Access to this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from Current Psychology
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-07176-x
2006; Renninger & Hidi, 2015, 2019). Interest has been
found to positively inuence learners’ attention (e.g., Hidi
et al., 2004), memory (e.g., McGillivray et al., 2015) and
engagement (e.g., Ainley, 2012). However, students’ inter-
est development at school still needs to be strengthened.
According to the report by the OECD (2017), students who
are highly motivated by external pressure (e.g., achieving
top grades) are more likely to suer from anxiety. This
emphasizes the importance of supporting students’ intrinsic
motivation or interest at school, guiding students to learn for
interest’s sake instead of being motivated by pressure. Also,
it has been found that students’ interest in many disciplines
declines as they become older, especially during middle
school (Frenzel et al., 2010; Jacobs et al., 2002). To take
learning science as an example, even though the importance
of interest in science has been repeatedly stressed in today’s
world, it is not uncommon for students to feel uninterested
Introduction
Adapting to today’s fast-changing world necessitates a
premium on continuous and persistent learning (OECD,
2020). Interest, as a critical fuel for learning in many con-
texts (Hidi & Renninger, 2006; Renninger & Hidi, 2015,
2019), is of great importance in promoting people’s con-
tinuous learning. As a multifaceted construct encompassing
motivational, cognitive and aective components, interest
refers to a psychological state of engaging and an inclina-
tion to reengage with specic content (Hidi & Renninger,
Zhixing Guo
u3007937@connect.hku.hk
1 The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
SAR, China
Abstract
The importance of interest in learning has long been recognized. Considering the benecial eects of situational interest
(e.g., its potential to develop into individual interest) and its primary dependence on environmental features, numerous
empirical studies have explored various situational interest sources (e.g., novelty, utility-value) within learning activities.
This review aims to systematically summarize the situational interest sources identied by existing empirical studies based
on the four-phase model of interest development (Hidi & Renninger Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127, 2006) and
to synthesize the inuence of these sources on learners’ situational interest. Underpinned by the ve-stage framework by
Arksey and O’Malley (International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32, 2005) and PRISMA exten-
sion for scoping reviews ([PRISMA-ScR], Tricco et al., Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473, 2018), the current
review examined 35 empirical studies on situational interest sources between 2006 and 2022. Six types of situational inter-
est sources (utility-value/relevance/meaningfulness, novelty, cognitive activation/complexity, social interaction, hands-on
activity, choice) were extracted from the empirical studies reviewed. The eects of these six types of situational interest
sources in dierent conditions and for dierent types of learners were demonstrated in the review. Latent sources under-
lying the proposed types of situational interest sources were also examined. The psychological, cognitive or behavioural
rationales underlying the eect of each type of situational interest source and the implications for future research and
practice were discussed at the end of the review.
Keywords Interest · Situational interest source · Learning · Scoping review
Accepted: 11 December 2024 / Published online: 26 December 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
What really elicits learners’ situational interest in learning activities: a
scoping review of six most commonly researched types of situational
interest sources in educational settings
ZhixingGuo1· Luke K.Fryer1
1 3
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
in science at school (Anderman & Maehr, 1994; Schmidt
et al., 2001; Renninger & Hidi, 2011). To grapple with the
decline of students’ interest, it is crucial that we identify
eective means of stimulating students’ interest and apply
them in real educational settings.
Situational interest, which refers to the emerging state of
interest development based on the four-phase model (Hidi
& Renninger, 2006), is recognized to be important due to
its positive inuence on learning in dierent aspects (e.g.,
attention, performance) (e.g., McDaniel et al., 2000) and its
potential for developing into long-term interest (Renninger
& Hidi, 2019). Applying the four-phase model of interest
development (see below) to real educational settings, the
question remains how to elicit students’ situational inter-
est through dierent learning activities. In other words,
what are the eective situational interest sources that can
be employed by educators to promote students’ interest? An
abundance of empirical studies involving dierent subjects
(e.g., science, reading, music) and with students at various
educational stages (e.g., primary school students, second-
ary school students, college students) have examined the
ways to elicit learners’ situational interest (e.g., Senko et
al., 2021; Høgheim & Reber, 2015; Hulleman et al., 2010).
Various situational interest sources have been identied
through both quantitative and qualitative methods in these
studies (Renninger & Hidi, 2022b). Researchers have also
started to consider whether external interest sources interact
with personal characteristics (e.g., self-ecacy, prior indi-
vidual interest) in exerting eects on learners’ situational
interest (Renninger et al., 2019). However, to the authors’
knowledge, no review has been conducted to summarize the
dierent types of situational interest sources identied by
these empirical studies and to further synthesize the inu-
ence of these sources on learners’ situational interest.
To extend our understanding of situational interest devel-
opment, this scoping review aims to (1) identify dierent
types of situational interest sources in educational settings
examined by relevant empirical studies between 2006 and
January, 2022; (2) demonstrate crucial features (e.g., par-
ticipants, subjects, study location) and methodological char-
acteristics (e.g., study design, data collection method) of the
existing empirical studies on situational interest sources;
(3) synthesize the inuence of dierent types of situational
interest sources on learners’ situational interest; (4) dem-
onstrate how dierent types of situational interest sources
interact with personal characteristics to inuence learners’
situational interest.
Literature review
Four-phase model of interest development
Interest, as a multifaceted construct, encompasses both situ-
ational forms that are subject to external stimuli and stable
forms that reect individual disposition (Hidi & Renninger,
2006). Hidi and Renninger (2006; Renninger & Hidi, 2015,
2019) proposed the four-phase model of interest develop-
ment dividing the process of interest development into four
phases: triggered situational interest, maintained situational
interest, emerging individual interest and well-developed
individual interest. Triggered situational interest is primar-
ily an aective experience activated by environmental fea-
tures such as incongruity, personal relevance and surprise.
These features can be discovered by individuals themselves
or facilitated by others. With continued engagement with
specic content, triggered situational interest can develop
into maintained situational interest, which mainly involves
aective and also cognitive and value components. Con-
necting situational interest to individual interest, emerging
individual interest develops with related knowledge and
value being coordinated. Individual’s interest in this phase
characterizes a shift from being mostly extrinsically driven
to mostly intrinsically driven. The last phase is well-devel-
oped individual interest during which individuals usually
voluntarily seek opportunities to extend and deepen their
understanding of specic content. Instructional conditions
that provide students with appropriate challenges can sup-
port the development of well-developed individual interest.
Importance of supporting situational interest
The importance of situational interest has long been recog-
nized by researchers (e.g., Renninger & Hidi, 2022b). Situ-
ational interest has been revealed to exert positive eects
on cognitive performance (e.g., Cordova & Lepper, 1996),
attention (e.g., McDaniel et al., 2000), and promoting the
integration of information with prior knowledge (Kintsch,
1980). Also, multiple experiences of situational interest can
lead to long-term interest (Palmer, 2009), which energizes
learning and can guide academic and career trajectories
(e.g., Krapp & Lewalter, 2001; Renninger & Hidi, 2015).
