Is too much of a good thing, a good thing?

Curiosity is characterized as the enjoyable pursuit of new knowledge. However, curiosity comes in more than one flavor. Unlike the Joyous Exploration dimension of curiosity (i.e., Kashdan, Disabato, Goodman, & McKnight, Reference Kashdan, Disabato, Goodman and McKnight2020), there is Deprivation Sensitivity or the uncomfortable urge to fill an information gap (Litman, Reference Litman2005). Both have metabolic costs that arise from orienting attention to the new, detecting information gaps, and making sense of the target of curiosity (Gruber & Ranganath, Reference Gruber and Ranganath2019). Deprivation Sensitivity has additional burdens. There is a restless need to know and a sense of frustration, triggered by a lack of information (Schweitzer, Gerpott, Rivkin, & Stollberger, Reference Schweitzer, Gerpott, Rivkin and Stollberger2023). To the outsider, an agent experiencing deprivation sensitivity appears to be anxious and neurotic – definitely not in the throes of well-being.

Strangers, close friends, and family possess mixed reactions to highly curious individuals. Highly curious people are perceived as having a high intellectual capacity and being imaginative, humorous, and non-judgmental; on the flip side, they are viewed as somewhat critical, rebellious, and distant (going into interviewer mode) (Kashdan, Sherman, Yarbro, & Funder, Reference Kashdan, Sherman, Yarbro and Funder2013).

Similarly, creativity is explicitly praised, but bosses may show implicit bias against creative workers (Mueller, Goncalo, & Kamdar, Reference Mueller, Goncalo and Kamdar2011), possibly because it can be associated with lower company loyalty (Madjar, Greenberg, & Chen, Reference Madjar, Greenberg and Chen2011) and quality (Miron, Erez, & Naveh, Reference Miron, Erez and Naveh2004). Teachers, too, show a comparable split between explicit and implicit views (Westby & Dawson, Reference Westby and Dawson1995). Creativity is often assumed to result in benevolent outcomes. However, creativity is not bound to any morality. Creativity can be used for negative ends which benefit the creator at the expense of others (such as stealing from work) or downright malevolent acts, with the goal being to cause harm (Kapoor & Kaufman, Reference Kapoor and Kaufman2022).

Creativity is often linked to mental illness, although these connections are often exaggerated or overly generalized. However, Carson (Reference Carson and Simonton2014) suggests that neurocognitive factors can be “shared vulnerabilities.” Neural hyperconnectivity (i.e., uncommon areas of the brain being connected, as in synesthesia), lower latent cognitive disinhibition, and a need for novelty can help someone be more creative – or more likely to develop psychopathology. Further, the creative process can trigger specific anxiety that is distinct from general anxiety (Daker, Cortes, Lyons, & Green, Reference Daker, Cortes, Lyons and Green2020).

Creative people have been likened to investors, choosing to put their time and resources toward a particular project (Sternberg & Lubart, Reference Sternberg and Lubart1995). Successful creators will buy low (unpopular) ideas, convince others of their value, and then sell high and move on to their next idea. A creator's decision to pursue any particular idea means they have less time to follow a different idea.

Optimal levels

Insufficient consideration is given to an inconvenient truth: there are always psychological trade-offs when investing in a behavior. In this case, we consider predictable ways that being curious and creative are costly. Think of finite resources – attention, time, money, and energy – that can be spent on other, more beneficial life pursuits that create a more well-rounded person. Some of the most powerful interventions for a good life such as exercise, diet, being in the company of pets, or spending time outside on a sunny day are often mundane habits.

Opportunity costs aside, there are social consequences that may lead to negative evaluations and/or social isolation (e.g., Mueller & Yin, Reference Mueller, Yin, Zhou and Rouse2021). The highly curious and creative often hold different ideas and perspectives than others. These differences lead to discriminatory actions by others and significant financial (e.g., rejection of novel ideas), personal (e.g., low self-worth), and interpersonal costs (social group rejection). Furthermore, at times, curiosity and creativity at their maximum produce overstimulation due to the vigilance demands and as a result, emotional well-being declines.

Despite a voluminous literature on curiosity and creativity, we know little about optimal levels of curiosity and/or creativity. We need to uncover when there is too much, when they are wrongly applied, and when costs outweigh benefits to the point of dysfunction. Determining optimal levels is the province of wisdom, metacognition, morality, and work–life balance, among other factors. We hope a conversation on trade-offs catalyzes research on what works best for whom in particular situations.