Curiosity, Self-regulation and Academic Achievement among Undergraduate Students Shah Rukh Tariq, Iffat Batool, and Tauqeer Saleem Khan GC University, Lahore The purpose of this research was to find relationship of curiosity, self-regulation and academic achievement. It was hypothesized that there would be a significant relationship among curiosity, self-regulation and academic achievement. Secondly, it was hypothesized that there would be a significant mean difference among achievement levels with respect to students’ curiosity and self-regulation. The current study has been conducted in four phases. In phase I and II semantic analysis and translation of tools were done respectively while in the phase III and IV psychometric properties, validity of instruments and the main findings were examined. For the current study sample was N = 150 (51 male and 99 female students). The participants were students of BS (Hons) belonging to different fields like arts, science and business. Curiosity and Exploration Inventory-II (Kashdan et al., 2009), Self-regulation Questionnaire (Ryan & Deci, 2000; adapted version) were used to collect data. Purposive sampling technique was used. Data were interpreted by using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, independent t-test, analysis of variance and factor analysis. The findings suggest that academic achievement is positively correlated with students’ embracing and autonomous regulation. The current study has important implications in educational settings. Keywords: Curiosity, self-regulation, academic achievement, undergraduates Curiosity is an important factor in human dynamic tasks. It plays a vital role in learning, wellbeing and motivation (Kashdan et al., 2009). The research on curiosity started from two approaches: Motivational research and observation of children behavior. The observations of children behavior provided the concepts such as question asking, interest in new things and desire for new knowledge (Voss & Keller, 1983). Curiosity in the classic times was considered as a part of motivation. Later on, curiosity was conceptualized as distinct feature of human personality (Goldberg et al., 2006; Kashdan et al., 2009; Peterson & Seligman, 2004). The major controversy in the classic literature on curiosity was found in its definition and the number of dimensions and it is still a point of controversy to some extent. However, the empirical investigation was spare on curiosity till 1950s. Even afterwards the literature on curiosity was limited to the four basic questions. These questions were about the definition of curiosity, its dimensionality, underlying factors and situational determinants (Loewenstein, 1994). The curiosity model was based on Berlyne’s specific and diversive curiosity concepts (Kashdan, Rose, & Fincham, 2004). Later on, Kashdan et al. (2009) modified the two factor curiosity and exploration model. Kashdan, Rose, and Fincham (2004) found that curiosity is significantly associated with big five personality traits (openness to experience, conscientiousness, and extraversion; positive direction with weak to moderate coefficients). Voss and Keller (1983) describe that the child-rearing process affects the exploratory behavior and this is also evident from the innate role of gender. In contrast, Draper (2010) found that there is no gender difference in overall curiosity level. It is also evident from the literature that motivation and curiosity concepts are linked to learning outcome (Guay, Ratelle, Roy, & Litalien, 2010; Kashdan et al., 2009; Ratelle, Guay, Vallerand, Larose, & Senecal, 2007; Vansteenkiste et al., 2010). Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Dr. Iffat Batool, Department of Psychology, GC University, Katchery Road, Lahore, Pakistan. Email: dr.iffatbatool@gmail.com The need to address the academic achievement is important because students’ personal and social development is allied with academic achievement (Barna & Brott, 2011), and if achievement is not productive and satisfying it may create problems for teachers, parents and individuals. The research findings suggested that poor academic achievement produce problems such as low self-esteem, poor self-concept or depression (Athanimath, 2009; Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, & Vohs, 2003; Canadian Council on Learning, 2009). Occupational and educational success demands optimal performance, and are connected to social and personal development (Barna & Brott, 2011). In this connection academic achievement is important factor to examine various perspectives, because it is not a topic of limited interest, but it is a broad topic of interest now. Students’ academic performance is related to their personal and social satisfaction (Barna & Brott, 2011). In summary, curiosity, self-regulation and academic achievement provided the insight that there could be a link between curiosity, self-regulation and academic performance (see Voss & Keller, 1983). Self-regulation was examined in various contexts in educational, clinical and organizational settings (Brydges & Butler, 2012). The literature also suggests that gender, socio economic status and age factor has already sufficient empirical findings with respect to academic achievement (Gibb, Fergusson, & Horwood, 2008). Therefore, academic achievement model needs to be explored with indigenous perspective. Objectives of the Study  To examine the Urdu translated version of the curiosity and exploration inventory-II and self-regulation questionnaire (adapted version).  To examine the validity and psychometric properties of curiosity and self-regulation measure.  To find the relationship between academic achievement, curiosity and self-regulation  To find the difference of high, average and low achievers’ performance with respect to curiosity and self-regulation. Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 2013, Vol. 11, No.2, 28-35