Even though interest may naturally unfold, situational
interest is typically supported and promoted through the
interaction between individuals and environment (e.g., Hidi
& Renninger, 2006; Renninger & Hidi, 2022b). According to
the four-phase model of interest development (Hidi & Ren-
ninger, 2006), triggered situational interest can be elicited
by environmental or text characteristics such as incongru-
ity, surprising information, personal relevance, and intensity
(e.g., Renninger & Hidi, 2002; Sadoski, 2001). Learning
1 3
588
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
activities involving group work and computers have also
been indicated to trigger situational interest (e.g., Cordova
& Lepper, 1996; Sloboda & Davidson, 1995). In regard to
developing maintained situational interest, the four-phase
model of interest development pointed out that instructional
activities with meaningful and personal involvement, such
as project-based learning and collaborating work, enabled
the maintenance of situational interest (e.g., Homann,
2002; Sloboda & Davidson, 1995). These illustrations pro-
vided a foundation for empirical studies to further explore
situational interest sources in educational settings.
Plenty of empirical studies on dierent types of situa-
tional interest sources have been conducted in educational
settings. The eects of the same type of situational interest
source sometimes diverged in dierent studies (e.g., Hulle-
man et al., 2010; Rellensmann & Schukajlow, 2017). This
calls for a review to synthesize the inuence of dierent
types of situational interest sources in diverse conditions.
Personal readiness and the development of
situational interest
Apart from environmental features, personal readiness/char-
acteristics also play a role in the development of situational
interest. Learners’ prior interest in certain content could be
one of the factors of personal readiness inuencing situa-
tional interest development. As Renninger and Hidi (2022b)
indicated in their recent book chapter, the triggering of
interest can occur in each phase of interest development, not
merely in the early phase. Considering that dierent phases
of interest development involve distinct aective, knowl-
edge and value components, triggering situational interest
for learners in dierent interest phases may call for dier-
ent interest sources. Another factor of personal readiness/
characteristic inuencing situational interest development
is prior knowledge (Dochy et al., 1999). Recent modeling
studies (Fryer & Ainley, 2019; Nuutila et al., 2020) have
indicated that prior knowledge plays an essential role in
interest development. Self-ecacy is also a personal char-
acteristic that cannot be neglected when examining situ-
ational interest sources (e.g., Fryer et al., 2016; Nuutila et
al., 2020). The reciprocal association between interest and
self-ecacy has been substantiated both theoretically (Hidi
et al., 2002, 2007) and empirically (e.g., Fryer & Ainley,
2019; Nuutila et al., 2020) by relevant studies.
Method
A scoping review protocol has been registered beforehand.
(https:/ /doi.or g/10.17 605/O SF.IO/AWUQK). The current
scoping review was grounded in the ve-stage framework
proposed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005), which was fur-
ther developed by Levac et al. (2010) and Daudt et al. (2013),
and PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-
ScR) (Tricco et al., 2018). It includes ve stages: (1) identi-
fying the research question; (2) identifying relevant studies;
(3) selecting appropriate studies; (4) charting the data; (5)
collating, summarizing, and reporting the result.
Identifying the research question
To guide this review, the following research questions were
proposed:
(1) What situational interest sources have been identied
by existing empirical studies based on the four-phase
model of interest development? How many empirical
studies have been conducted for each type of situational
interest source?
(2) What are the crucial features (e.g., participants, sub-
jects, study location) of existing empirical studies on
situational interest sources?
(3) What are the methodological characteristics (e.g., study
design, data collection method) of existing empirical
studies on situational interest sources?
(4) According to the existing empirical studies, how do
dierent types of situational interest sources inuence
students’ situational interest respectively in educational
settings?
(5) How do dierent types of situational interest sources
inuence learners’ situational interest depending on
their personal readiness/characteristics?
Identifying relevant studies
When targeting relevant studies, the date of coverage started
from 2006, when triggered and maintained situational inter-
est was clearly dened by Hidi and Renninger’s (2006)
four-phase model of interest development, and ended in
January, 2022. Articles published in peer-reviewed journals
were included in the search because these articles are usu-
ally of high quality (e.g., rigorous study design). Confer-
ence proceedings, if any, were also examined to ensure the
breadth of the current review. Only studies in English were
included, as English is the predominant language for rel-
evant articles and is understood by both authors.
The following electronic databases and collections were
searched. These databases were selected because most
articles in the eld of education were included in these
databases: Web of Science, EBSCOhost Academic Search
Complete, EBSCOhost Eric, EBSCOhost Education Full
Text (H.W Wilson), Taylor & Francis, British Educa-
tion Index (BEI). Search items utilized in searching titles,
1 3
589
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
consensus on charting the following data: year, location,
sample, subject, intervention/study design, type of data,
individual readiness/characteristics measured in the pre-
test, inuence of each type of situational interest source on
learners’ situational interest. The two reviewers rst charted
the data of all 35 articles independently and then nalized
the charted information through discussion (See charted
information for each included study in the supplementary
material).
abstracts and keywords are indicated in Table 1. Nuanced
adjustments were made to adapt to the search strategies in
dierent databases and collections. Reference lists in the
relevant studies were also examined, which helped to iden-
tify new references and lower the chances of missing the
studies of interest.
Study selection
Due to the breadth of the search terms employed, 474 rel-
evant papers were identied in the preliminary search pro-
cess. All the identied citations were exported into EndNote
V.X9. for duplicate removal. After removing duplicates,
239 articles were left for further screening. Two review-
ers conducted the screening process separately based on
the inclusion and exclusion criteria in Table 2. In the rst-
round screening, titles and abstracts of identied papers
were examined, with 166 irrelevant studies being excluded
and 73 articles left. All the studies deemed relevant after the
rst-round screening were reviewed for the full text. In the
end, 35 articles were included in the current scoping review.
The results of this selection process were presented in a Pre-
ferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-
Analyses (PRISMA) Flow Diagram (Tricco et al., 2018, see
Fig. 1).
Charting the data
According to Arksey and O’Malley (2005), the mixture of
general information and specic items concerning research
questions can be included in the chart. Given that the current
review specically addressed the inuence of the six most
commonly researched types of situational interest sources
by relevant empirical studies, the two reviewers reached
Table 1 Search items
Search Items (“interest”
OR “interest
develop-
ment” OR
“situational
interest”
OR “task
interest” OR
“interesting”
OR “interest-
ing task”)
AND (“learn-
ing” OR
“sources” OR
“interest” OR
“interesting”)
Table 2 Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria
Population Students across dierent educa-
tional phases
Individuals who
are not students,
e.g., adults in
working settings
Concept a. Situational interest sources
based on the four-phase model
of interest development (Hidi &
Renninger, 2006), because this is
a widespread model delineating
interest from a developmental
perspective
b. The study design should be
reasonable enough to clearly
separate the inuence of each
type of interest source within one
learning activity, otherwise it is
dicult to identify the inuence
of a specic interest source
a. Situational
interest sources
that are not based
on four-phase
model of interest
development
b. Some interest
sources may
co-occur in one
learning activity
(Renninger &
Hidi, 2022a). The
studies mixing the
inuence of dif-
ferent situational
interest sources
within one learn-
ing activity will
be excluded
Context Both in and out-of-school con-
texts in the educational settings
across dierent countries and
cultural backgrounds
The contexts out
of educational
settings, e.g.,
working settings
Types of
sources of
evidence
Primary studies in the peer-
reviewed journals and in the
conference proceedings
Research that
are not primary
studies, or not
published in
refereed journals
or conference
proceedings
Publication
year
Published between 2006,
when triggered and maintained
situational interest was clearly
dened by Hidi and Renninger’s
(2006) four-phase model of
interest development, and Janu-
ary, 2022
Published in other
time
Language Published in English, because
English is the language that most
relevant articles used and both
authors understand
Published in other
languages
1 3
590
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
a. Utility-value/relevance/meaningfulness: situational
interest is elicited by the connection with individuals’
future goals, daily life, preferences or prior interests
(e.g., Wigeld, 1994; Høgheim & Reber, 2015; Hunsu,
2017);
b. Novelty: situational interest is elicited by something
new (i.e., novelty); not knowing what was going to hap-
pen (i.e., suspense) or something unexpected happen-
ing (i.e., surprise); changes of learning task forms (i.e.,
variety) (Palmer, 2009);
Results
Types of situational interest sources identied by
existing empirical studies
By listing all the situational interest sources mentioned in
the reviewed articles and then categorizing the sources with
similar denitions into one type, six types of situational
interest sources were extracted from the 35 included studies:
Fig. 1 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Flow Diagram
1 3
591
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
students (around 12–15 years old) (26%), six with primary
school students (17%), four with high school students
(around 16–18 years old) (11%), one with postgraduate stu-
dents (3%), and one with students from primary to second-
ary school (3%).
