 400 - 411 1964. 

Rosenthal, R. and Jacobson, L. Teacher expectationB for the 
disadvantaged. Scientific American 2t8, pp. 19 - 23. 
1968. 



Rushton , J . 'fhc rclatior.Gilip between personality ch.ir acteristics 
and Gcholan t ic :mccc.;:; in eleven- year- old children. 
!!z:.iti::h J ourn-:1 of 'luc l.)o nt' .. l PsycholOG,Y.:, 36 , pp. 178 - 184. 
1966. 

Schnruck, H. ..,orne Relat1on~hi)).> of Peer lik in3 pattern.; in the 
cla..;:;room to pupil at ti turi cs ant! achievemcnto. ..ichool 
:lcvie\·r , 12 : PP• 337 - 359 1963. 

Shaw, z.i. c. and r:ccucn, J. T. The onoet of academic under-achievement 
in bric;ht cluldrcn. Jourm:..l of J.:::ducntiona.l Ps:rcholo,s7 , 21. : 
pp. 103 - 108 1960. 

Shouksmith , G. Intellicencc , r;reativi ty and Coi;ni tivc Style . 
London Da t :;ford : 1970. 

Staines , J . :'I. The se l f - picture :i.s a factor in the clas.Jroom. 

Stott, 

} n tinh Jou r m.l 0 4
• ::due tio!'lt>.l ?sycholoa, 28, pp. 97 - 111 . 

1958. 
].).H. ancl Jykes , E. C. 

The Child in Jchool . 
Br istol 3oci~l-.~d 1uGtMcnt Guide.· , 
Univcroity of Londo n Press 19J2. 

Thomas , J . B. Jr~lf-Conccpt in Ps,ycholo r;y a nd Zduc;;.tion: a r eview 
of rcce irc:1 . tr. F' • ..• it . PublL;hi?lti Compan,j' 197 3. 

Thorpe , L. :3.; Cl .1.rk , :;. ;1 . ·md Tie0s, E. 1'1 . California tent of 
per.-;01nli t y , ele: icnt'.lry foro A - A, r evised, Los An_;eles : 
California 're::; t Eure~u , 1953. 

White , R • • i . l.ot iv1t1on recon:ndered : the concet>t of compe t ence. 
PoycholoG1cul Review, 66: PP• 297 - 333 1959. 

White , R. W. Competence and the PGychoscxual St<ses of Development , 
in (ed) Jones , M. R. NebraGka Symposium on t.fotivo.tion 1960 
Lincoln : Univ. Nebraska Press , pp. 97 - 138 1960. 



A P P E N D I C E S 



A P P E N D I X A 

Items selected from the \lhich to Discuss Test. 

(Maw and Maw 1966) 

School Date 
~~~~~~~~~-

Picture Satisfaction (Pa rt I) 

Directions: On the followinc pages are some pictures of anima l s , 

people and things. Somet hi ng is said about each picture. Perhaps 

you would like to know s omething else about each picture. Please 

write the questions you would like answered below each picture . 

,/ 



~ 

-

The Oreodont 

These anill&ls no longer live on the earth. 'What else 110uld you like to know 
about this picture? 



The Scientist 

This is a picture of a scientist . What e lse would you like to know about this picture? 



The manatee is a clumsy-looking animal. What else would you like to know about this picture? 



I I I 
1 

. ~ i J 
·. l \ 

r, .~J 

J 

0 
"O 
0 

Cl 

Q) 

...c 
8 

~ 

l 
I 

0 
.µ 

Q) 

~ 
rl 

~ 
0 
~ 

'd 

~ 
0 
:i: 

v 
Cll 
rl 
Q) 

.µ 
'1l 

:i 



Chinese Musical Instrument 

This is a picture or a musical instrument that looks like a fu!UJ1' teapot. What 
•lH would 7ou like to know about this picture? 



A P P E N D I X B 

Name School .ate Room --- - -
ABOU'r fliY.3ELF 

This is a study of so:ne of your habits and attitudes . Tilerc is 
no ri~ht or wrong answer for any statement . The best answer is what 
you feel is true of yourself. For each statement mark X above the 
word which tells how true it i s of yourself. 

1. I l ike to explore strange places . 

never sometimes often always 

2. If a grown- up says someth1ni;, I believe it. 

never sometimes often a lways 

3. When I see a neichbour dig~inG in his yard, I wonder what he 
is doing. 

---never sometimes often always 

4. \'/hen someone talks about stran&e things , I want to know more about 
them. 

never sometimes often always 

5. I question thin6S that I read or see. 

never sometimes often always 

6. When there is something new in the r oom, I notice it right away. 

never sometimes of ten always 

7. I like to find out how things work. 

-never sometim