Interest in Complex Novelty

Figures & data

Table 1. Mean (standard deviation) interest, coping potential, novelty, and complexity of the four products selected for the main study (pretest).

	Dry Ice Washing Machine	Bio Polymer Refrigerator	MAB Robotic Cleaning Flies	Personal Manager Bracelet
Interest	6.35 (0.84)	6.62 (0.78)	6.05 (1.12)	5.93 (1.09)
Coping potential	3.51 (1.60)	4.18 (1.71)	2.77 (1.36)	4.37 (1.59)
Novelty	6.25 (0.97)	6.35 (0.77)	6.07 (1.04)	5.55 (0.95)
Complexity	5.90 (1.28)	6.15 (1.07)	6.02 (1.07)	5.33 (1.20)

Note. Other products in the pretest were not selected because they were rated as relatively familiar (means equal or smaller than 4; vacuum cleaner, e-cigarette), relatively simple (means equal or smaller than 4; e-cigarette), relatively high coping potential (means equal or higher than 4.5; LED watch, e-cigarette, phone, ring, flexible arm computer, headphones), or relatively low interest (means lower than 5.5; vacuum cleaner, e-cigarette, stop smoking device).

Table 2. Mean (standard deviation/standard error) interest, coping potential, novelty, and complexity as a function of condition (similarity vs. control; Experiment 1).

	Similarity	Control	Glass’s Δ
Interest	5.80 (0.90/0.13)	5.43 (0.97/0.14)	0.38
Coping potential	4.59 (1.08/0.15)	4.14 (1.02/0.15)	0.44
Novelty	5.48 (0.93/0.13)	5.30 (0.87/0.12)	0.21
Complexity	4.94 (1.20/0.17)	4.87 (0.88/0.13)	0.08

Table 3. Estimated interest, coping potential, novelty, and complexity as a function of low versus high curiosity in the similarity versus control condition.

	Low Curiosity			High Curiosity
	Similarity	Control	β	Similarity	Control	β
Interest	5.46	5.19	.14	6.13	5.67	.24
Coping potential	4.55	3.72	.39	4.64	4.58	.03
Novelty	5.40	5.42	−.01	5.56	5.17	.22
Complexity	4.79	5.05	−.16	5.15	4.69	.22

Note. βs in the table represent the comparison of the control versus similarity condition in the regression. βs for the main effects for low/high curiosity: interest = .25/coping potential = .40/novelty = −.14/complexity = −.17. βs for the Similarity/Control Condition × Low/High Curiosity interaction: interest = .09/coping potential = −.30/novelty = .19/complexity = .32.

Table 4. Mean (standard deviation/standard error) interest, coping potential, novelty, and complexity as a function of condition (similarity vs. information vs. similarity + information vs. control; Experiment 2).

	Similarity	Information	Similarity + Information	Control Condition
Interest	5.74 (0.91/0.13)	5.59 (1.23/0.17)	5.59 (1.22/0.17)	5.26 (1.12/0.16)
	Glass’s Δ = 0.43	Glass’s Δ = 0.29	Glass’s Δ = 0.29
Coping potential	4.12 (0.96/0.14)	4.31 (1.20/0.17)	4.15 (0.83/0.12)	3.57 (1.12/0.16)
	Glass’s Δ = 0.49	Glass’s Δ = 0.66	Glass’s Δ = 0.52
Novelty	6.08 (0.86/0.12)	5.98 (0.97/0.14)	5.68 (1.14/0.16)	5.53 (0.78/0.11)
	Glass’s Δ = 0.71	Glass’s Δ = 0.58	Glass’s Δ = 0.19
Complexity	5.49 (0.98/0.14)	5.38 (1.09/0.15)	5.46 (1.02/0.14)	5.22 (1.03/0.15)
	Glass’s Δ = 0.26	Glass’s Δ = 0.16	Glass’s Δ = 0.23

Table 5. Mean (standard deviation/standard error) coping potential (general and with the invention) and interest as a function of recall condition (high vs. low coping potential; Experiment 3).

	High Coping Potential	Low Coping Potential	Cohen’s d
General coping potential	5.78 (0.85/0.12)	4.69 (1.67/0.23)	0.82
Interest in invention	5.91 (0.77/0.11)	5.40 (0.90/0.12)	0.61
Coping potential with invention	5.15 (0.86/0.12)	4.85 (1.07/.15)	0.31