In terms of the distribution of the study location, 12 arti-
cles examined the participants in the United States (34%),
six in Denmark (17%), three in Australia (9%), three in Fin-
land (9%), two in Germany (6%), two in Norway (6%), two
in China (6%), one in the United Kingdom (3%), one in
Japan (3%), one in Cyprus (3%) and two studies without
specied study location (6%).
Regarding the subject involved in the research, 19 stud-
ies were conducted with science (54%), seven with math
(20%), two with reading (6%), two with music (6%) (see
Fig. 3) and ve with other subjects.
Methodological characteristics of existing empirical
studies on the six types of situational interest
sources
To explore the six types of situational interest sources, 20
studies applied the quantitative approach; 10 utilized the
mixed method; ve applied the qualitative approach. Among
the 30 studies utilizing quantitative and mixed methods, 17
c. Cognitive activation/complexity: situational interest is
stimulated through prompting learners to think about
certain content, posing questions, introducing a prob-
lem, and answering questions learners previously had
(Quinlan, 2019);
d. Social interaction: situational interest is elicited by
learners’ interaction with other learners (e.g., group
work);
e. Hands-on activity: situational interest is elicited by
learning through experience;
f. Choice: situational interest is aroused by providing
learners with dierent choices and asking them to
choose based on their preferences.
The distribution of the number of articles concerning each
type of situational interest source is demonstrated in Fig. 2.
Distribution of participants’ educational stage,
subjects involved, and study location in existing
empirical studies on the six types of situational
interest sources
Among the 35 empirical studies examining the six types
of situational interest sources, 14 studies were conducted
with undergraduate students (40%), nine with middle school
Fig. 2 Distribution of the Number of Empirical Studies on Each Type of Situational Interest Source
1 3
592
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
situational interest sources have been identied by the
empirical studies retrieved. Positive inuence refers to
increasing situational interest whereas negative inu-
ence indicates decreasing/impairing situational interest.
In all of the 35 articles reviewed, twenty studies explored
the inuence of the six types of sources on students’ trig-
gered situational interest. Eight studies (e.g., Hunsu et al.,
2017; Høgheim & Reber, 2017) examined both triggered
and maintained situational interest. Seven studies did not
specify the type of situational interest measured.
studies employed non-experimental study design whereas
13 employed experimental/quasi-experimental study design
(see Appendix in the supplementary material).
Inuence of the six types of situational interest
sources on learners’ situational interest
The inuence of the six types of situational interest sources
on participants’ situational interest is presented in Fig. 4.
Both positive and negative inuences of the six types of
Fig. 4 Inuence of Situational Interest Sources on Learners’ Situational Interest
Fig. 3 Distribution of the Subject
Involved in the Relevant Empiri-
cal Studies on Situational Interest
Sources
1 3
593
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
relevance and connection to the self. However, the role that
self-connection plays in the eect of the source of cognitive
activation in stimulating situational interest still deserves
more exploration.
Inuence of situational interest sources for dierent
types of learners
Some included studies illustrated that the inuence of situ-
ational interest sources was also related to individuals’
readiness for specic content (e.g., prior knowledge, prior
individual interest, perceived competence) (see Table 4).
One study (Durik et al., 2015) indicated that the interven-
tion of directly-communicated utility-value was benecial
to the triggered situational interest for those with high per-
ceived competence but detrimental to those with low per-
ceived competence. However, when participants with low
perceived competence received an expectancy boost prior
to the learning, the presence of directly-communicated
utility-value could also increase the participants’ triggered
situational interest. Another study (Hulleman et al., 2010)
examined the eects of self-generated utility-value inter-
vention on learners’ situational interest. The result showed
that dierent from directly-communicated utility-value
intervention, self-generated utility-value helped to promote
maintained situational interest for those with low expec-
tancies for success. According to Durik et al. (2015), this
may be because directly-communicated utility-value could
be daunting, if not threatening, to those with low perceived
competence. Directly-communicated utility-value seemed
to “force” the students to expand their skills. Self-generated
utility-value, on the other hand, may be more benecial
to the students with low perceived competence because it
encourages them to think about why their existing skills
could be useful.
Another situational interest source exerting dierent
inuence for dierent types of learners was complexity. One
study (Durik & Matarazzo, 2009) reported that the source of
perceived complexity negatively inuenced maintained sit-
uational interest for those with low prior knowledge in biol-
ogy while a contrary eect was observed for those with high
prior knowledge. This seemed to conform to the intuition
that individuals with high prior knowledge can deal with
the complexity more easily and positively whereas for those
with low prior knowledge, the complexity may decrease the
ease of comprehension (Schraw et al., 1995) and may fur-
ther impair their interest.
For the source of choice, one study (Høgheim & Reber,
2015) demonstrated its positive inuence on triggered and
maintained situational interest for students with high indi-
vidual interest or high perceived competence.
Latent sources underlying proposed types of
situational interest sources
Some of the empirical studies also explored and discussed
latent situational interest sources that actually took eect
underlying the proposed six types of situational interest
sources (see Table 3). Three studies (Palmer, 2009; Dohn,
2011; Dohn, 2010) indicated novelty components (e.g., new
task form) and social interaction as the underlying sources
of hands-on activities to support triggered situational inter-
est. That is, it was the novelty of the new task form and
students’ communication and collaboration during social
interaction that enabled the hands-on activities to elicit stu-
dents’ triggered situational interest. One study (Dohn, 2010)
also indicated that hands-on activities without novelty failed
to arouse students’ triggered situational interest. Another
example of latent sources concerned the proposed source
of social interaction. Siklander et al. (2017) conducted fur-
ther analysis of the source of social interaction and identi-
ed two latent sources that supported triggered situational
interest: co-constructing new knowledge with group mem-
bers through collaborative discussion and being motivated
by other members through collaboration. For the source of
cognitive activation, one study (Dohn, 2010) proposed that
knowledge acquisition helped to increase students’ trig-
gered situational interest only when the knowledge was
relevant and meaningful to individuals, such as answering
individuals’ prior questions. This might be related to the
benecial eects of self-related information processing
(e.g., Hidi et al., 2019; Reninnger & Hidi, 2022a, 2022b;
Sui & Humphreys, 2015) in stimulating learners’ interest.
Individuals tend to prioritize information relevant to them-
selves, thereby devoting more engagement to the content.
In this case, the latent situational interest source underly-
ing cognitive activation (knowledge acquisition) may be
Table 3 Latent situational interest sources underlying proposed types
of situational interest sources
Article(s) Proposed situational
interest source
Latent situational interest
source(s)
Palmer, 2009
Dohn, 2011
Dohn, 2010
Hands-on activity a. Novelty of the new task
form of hands-on activity;
b. Students’ communica-
tion and collaboration in
the middle of the hands-on
activity.
