case ofcognitiveinterest, processing ofcoherent texts promoted a sense of pos-
itive affect about the passage that led toincreased learning.
Whereasitis possible to set up research paradigms that separate emotional
andcognitiveinterests, we believe that such separations may be artificial, as
emotional andcognitive functioning appear tocontinuouslyinteractininterest
development.In addition, we have no neurophysiologicalindications of
unique neural processes underlying exclusively emotional andcognitive proc-
esses, anditis more likely that both systems areinvolved to varying degrees.
Focusing more specifically on discourse, several research groups worked
onidentifying textcharacteristics thatcontribute to triggering readers’/listen-
ers’situationalinterest.In early studies of text features, novelty, unexpected
surprisinginformation,intensity, concreteness and visual imagery were
found tocontribute to situationalinterest (Anderson, Shirey, Wilson, &
Fielding, 1987;Hidi&Baird, 1986, 1988).Following this work, Schraw,
Brunning, and Svoboda (1995)identified six sources of text-based (situa-
tional)interest:(a) ease ofcomprehension (Mitchell, 1993;Wade, Buxton, &
Kelly, 1999);(b) prior knowledge (Alexander, 1997;Alexander, Jetton, &
Kulikowich, 1995);(c) textcohesion (Kintsch, 1980;Wade, 1992);(d) vivid-
ness (Sadoski, Goetz, & Fritz, 1993);(e) reader engagement (Mitchell, 1993);
and (f ) evocative emotional reactions (Krapp et al., 1992).The experimental
findings of Schraw et al.(1995) furtherindicated that only some of these
sources ofinterest were related significantly to subjects’actual feeling ofin-
terest (referred to as perceivedinterest by the authors).Furthermore, a lack
ofinteractions between the six sources ofinterest suggested that a number of
individual factors rather thancomplexinteractive relationships between fac-
tors were responsible for the elicited situationalinterest.Finally, the finding
that prior knowledge ratings were only marginally related to perceivedinter-
est, and they were unrelated to recall, suggested that knowledge aloneis not a
sufficient factor toincrease text-based (situational)interest and learning.
In aninvestigation that also focused on sources ofinterest, Wade et al.
(1999) studied thecharacteristics associated with self-reportedinterest ofin-
formational (science) texts.Theirfindings overlap with those of Schraw et al.
(1995)in some areas suchascomprehension andimagery.Other textcharac-
teristics that Wade et al.(1999) found to be associated with higherinterest
were novelty andimportance/value.
Social aspects of the environment have also been found toinfluence the
development of situationalinterest.For example, Isaac, Sansone, and Smith
(1999) reported that working with othersincreased someindividuals’situa-
tionalinterest.Häussler and Hoffmann (1998) found that girls’situationalin-
terest was mediated by the gender of those who were presentin the learning
situation.More specifically, girls’interestin physiclessons was supported by
mono-educationalclasses.Hidi,Weiss, Berndorff, and Nolan’s (1998) re-
search that focused on learninginascience museum setting,indicated that
98 HIDI,RENNINGER,KRAPP