Cited by 803Psychological and Educational Research StudiesReinforcement Learning in RoboticsVisual perception and processing mechanisms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 109 of the 132 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 51 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Information-seeking, curiosity, and attention: computational and neural mechanisms

Open access
Gottlieb, Jacqueline, Oudeyer, Pierre-Yves, Lopes, Manuel, Baranes, Adrien·2013·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

Summary Intelligent animals devote much time and energy to exploring and obtaining information, but the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. We review recent developments on this topic that have emerged from the traditionally separate fields of machine learning, eye movements in natural behavior, and studies of curiosity in psychology and neuroscience. These studies show that exploration may be guided by a family of mechanisms that range from automatic biases toward novelty or surprise, to systematic search for learning progress and information gain in curiosity-driven behavior. In addition, eye movements reflect visual information search in multiple conditions and are amenable for cellular-level investigations, suggesting that the oculomotor system is an excellent model system for understanding information sampling mechanisms.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review integrates machine learning, eye-movement, and curiosity research to argue that information seeking ranges from automatic novelty/surprise biases to targeted search for learning progress and information gain. It proposes the oculomotor system as a model for information sampling and highlights intrinsic rewards and uncertainty monitoring as key open questions.

Key findings

  • Information seeking is defined as actions whose primary goal is to obtain information and reduce uncertainty; it can be extrinsically motivated, as when a driver glances at a traffic light, or intrinsically motivated, as in curiosity or interest.
  • Task-related gaze is proactively guided by uncertainty: in visuo-manual tasks the eyes move ahead of the hand to collision or target points and wait there, and in a virtual-reality walking study subjects preferentially deployed gaze to oncoming pedestrians with a history of veering onto a collision course.
  • Curiosity-like mechanisms include Lowenstein’s information gap hypothesis, illustrated by a mystery novel with 10 equally likely suspects where the reader moves from high entropy to a single culprit, and developmental robotics approaches that reward learning progress rather than absolute competence.
  • Novelty, surprise, and uncertainty heuristics help discover new tasks but are inefficient in large open-ended spaces and risk trapping agents in unlearnable tasks; learning-progress systems may support efficient exploration but a quantitative neural response to learning progress has not been demonstrated empirically.

Methods

  • Narrative review synthesizing three traditionally separate lines: active learning and exploration in machine learning and robotics, eye movements in natural behavior, and curiosity in psychology and neuroscience.
  • No primary empirical sample or new data are reported; the paper uses conceptual and computational examples, including a POMDP traffic-light example, the information gap mystery-novel illustration, and developmental robotics simulations/robots.
  • Main analysis is conceptual integration and comparison of mechanisms across fields, not statistical meta-analysis.

Limitations

  • The paper states that understanding information-seeking mechanisms is in its infancy, that a quantitative response to learning progress distinct from phasic responses to novelty, surprise, or arousal has not been demonstrated empirically, and that the learning-progress approach entails a complex meta-cognitive architecture awaiting empirical verification.
  • The paper also states that it has not been empirically explored to what extent task-related informational eye movements are habitual, immutable aspects of a task versus rapidly responsive to changing epistemic conditions.
  • Evident from the text: as a review, it provides no new experimental data, and many claims about intrinsic rewards and their neural implementation remain speculative; the paper itself notes the question of active exploration is vast and cannot be exhaustively covered.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2013.09.001

Cites

109 of 109 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 51 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 12
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 22
30 of 30
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The brain generates intrinsic rewards related to learning or acquiring information.

    “it seems necessary to assume that the brain generates intrinsic rewards related to learning or acquiring information (Berlyne 1960).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Biological drives are prompted by salient and easily recognizable signs.

    “while biological drives are prompted by salient and easily recognizable signs (e.g., somatic signals for hunger or sex)”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In scientific research, the results of an experiment typically open up new questions that had not been foreseen, and it is not possible to estimate in advance the current entropy and the final desired state.

    “In scientific research for example, the results of an experiment typically open up new questions that had not been foreseen, and it is not possible to estimate in advance what is the current entropy and the final, desired, state.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The central objective of developmental robotics is to design agents that can explore in open-ended environments and develop autonomously without a pre-programmed trajectory, based on their intrinsic interest.

    “The central objective of developmental robotics is to design agents that can explore in open-ended environments and develop autonomously without a pre-programmed trajectory, based on their intrinsic interest.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The brain has intrinsic reward and cognitive control mechanisms.

    “the brain’s intrinsic reward and cognitive control mechanisms.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Eye movements are amenable to neurophysiological investigations.

    “By virtue of their amenability to neurophysiological investigations”
6 of 6

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 132 references

23 of the 132 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Nguyen, 2013, Socially guided intrinsic motivation for robot learning of motor skills, Auton Robots

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 803

Metadata

Authors
Gottlieb, J., Oudeyer, P.-Y., Lopes, M., & Baranes, A.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies du numérique (FR)
Corresponding author
Gottlieb, Jacqueline
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-11
Volume
17
Issue
11
Pages
585-593
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2013830186
Cited by
784
References
132
Citations by year
2026: 43 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 77 · 2023: 165 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 68 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 2
FWCI
4.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (4r01mh098039-05)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH-098039, R03MH091590)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R21DA030095)
  • National Eye Institute (P30EY019007)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychological and Educational Research Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
information seeking, curiosity, attention, exploration, novelty bias, surprise, information gain, eye movements, oculomotor system
MeSH terms
Animals, Artificial Intelligence, Attention, Brain, Exploratory Behavior, Humans, Information Seeking Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review