Siklander et
al., 2017
Social interaction a. Co-constructing new
knowledge with group
members through collab-
orative discussion;
b. Being motivated by
other members through
social interaction.
Dohn, 2010 Cognitive activation
(knowledgeacquisition)
Relevance/connection to
the self
1 3
594
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
Utility-value/relevance/meaningfulness
The situational interest source of utility-value/relevance/
meaningfulness refers to that the interest was elicited by the
connection with individuals’ future goals, daily life, pref-
erences or prior interests (e.g., Hunsu, 2017; Høgheim &
Reber, 2015; Wigeld, 1994). Renninger and Hidi (2022a,
2022b; Hidi et al., 2017, 2019) have pointed out the impor-
tance of self-related information processing, such as util-
ity-value intervention, in triggering interest. Self-related
information processing refers to the process that individu-
als deal with the information personally relevant to them
(e.g., Hidi et al., 2019; Sui & Humphreys, 2015). According
to neuroscientists, people typically prioritize the self (e.g.,
Sui & Humphreys, 2015). Self-related information process-
ing plays a crucial and positive role in people’s memory,
perception, and decision-making (e.g., Sui & Humphreys,
2015), and thus promote individuals’ engagement and inter-
est (Renninger & Hidi, 2022a, 2022b). Renninger and Hidi
(2022a, 2022b) also indicated that personal relevance to the
content was essential in eliciting information search, which
activated reward circuitry and might further increase learn-
ers’ interest (Kang et al., 2009). This may provide an expla-
nation for why utility-value /relevance /meaningfulness can
elicit learners’ situational interest.
Novelty
A situational interest source was categorized as novelty if
the interest was elicited by something new (i.e., novelty),
not knowing what was going to happen (i.e., suspense) or
something unexpected happening (i.e., surprise), or changes
in the task form (i.e., variety) (Palmer, 2009). Novelty has
been linked with rewards and reward circuitry to work as
a source of interest and motivation (Renninger & Hidi,
2022a, 2022b). According to Schultz (2007), rewards refer
to any objects, situations, or events that “attain positive
motivational properties from internal brain processes” and
drive people to engage more in them. The importance of
rewards has been highlighted by neuroscientists, suggest-
ing that human beings’ everyday behaviour is motivated
by the impetus of reward-seeking processes (Fareri et al.,
2008; Ernst & Spear, 2009). Both primary rewards for
basic survival and higher order rewards, such as novelty
and social rewards, are essential to human’s behavioural
choices (Schultz, 2007). Specically, brain structures for
reward processes were dened as reward circuitry (Ernst &
Spear, 2009). According to Kang et al. (2009), the presence
of interest was related to activation of reward circuitry. They
found that students’ curiosity (similar to interest in that they
are both featured by the internally motivated search for
new things) was associated with a brain region (caudate)
Discussion and implications
Potential rationales on how each type of situational
interest source exerts inuence on learners’
situational interest
Six types of situational interest sources were extracted from
the existing empirical studies exploring how to elicit situ-
ational interest in educational settings. Most studies directly
connected situational interest sources within learning tasks
to the changes in learners’ situational interest. However, the
psychological, cognitive and behavioural rationales under-
lying the eect of each type of situational interest source
have often been neglected. The following section illustrates
potential explanations/rationales about how each type of
situational interest source can inuence learners’ situational
interest.
Table 4 Inuence of situational interest sources for dierent types of
Learners
Type of situ-
ational interest
source
Article Inuence on situational interest
for learners with dierent personal
readiness/characteristics
Directly-
communicated
utility-value
intervention
Durik et al.,
2015
a. Positive inuence on triggered
situational interest for learners with
high perceived competence in math
b. Negative inuence on triggered
situational interest for learners with
low perceived competence in math
c. Positive inuence on triggered
situational interest for learners with
low perceived competence if an
expectancy boost is conducted prior
to the learning
Hecht et al.,
2021
Positive inuence on triggered situ-
ational interest for learners with high
initial interest for a learning task
Self-generated
utility-value
intervention
Hulleman
et al., 2010
Positive inuence on maintained
situational interest for learners with
low expectancy for success
Context
personalization
(relevance)
Høgheim &
Reber, 2015
Positive inuence on triggered
and maintained situational inter-
est for learners with low perceived
competence
Complexity Durik &
Matarazzo,
2009
a. Negative inuence on triggered
situational interest for learners with
low prior knowledge
b. Positive inuence on maintained
situational interest for learners with
high prior knowledge in biology or
high initial interest
Choice Høgheim &
Reber, 2015
Positive inuence on triggered and
maintained situational interest for
learners with high individual interest
in math
1 3
595
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
Hands-on activity
“Hands-on” generally refers to learning through experi-
ence. According to experiential learning theory, knowl-
edge is generated through the transformation of experience
(Dewey, 1938; Piaget, 1952). Kolb’s experiential learn-
ing model (1984) depicted the learning process as a cycle
comprising four phases. Learners rst engage in concrete
experience, which is characterized by direct sensory or
emotional experiences that serve as the basis for under-
standing. This is then followed by learners’ reexive obser-
vation in which learners consciously reect on and interpret
their experience. After the reexive observation, learners
engage in abstract conceptualization. In this phase, learn-
ers seek to understand the underlying principles and con-
cepts that explain their experiences. It involves thinking,
analysing and integrating new information with existing
knowledge. At last, learners experience the phase of active
experimentation during which learners plan to test what
they have learned in the forthcoming experience. The entire
cycle of experiential learning illustrates how learning stems
from experience and further promotes learners to purpose-
fully engage in new experience, which is akin to the central
denition of interest. From this perspective, the experiential
experience provided by hands-on activity may explain why
hands-on activity could be the source of interest.
Also, according to the concept of Learning by Doing
(LBD) (Bates, 2019), learners learn by doing and then
reecting on their experience. This promotes learners’ fur-
ther engagement (which is akin to the central denition of
interest) by empowering learners to apply the theoretical
knowledge and practical experiences gained through reec-
tion to new situations. Thus, learners’ desire to apply the
experience and reection obtained in hands-on activities to
tackle novel situations may explain why hands-on activities
can further stimulate learners’ interest and engagement.
Choice
Choice has been found to exert positive inuence on learn-
ers’ aective engagement, including acceptance of the
greater complexity of a task, positive attitude, perceived
competence and satisfaction (e.g., Cordova & Lepper,
1996; Flowerday & Schraw, 2000). The signicant inu-
ence of choice on aective engagement may explain why
choice can be a source of interest. However, negative eects
of choice on engagement have also been reported by some
earlier studies (e.g., Butler & Winne, 1995; Hannan & Sul-
livan, 1996). This negative relationship might be attributed
to learners’ insucient knowledge for making a good deci-
sion when given choices or learners’ choosing a path with
previously linked with anticipated rewards. Novelty, as an
aspect of unexpected rewards, was reported to elicit more
reward anticipation responses in the reward circuitry (Krebs
et al., 2011; Wittmann et al., 2007). Considering the afore-
mentioned association of activation of reward circuitry and
appearance of interest, novelty might lead to more curios-
ity and interest. Therefore, the link of reward circuitry with
both interest and novelty might be an explanation for why
novelty can act as a source of interest (Renninger & Hidi,
2015).
