Dataset Information

Comparing competing characterizations suggests there might be more than one type of interest.

ABSTRACT: Although there is general consensus concerning the importance and function of interest in our daily lives, there is little agreement about its nature. Four studies of increasing ecological validity (total N = 993) were carried out to compare two different characterizations of interest in terms of the key appraisals involved. The findings indicate that while a two-appraisal model is suitable to explain the interest we can feel towards simple stimuli, a more complex model may better capture the nature of interest in the real world. Further analysis suggested the contrasting previous results could be resolved by arguing that previous models of interest capture different types of interest. This novel finding represents a promising first step towards a more definitive definition of interest, and suggests that while interest may always be related to motivating exploration, learning and general well-being, researchers should be more precise about the type of interest to which they refer.

SUBMITTER: Dukes D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11358424 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing competing characterizations suggests there might be more than one type of interest.

Dukes Daniel D Audrin Catherine C Clément Fabrice F Mortillaro Marcello M

Scientific reports 20240828 1

Although there is general consensus concerning the importance and function of interest in our daily lives, there is little agreement about its nature. Four studies of increasing ecological validity (total N = 993) were carried out to compare two different characterizations of interest in terms of the key appraisals involved. The findings indicate that while a two-appraisal model is suitable to explain the interest we can feel towards simple stimuli, a more complex model may better capture the na ...[more]

PMID: 39198574

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA competing interest is an important source of bias in research and disclosure is frequently employed as a strategy to manage it. Considering the importance of systematic reviews (SRs) and the varying prevalence of competing interests in different research fields, we conducted a survey to identify the range of competing interests in SRs assessing surgical interventions or devices and explored the association between the competing interest disclosures and authors' conclusions.MethodsWe retrieved SRs of surgical interventions and devices published in 2017 via PubMed. Information regarding general characteristics, funding sources, and competing interest disclosures were extracted. We conducted a descriptive analysis of the studies' characteristics and compared them between Cochrane SRs (CSRs) and non-Cochrane SRs using the Chi-square test. Results were expressed as odds ratio and their 95% confidence interval.ResultsOne hundred fifty-five SRs published in 2017 were included in the study. More than half of the SRs (58.7%) reported their funding sources and 94.2% reported authors' competing interest disclosures. Among 146 SRs that stated competing interest disclosures, only 35 (22.6%) SRs declared at least one author had a competing interest. More than 40 terms were used to describe competing interests. Cochrane SRs (CSRs) were more likely to provide a detailed description of competing interests compared to those in non-CSRs (48.0% versus 25.4%, P = 0.023). No association between positive conclusions and competing interest disclosures was found (P = 0.484, OR = 0.43, 95%CI: 0.08, 2.16). In the subgroup analyses, SRs stating no competing interest disclosure were more likely to report positive conclusions than those stating at least one type of competing interest, but the difference is not significantly different (P = 0.406, OR = 1.38, 95%CI: 0.64, 2.98).ConclusionIn surgical SRs, there is a high percentage of competing interest disclosures but without detailed information. The identification and statement of competing interests with a detailed description, particularly the non-financial ones, needs improvement. Some efficient and effective methods/tools for identifying, quantifying, and minimizing potential competing interests in systematic reviews remains valuable.

Dataset Information

Comparing competing characterizations suggests there might be more than one type of interest.

Publications

Comparing competing characterizations suggests there might be more than one type of interest.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets