There are two other aspects of curiosity that should be discussed:
reactions to novelty, and the effect of the environment on behavior.
Both will confuse the observer and make it very hard to determine the
exact type of behavior being observed.  Well-researched publications on
polecat reactions to novelty are scarce, so I have been forced to contact
researchers directly via email for answers to some of my questions.  The
consensus of the responding polecat experts is that the reactions of
wild-bred polecats are similar to those of other mustelids and generally
the same as any carnivore.  Reactions appear to differ in intensity in
some areas of behavior, but the basic carnivore pattern is generally
followed.
 
What this means is that polecats generally take one of three approaches
to novel items in a known environment: they can ignore it, they can
aggressively investigate it, or they can cautiously investigate it.
This begs the question, "Are ANY of the three reactions properly termed
'curiosity'?" Ignoring a novel item MAY be a reactive response, and not
indicative of the polecat's natural degree of curiosity at all.
Aggressive investigation may appear to show the polecat is extremely
curious, but MAY also be nothing more than a reactive reaction as well.
A cautious investigation may be interpreted to indicate fearfulness and
a lack of curiosity, but it may also be a reactive response, and not a
correct gage of the polecat's overall curiosity.  Complicating the entire
mess is that both ferrets and polecats will preferentially investigate
complexity over novelty, so you have to consider the effects of the
immediate environment on the observation.  Clearly, the investigation of
novel items in an environment can be used to determine the reactive
responses of a ferret or a polecat, but applying those observations to
the determination of curiosity is extremely difficult.
 
This is why my definition of curiosity is so specific, and why I
emphasized it so frequently.  In the studies made of polecats,
polecat-ferret hybrids, and ferrets, side-by-side comparisons indicate
ferrets show overall less fearfulness, more investigative behaviors
(sniffing, playing with, rolling over, manipulating, chewing, carrying,
etc.) than either polecats or polecat-ferret hybrids.  Individuals may
argue my definition of curiosity is subject to review, but it is based
on published and accepted definitions.  For example:
 
"Curiosity implies a voluntary form of exploratory behaviour, and the
term is NOT USED FOR REFLEXIVE FORMS OF EXPLORATION."  (McFarland 1981
The Oxford Companion to Animal Behaviour).
 
"[Exploratory behavior] is the behavior of curiosity.  It allows an
animal to explore a novel situation, location, or object even though
there is NO SPECIFIC NEED TO DO SO."  (Beaver 1994 The Veterinarian's
Encyclopedia of Animal Behavior).
 
"Curisoity behavior; exploration.  Search for and active investigation
of novel situations IN THE ABSENCE OF PRESSING NEED."  (Immelmann and
Beer 1989 A Dictionary of Ethology).
 
Reactive responses indicate immediate need.  Was that sound or object a
predator?  Was it food?  Exploratory responses in these situations are
ultimately designed to preserve the life of the animal, and are not
considered "curiosity." Curiosity implies conscious intent, the simple
desire to investigate something within the environment that is unknown to
the investigator, despite no pressing need to do so.  In the past, such
implications were alarming to animal behaviorists because it implied
animal consciousness.  With the introduction of Darwinian principles into
ethology (the study of animal behavior), such objections are increasingly
being discounted (as they should).
 
Bob C
[Posted in FML issue 4307]