Cognitive activation/complexity
The situational interest source of cognitive activation/com-
plexity mostly refers to prompting learners to think about
certain content, posing questions, introducing a problem,
and answering questions learners previously had (Quinlan,
2019). This might be related to human’s need for cognition.
The need for cognition was dened as a tendency to “struc-
ture relevant situations in meaningful, integrated ways”
(Cohen et al., 1955, p. 291). To satisfy the need for cogni-
tion, people are inclined to organize the experiential world
in a meaningful way. When faced with a complicated learn-
ing task, learners may be motivated by the need for cogni-
tion to actively nd solutions, which provides a potential
account for why cognitive activation/complexity can act as
a situational interest source.
Also, according to Schultz (2007), cognitive rewards,
as a type of reward, had the potential to lead individuals’
behaviour to certain objects and to elicit positive feelings
of pleasure and hedonia. Learners might attain cogni-
tive rewards when a prior question they had in mind was
answered, which would, in turn, arouse positive emotions
and increase their interest.
Social interaction
Theories of social representations and social construction
of autobiographical experience may provide explanations
for how social interaction elicits situational interest. These
theories assumed that people co-constructed their percep-
tions of a topic in conversations to reach shared represen-
tations of the topic (Clark, 1996; Pasupathi, 2001). Apart
from objective information, subjective appraisals and evalu-
ations of the experience (e.g., whether it was interesting or
not) also play important roles during the co-construction
of autobiographical experience. Through the interactions,
interlocutors’ representations of an activity can be strength-
ened or undermined by each other’s opinions (Nolen, 2020).
Similarly, individuals’ interests may also be supported or
impaired by other’s opinions through social interaction in
a learning task.
1 3
596
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
However, whether the inuence remains impactful when
the same situational interest source appears repeatedly for
a month or a semester still needs to be veried in long-term
studies.
Also, the short duration of the studies determines that
the intervals between interventions and measurements of
maintained situational interest are short. Maintained situ-
ational interest, according to Hidi and Renninger (2006;
Renninger & Hidi, 2015, 2019), is developed from triggered
situational interest through continued engagement with spe-
cic content. However, among the eight studies probing into
the inuence on maintained situational interest, only four
studies lasted for more than one session. Even though the
other four studies included maintained situational interest
as an outcome, the short duration of the studies impeded the
participants from experiencing continued engagement with
certain content and thus might have led to an inaccurate
assessment of maintained situational interest. Therefore,
studies of longer duration are needed to capture the long-
term eects of a specic interest source.
Measurement of situational interest
Most studies reviewed assessed learners’ triggered situ-
ational interest through retrospective self-report question-
naire after each session or each task. Only 20% of the
studies utilized immediate measurement, such as short ques-
tions and informal interviews during tasks or interventions.
Considering the situation-specic and transient nature of
triggered situational interest, a micro-analytic measurement
approach (e.g., video data, short questions) conducted dur-
ing or right after a learning task might be more appropri-
ate to capture the real-time picture of triggered situational
interest.
Latent situational interest sources underlying learning
tasks
Among the 10 studies focusing on the interest source of
social interaction, multiple studies merely identied inter-
est sources/external stimuli at the task level (e.g., discussion
task, sharing photos in the Facebook group, competition)
without targeting latent interest sources at the psychological
or cognitive level (e.g., motivating group members, co-con-
structing new knowledge: Siklander et al., 2017). Simi-
larly, for the nine studies focusing on the interest source of
hands-on activity, many of them only proposed the inter-
est source at the task level (e.g., performing experiments,
playing musical instruments) without delving into underly-
ing sources (e.g., promoting the real experience of learning
materials). Renninger et al. (2019) indicated that more dif-
ferentiated information is needed about potential triggers to
the least diculties when they do not have high motivation
for the task (Flowerday & Schraw, 2000).
However, questions still exist about the underlying mech-
anism through which the source of choice inuences learn-
ers’ interest (Flowerday & Shell, 2015). One question is that
it was unclear whether the positive inuence of choice on
situational interest was owing to the fulllment of learners’
need for autonomy or learners’ interest in the content chosen
by themselves. More studies should be conducted to target
specic reasons underlying the source of choice.
The selected theories mentioned above provide potential
explanations for the underlying mechanism through which
dierent types of situational interest sources exert inu-
ence on learners’ interest. For some of the interest sources
(e.g., social interaction, choice), more than one rationale
was proposed. Future empirical studies can further test and
verify the psychological, cognitive and behavioural ratio-
nales underlying each type of interest source in educational
settings.
Characteristics of existing empirical studies on
situational interest sources and implications for
future research and practice
Participants and subjects examined by the studies
As mentioned in the results, a large amount of existing stud-
ies (40%) on situational interest sources targeted undergrad-
uate students. Considering that interest plays a crucial role
in motivating young students in early formal educational
stages (from primary school to high school) and that young
students are usually more likely to lack learning initia-
tive when facing relatively tedious learning tasks, a com-
prehensive picture of the inuence of situational interest
sources on young students’ learning is essential. To this end,
similar studies focusing on younger learners are strongly
encouraged.
With regard to the subjects involved in the studies on
situational interest sources, over half of the subjects (54%)
were related to science. To develop a full picture and to
increase the external validity of the inuence of dierent
situational interest sources, studies conducted with dierent
subjects are recommended.
Duration of the studies
In all the 35 empirical studies reviewed, 57% of the studies
were conducted within one session. The short duration pre-
vented these studies from uncovering the inuence of situa-
tional interest sources in long-lasting real-class settings. For
example, a type of situational interest source may success-
fully trigger students’ interest the rst time it is introduced.
1 3
597
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
model of interest development are not reviewed in the pres-
ent study. Also, the current review mainly focuses on the
inuence of the individual’s characteristics (e.g., self-e-
cacy, prior interest, prior knowledge) on the eectiveness
of dierent types of situational interest sources, the impact
of contextual factors (e.g., cultural, socio-economic) are not
discussed in the present study. Future research can under-
take further investigations into the impact of broader con-
textual factors on the eectiveness of situational interest
sources in educational settings.
Conclusions
The current review has provided a synthesis of six most
commonly researched types of situational interest sources
in educational settings (novelty, relevance/utility-value/
meaningfulness, social interaction, hands-on activity,
choice, cognitive activation/complexity) examined by rel-
evant empirical studies between 2006 and January, 2022.
40% of the empirical studies reviewed are conducted with
undergraduate students. To further promote interest for
younger students, who are more likely to suer from the
lack of learning initiative at school, more studies should be
conducted among primary or middle school students. Also,
latent sources underlying the proposed types of situational
interest sources deserve further exploration. Pinpointing the
underlying situational interest sources enables educators
to apply the sources more exibly and eectively in real
educational settings. Moreover, the nding reveals that the
same situational interest source may have dierent eects
for dierent types of learners (e.g., learners with dierent
levels of prior individual interest or self-ecacy). Future
researchers and educators should take learners’ personal
readiness/characteristics into consideration when designing
learning tasks to elicit students’ situational interest.
Supplementary Information The online version contains
supplementary material available at h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / s 1 2 1 4 4 - 0
2 4 - 0 7 1 7 6 - x .
Data availability The author conrms that all data generated or anal-
ysed during this study are included in this published article.
Declarations
Informed consent No participant is involved in the current review
study. Therefore, informed consent is not applicable.
Ethical approval No human participant is involved in the current re-
view study. Ethical approval statement is not available.
Competing interest The authors have no relevant nancial or non-
nancial interests to disclose.
explore why these sources take eect. More eorts should
be taken to explore the latent sources underlying commonly
proposed sources of interest instead of overgeneralizing
some situational interest sources to one certain type based
on its surface characteristics (e.g., hands-on activity, social
interaction).
The inuence of personal readiness/characteristics on the
eects of situational interest sources
Apart from external stimuli, learners’ readiness/characteris-
tics, such as prior individual interest, prior knowledge and
self-ecacy, have also been found to inuence their situ-
ational interest (e.g., Fryer et al., 2021; Nuutila et al., 2020;
Fryer & Ainley, 2019; Renninger & Hidi, 2011; Durik &
Matarazzo, 2009). However, among the 35 included studies
in the current review, 14 studies did not consider individual
characteristics in the pre-test when examining the inu-
ence of situational interest sources. To avoid potential con-
founding eects of personal readiness/characteristics and to
clarify the inuence of specic situational interest sources
for dierent learners, individual personal readiness/charac-
teristics should be examined when exploring the inuence
of situational interest sources. Also, as Renninger and Hidi
(2022b) claried in their recent book chapter, the triggering
of interest can occur in each phase of interest development,
not merely in the early phase. This indicated the importance
of considering learners’ prior individual interest for certain
content and examining how dierent sources may inuence
learners’ situational interest in dierent phases of interest
development.
Comparing dierent types of situational interest sources
Apart from exploring the inuence of a specic situational
interest source, future research can contribute to the eld by
comparing the eects of dierent situational interest sources
with dierent subjects and dierent learners. Meta-analysis
can also be conducted to further compare the eects of
dierent situational interest sources. These kinds of com-
parisons may enable more eective application of dierent
situational interest sources in dierent situations.
Limitations and future directions
The present review examines six types of situational interest
sources identied by relevant empirical studies. However,
only the studies examining interest based on the four-phase
model of interest development (Hidi & Renninger, 2006)
are included in the current review. The situational interest
sources that are not dened or studied within the four-phase
1 3
598
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
Dohn, N. B. (2013). Situational interest in engineering design activi-
ties. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2057–
2078. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 80/09 500693.2012.757670
Dohn, N. B., & Dohn, N. B. (2017). Integrating Facebook in upper sec-
ondary biology instruction: A case study of students’ situational
interest and participation in learning communication. Research in
Science Education, 47(6), 1305–1329. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / s 1
1 1 6 5 - 0 1 6 - 9 5 4 9 - 3
Dohn, N. B., Madsen, P. T., & Malte, H. (2009). The situational inter-
est of undergraduate students in zoophysiology. Advances in
Physiology Education, 33(3), 196–201. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 1 5 2 /
a d v a n . 0 0 0 3 8 . 2 0 0 9
Drymiotou, I., Constantinou, C. P., & Avraamidou, L. (2021). Enhanc-
ing students’ interest in science and understandings of STEM
careers: The role of career-based scenarios. International Journal
of Science Education, 43(5), 717–736. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 9
5 0 0 6 9 3 . 2 0 2 1 . 1 8 8 0 6 6 4
Durik, A. M., & Matarazzo, K. L. (2009). Revved up or turned o? How
domain knowledge changes the relationship between perceived
task complexity and task interest. Learning and Individual Dier-
ences, 19, 155–159. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 16/j. lindif.2008.08.005
Durik, A. M., Shechter, O. G., Noh, M., Rozek, C. S., & Harackiewicz,
J. M. (2015). What if I can’t? Success expectancies moderate the
eects of utility value information on situational interest and per-
formance. Motivation and Emotion, 39(1), 104–118. h t t p s : / / d o i . o
r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / s 1 1 0 3 1 - 0 1 4 - 9 4 1 9 - 0
Edwards, O. V., White, K. R., Rainwater, C., & Simmons, E. (2021).
Utility value intervention fails to boost student motivation and
performance in psychology courses. Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning in Psychology. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/st l0000207
Erickson, M., Wattiaux, M. A., Marks, D., & Karcher, E. L. (2021).
Brief, written reections improve interest of Introductory Animal
Science undergraduates. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(2),
ar28. https:/ /doi.or g/10.11 87/cb e.20-08-0164
Ernst, M., & Spear, L. P. (2009). Reward systems. In de M. Haan, & M.
R. Gunnar (Eds.), Handbook of developmental social neurosci-
ence (pp. 324–341). Guilford Press.
Fareri, D. S., Martin, L. N., & Delgado, M. R. (2008). Reward-related
processing in the human brain: Developmental considerations.
Development and Psychopathology, 20, 1191–1211. h t t p s : / / d o i .
o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 7 / S 0 9 5 4 5 7 9 4 0 8 0 0 0 5 7 6
Flowerday, T., & Schraw, G. (2000). Teacher beliefs about instruc-
tional choice: A phenomenological study. Journal of Educa-
tional Psychology, 92, 634–645. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/00
03-066X.55.1.68
Flowerday, T., & Shell, D. F. (2015). Disentangling the eects of inter-
est and choice on learning, engagement, and attitude. Learning
and Individual Dierences, 40, 134–140. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6
/ j . l i n d i f . 2 0 1 5 . 0 5 . 0 0 3
Frenzel, A., Goetz, T., Pekrun, R., & Watt, H. (2010). Development of
mathematics interest in adolescence: Inuences of gender, fam-
ily, and school context. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20,
507–537. https:/ /doi.or g/10.11 11/j. 1532-7795.2010.00645.x
Fryer, L. K., & Ainley, M. (2019). Supporting interest in a study
domain: A longitudinal test of the interplay between interest,
utility-value, and competence beliefs. Learning and Instruction,
60, 252–262. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 16/j. learninstruc.2017.11.002
Fryer, L. K., Ainley, M., & Thompson, A. (2016). Modelling the links
between students’ interest in a domain, the tasks they experience
and their interest in a course: Isn’t interest what university is all
about? Learning and Individual Dierences, 50, 57–165. h t t p s : / /
d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . l i n d i f . 2 0 1 6 . 0 8 . 0 1 1
Fryer, L. K., Ainley, M., Thompson, A., Gibson, A., & Sherlock,
Z. (2017). Stimulating and Sustaining interest in a language
course: An experimental comparison of Chatbot and Human task
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format,
as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the
source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate
if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless
indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended
use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted
use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright
holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit h t t p : / / c r e a t i v e c o m m o n s . o
r g / l i c e n s e s / b y / 4 . 0 / .
References
Ainley, M. (2012). Students’ interest and Engagement in Classroom
activities. Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp.
283–302). Springer US.
Anderman, E. M., & Maehr, M. L. (1994). Motivation and school-
ing in the middle grades. Review of Educational Research, 64(2),
287–309. https:/ /doi.or g/10.31 02/00 346543064002287
Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a meth-
odological framework. International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 3 6 4 5 5 7 0 3 2 0
0 0 1 1 9 6 1 6
Bates, A. W. (2019). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for design-
ing teaching and learning (2nd edn). BCcampus.
Bernacki, M. L., & Walkington, C. (2018). The role of situational
interest in Personalized Learning. Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 110 (6), 864–881. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/ed u0000250
Bølling, M., Hartmeyer, R., & Bentsen, P. (2019). Seven place-con-
scious methods to stimulate situational interest in science teach-
ing in urban environments. Education 3–13, 47(2), 162–175.
https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 80/03 004279.2017.1420096
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated
learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research,
65(3), 245–281. https:/ /doi.or g/10.31 02/00 346543065003245
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, A. R., Stotland, E., & Wolfe, D. M. (1955). An experimental
investigation of need for cognition. The Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 51(2), 291. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/h0 042761
Cordova, D., & Lepper, M. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the pro-
cess of learning: Benecial eects of contextualization, person-
alization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88,
715–730. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/00 22-0663.88.4.715
Daudt, H., van Mossel, C., & Scott, S. J. (2013). Enhancing the scoping
study methodology: A large inter-professional team’s experience
with Arskey and O’Malley’s framework. BMC Med Research,
13(1), 48–56. https:/ /doi.or g/10.21 061/s ee.26
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Collier Books.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Buehl, M. M. (1999). The relation between
Assessment practices and outcomes of studies: The case of
Research on prior knowledge. Review of Educational Research,
69(2), 145–186. https:/ /doi.or g/10.31 02/00 346543069002145
Dohn, N. B. ( 2010). Situational interest of high school students who
visit an aquarium. Science Education, 95(2), 337–357. h t t p s : / / d o
i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / s c e . 2 0 4 2 5
Dohn, N. B. ( 2011). Upper secondary students’ situational interest:
A case study of the role of a zoo visit in a biology class. Interna-
tional Journal of Science Education, 35(16), 2732–2751. h t t p s : / /
d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 9 5 0 0 6 9 3 . 2 0 1 1 . 6 2 8 7 1 2
1 3
599
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
Child Development, 73, 509–527. https:/ /doi.or g/10.11 11/14
67-8624.00421
Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S.
M., Wang, J. T., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle
of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and
enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20, 963–973. h t t p s : / /
d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 1 1 1 / j . 1 4 6 7 - 9 2 8 0 . 2 0 0 9 . 0 2 4 0 2 . x
Kintsch, W. (1980). Learning from texts, levels of comprehension, or:
Why anyone would read a story anyway. Poetics, 9, 87–98. https:/
/doi.or g/10.10 16/03 04-422X(80)90013-3
Knoster, K. C., & Goodboy, A. K. (2021). Making content relevant: A
teaching and learning experiment with replication. Communica-
tion Education, 70(1), 4–26. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 3 6 3 4 5 2 3 . 2
0 2 0 . 1 7 8 8 1 0 6
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of
learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
Krapp, A. (2005). Basic needs and the development of interest and intrin-
sic motivational orientations. Learning and Instruction, 15(5),
381–395. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 16/j. learninstruc.2005.07.007
Krapp, A., & Lewalter, D. (2001). Development of interests and inter-
est-based motivational orientations: A longitudinal study in voca-
tional school and work settings. In S. Volet, & S. Järvelä (Eds.),
Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and meth-
odological implications (pp. 201–232). Elsevier.
Krebs, R. M., Heipertz, D., Schuetze, H., & Düzel, E. (2011). Novelty
increases the mesolimbic functional connectivity of the substantia
nigral/ventral tegmental area (SN/VTA) during reward anticipa-
tion: Evidence from high-resolution fMRI. Neuroimage, 58, 647–
655. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 16/j. neuroimage.2011.06.038
Levac, D., Coloquhoun, H., & Brien, O. (2010). Scoping studies:
Advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5(1),
69–77. https:/ /doi.or g/10.11 86/17 48-5908-5-69
Logan, M. R., & Skamp, K. R. (2013). The impact of teachers and their
science teaching on students’‘science interest’: A four-year study.
International Journal of Science Education, 35(17), 2879–2904.
https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 80/09 500693.2012.667167
Magner, U. I. E., Glogger, I., & Renkl, A. (2016). Which features make
illustrations in multimedia learning interesting? Educational Psy-
chology, 36(9), 1596–1613. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 1 4 4 3 4 1 0 . 2 0
1 4 . 9 3 3 1 7 7
McDaniel, M. A., Waddill, P. J., Finstad, K., & Bourg, T. (2000). The
eects of text-based interest on attention and recall. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 92(3), 492–502. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 3
7 / 0 0 2 2 - 0 6 6 3 . 9 2 . 3 . 4 9 2
McGillivray, S., Murayama, K., & Castel, A. D. (2015). Thirst for
knowledge: The eects of curiosity and interest on memory in
younger and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 30(4), 835–841.
https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/a0 039801
Mills, R., Tomas, L., Whiteford, C., & Lewthwaite, B. (2020). Devel-
oping middle school students’ interest in learning science and
geology through Slowmation. Research in Science Education,
50(4), 1501–1520. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 07/s1 1165-018-9741-8
Nolen, S. B. (2020). A situative turn in the conversation on motivation
theories. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101866.
https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 16/j. cedpsych.2020.101866
Nuutila, K., Tapola, A., Tuominen, H., Kupiainen, S., Pásztor, A., &
Niemivirta, M. (2020). Reciprocal predictions between interest,
Self-Ecacy, and performance during a Task. Frontiers in Edu-
cation, 5(36). https:/ /doi.or g/10.33 89/fe duc.2020.00036
OECD. (2017). Overview: Students’ well-being. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2020). Continuous learning in working life in Finland. Get-
ting skills right. OECD Publishing.
Palmer, D. H. (2009). Student interest generated during an inquiry
skills lesson. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(2),
147–165. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 02/te a.20263
partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 461–468. h t t p s : / / d o
i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . c h b . 2 0 1 7 . 0 5 . 0 4 5
Fryer, L. K., Shum, A., Lee, A., & Lau, P. (2021). Mapping students’
interest in a new domain: Connecting prior knowledge, interest,
and self-ecacy with interesting tasks and a lasting desire to
reengage. Learning and Instruction, 75, 101493. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1
0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . l e a r n i n s t r u c . 2 0 2 1 . 1 0 1 4 9 3
Fulmer, S. M., & Tulis, M. (2013). Changes in interest and aect dur-
ing a dicult reading task: Relationships with perceived di-
culty and reading uency. Learning and Instruction, 27, 11–20.
https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 16/j. learninstruc.2013.02.001
Hannan, R. D., & Sullivan, H. J. (1996). Preferences and learner con-
trol over amount of instruction. Journal of Educational Psychol-
ogy, 88(1), 162–173. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/00 22-0663.88.1.162
Hecht, C. A., Grande, M. R., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2021). The role of
utility value in promoting interest development. Motivation Sci-
ence, 7(1), 1–20. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/mo t0000182
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of Interest
Development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. h t t p s : / /
d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 2 0 7 / s 1 5 3 2 6 9 8 5 e p 4 1 0 2 _ 4
Hidi, S., Berndor, D., & Ainley, M. (2002). Children’s argument writ-
ing, interest and self- ecacy: An intervention study. Learning
and Instruction, 12(4), 429–446. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / S 0 9 5 9 - 4
7 5 2 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 0 9 - 3
Hidi, S., Renninger, K. A., & Krapp, A. (2004). Interest, a motivational
variable that combines aective and cognitive functioning. In D.
Y. Dai, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Motivation, emotion, and cog-
nition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and
development (pp. 89–115). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hidi, S., Ainley, M., Berndor, D., & Del Favero, L. (2007). The role
of interest and self- ecacy in science-related expository writ-
ing. In S. Hidi, & P. Boscolo (Eds.), Writing and motivation (pp.
203–217). Elsevier. https:/ /doi.or g/10.11 63/97 81849508216_012
Hidi, S. E., Renninger, K. A., & Northo, G. (2017). The development
of interest and self-related processing. In F. Guay, H. W. Marsh,
D. M. McInerney, & R. G. Craven (Eds.), International advances
in self research. Vol. 6: SELF– driving positive psychology and
well-being (pp. 51–70). Information Age.
Hidi, S. E., Renninger, K. A., & Northo, G. (2019). The educational
benets of self-related information processing. In K. A. Ren-
ninger & S. E. Hidi (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of moti-
vation and learning (pp. 15–35). Cambridge University Press.
https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 17/97 81316823279.003
Homann, L. (2002). Promoting girls’ interest and achievement in
physics classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction, 12(4),
447–465. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 16/S0 959-4752(01)00010-X
Høgheim, S., & Reber, R. (2015). Supporting interest of middle school
students in mathematics through context personalization and
example choice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42,
17–25. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 16/j. cedpsych.2015.03.006
Høgheim, S., & Reber, R. (2017). Eliciting mathematics interest: New
directions for context personalization and example choice. The
Journal of Experimental Education, 85(4), 597–613. h t t p s : / / d o i . o
r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 0 2 2 0 9 7 3 . 2 0 1 6 . 1 2 6 8 0 8 5
Hulleman, C. S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B. L., & Harackiewicz, J. M.
(2010). Enhancing interest and performance with a utility value
intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 880–
895. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/a0 019506
Hunsu, N. J., Adesope, O., & Van Wie, B. J. (2017). Engendering situ-
ational interest through innovative instruction in an engineering
classroom: What really mattered? Instructional Science, 45, 789–
804. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 07/s1 1251-017-9427-z
Jacobs, J., Lanza, S., Osgood, D., Eccles, J., & Wigeld, A. (2002).
Changes in children’s self-competence and values: Gender
and domain dierences across grades one through twelve.
1 3
600
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Current Psychology (2025) 44:587–601
Educational Psychology Review, 13, 263–281. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 .
1 0 2 3 / A : 1 0 1 6 6 7 5 8 2 2 9 3 1
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H. C., Wiley,
D. E., Cogan, L. S., & Wolfe, R. G. (2001). Why school matter:
A cross national comparison of curriculum and learning. Jossey
Bass.
Schraw, G., Bruning, R., & Svoboda, C. (1995). Sources of situational
interest. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27(1), 1–17. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r
g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 0 8 6 2 9 6 9 5 0 9 5 4 7 8 6 6
Schultz, W. (2007). Reward Scholarpedia, 2(3), 1652.
Senko, C., Perry, A. H., & Greiser, M. (2021). Does triggering learn-
ers’ interest make them overcondent? Journal of Educational
Psychology. Advance online publication. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 3 7
/ e d u 0 0 0 0 6 4 9
Siklander, P., Kangas, M., Ruhalahti, S., & Korva, S. (2017). Explor-
ing triggers for arousing interest in the online learning. In Inter-
national technology, education and development conference (pp.
9081–9089).
Sloboda, J. A., & Davidson, J. W. (1995). The young performing musi-
cian. In I. Deliege, & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), The origins and devel-
opment of musical competence (pp. 171–190). Oxford University
Press.
Sui, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (2015). The integrative self: How self-
reference integrates perception and meaning. Trends in Cognitive
Science, 19(2), 719–728. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . t i c s . 2 0 1 5 . 0 8 . 0
1 5
Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H.,
Levac, D., & Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scop-
ing reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals
of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 7 3 2 6 /
M 1 8 - 0 8 5 0
Wang, Z., & Adesope, O. (2017). Do focused self-explanation prompts
overcome seductive details? A Multimedia Study. Journal of
Educational Technology & Society, 20(4), 47–57. h t t p : / / w w w . j s
t o r . o r g / s t a b l e / 2 6 2 2 9 2 0 4
Wiged, A. (1994). Expectancy–value theory of achievement moti-
vation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology
Review, 6, 49–78. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 07/BF 02209024
Wittmann, B. C., Bunzeck, N., Dolan, R. J., & Düzel, E. (2007). Antic-
ipation of novelty recruits reward system and hippocampus while
promoting recollection. Neuroimage, 38, 194–202. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g
/ 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . n e u r o i m a g e . 2 0 0 7 . 0 6 . 0 3 8
Zimmerman, H. T., Land, S. M., & Jung, Y. J. (2016). Using augmented
reality to support children’s situational interest and science learn-
ing during context-sensitive informal mobile learning. Mobile,
ubiquitous, and pervasive learning (pp. 101–119). Springer.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
dictional claims in published maps and institutional aliations.
Pasupathi, M. (2001). The social construction of the personal past and
its implications for adult development. Psychological Bulletin,
127, 651–672. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 37/00 33-2909.127.5.651
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. W.W. Norton
& Co.
Quinlan, K. M. (2019). What triggers students’ interest during higher
education lectures? Personal and situational variables associated
with situational interest. Studies in Higher Education, 44(10),
1781–1792. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 80/03 075079.2019.1665325
Rellensmann, J., & Schukajlow, S. (2017). Does students’ interest in
a mathematical problem depend on the problem’s connection to
reality? An analysis of students’ interest and pre-service teachers’
judgments of students’ interest in problems with and without a
connection to reality. Zdm Mathematics Education, 49(3), 367–
378. https:/ /doi.or g/10.10 07/s1 1858-016-0819-3
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2002). Student interest and achievement:
Developmental issues raised by a case study. In A. Wigeld, &
J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp.
173–195). Academic.
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2011). Revisiting the conceptualiza-
tion, measurement, and generation of interest. Educational Psy-
chologist, 46(3), 168–184. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 0 4 6 1 5 2 0 . 2 0 1
1 . 5 8 7 7 2 3
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2015). The power of interest for moti-
vation and engagement. Routledge.
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2019). Interest Development and
Learning. The Cambridge Handbook of Motivation and Learning
(pp. 265–290). Cambridge University Press. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0
1 7 / 9 7 8 1 3 1 6 8 2 3 2 7 9 . 0 1 3
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2022a). Interest development, self-
related information processing, and practice. Theory into Prac-
tice, 61(1), 23–34. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 0 4 0 5 8 4 1 . 2 0 2 1 . 1 9 3 2
1 5 9
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2022b). Interest: A unique aective
and cognitive motivational variable that develops. In A. Elliot
(Ed.), Advances in motivation science (Vol. 8). Elsevier.
Renninger, K. A., Bachrach, J. E., & Hidi, S. E. (2019). Triggering
and maintaining in early phases of interest development. In H.
Hedges & M. Birbili (Guest Eds.), Special Issue: Conceptualising
and researching interest/s as a learning phenomenon. Learning,
Culture and Social Interaction, 23, 1– 1 7 . h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6
/ j . l c s i . 2 0 1 8 . 1 1 . 0 0 7
Roberts, J. C. (2015). Situational interest of fourth grade children in
music at school. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63,
180–197. https:/ /doi.or g/10.11 77/00 22429415585955
Roberts, J. C. (2017). Elementary students’ situational interest in les-
sons of world music. Bulletin of the Council for Research in
Music Education, 212, 7–26. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 5 4 0 6 / b u l c o u r e s m
u s e d u . 2 1 2 . 0 0 0 7
Sadoski, M. (2001). Resolving the eects of concreteness on inter-
est, comprehension, and learning important ideas from text.
1 3
601
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:
use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at
onlineservice@springernature.com
Content uploaded by Zhixing Guo
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Zhixing Guo on Dec 26, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
