Lecture 11: Malleable vs. Fixed Thinking Flashcards
(35 cards)
Carol Dweck intelligence survey
Carol Dweck asked participants: “Which of the two statements do you agree with more strongly?
a) Your intelligence is something about you that cannot change very much.
b) No matter how much intelligence you have, you can always change it quite a bit.
Carol Dweck intelligence survey findings
Found that 50% of North American participants believe intelligence is malleable, while the other 50% believe it is fixed
little genius story
- Koestner’s friend’s child’s teacher identified 5 “little geniuses” in her class who she believed were gifted in math
- She would work with those children on advanced math, while the others would play with blocks
what would Carol Dweck suggest about the little genius story?
Carol Dweck would suggest that this treatment negatively impacts motivation in the non-genius group but the genius group will also be negatively impacted in other ways
what factors are used to assess one’s motivation
- Effort
- Goals
- Challenge
- Persistence
theories that support ability praise
- self-efficacy
- expectancy
- reinforcement
self-efficacy theory
confidence in a particular area for doing certain kinds of things
expectancy theory
praise is a social reinforcement that communicates expectations and hence, impacts performance
reinforcement theory
reinforcement can modify behaviour
Koestner’s Ph.D. thesis
- Found that kids and university students responded well to ability praise
- They were more likely to do a challenging task afterwards
Dweck on Koestner’s thesis
- This study fails to consider the long-term implication of praise over the natural learning curve of any activity
- Any learning curve involves difficulty and challenge
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study sample & method overview
- 128 5th-graders from rural and inner-city schools
- 50% Caucasian, 19% African American, and 31% Hispanic
- 3 sets of problems, each containing 10 standard progressive matrices
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study first set of problems
- All children received success feedback after the first set of problems
- Ex. “Wow, you did really well on these problems. You got x number right. That’s a really high score.”
- No matter what their actual score was, all children were told that they had solved at least 80% of the problems that they answered
- ⅓ were also told, “You must be smart at these problems.” (intelligence praise)
- ⅓ were also told, “You must have worked hard at these problems.” (effort praise)
- The remaining children received no additional feedback
- Achievement goals were measured after they had worked on the first set of (success) matrices and received feedback
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study post-first set of problems decision
- Then, children were given the option to either work on more challenging or easier problems
- Found that those who were given intelligence praise wanted to do the easier problems, while those who were given effort praise wanted to do the harder problems
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study second set of problems
- After a second, difficult trial, children were rated on a 1-6 scale based on their desire to persist and task enjoyment
- Children in the intelligence praise condition had lower enjoyment and persistence than those in the effort praise condition
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study attributions for poor performance in the second problem set
- Those in the effort praise condition attributed the failure to a lack of effort
- Those in the intelligence praise condition attributed their failure to a lack of intelligence
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study acknowledgement of poor performance in the second problem set
Children in the effort condition acknowledged how poorly they did but those in the ability condition exaggerated how well they did
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study third set of problems
- Performance on the third set of problems (matched to the same level of difficulty as the original set) was then measured:
- Children who received the intelligence praise did significantly worse in the 3rd set than in the 1st set
- Children in the control condition had similar performance in the 3rd and 1st set
- Children in the effort praise conditioning did better in the 3rd set than in the 1st set
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study results and self-efficacy, reinforcement, and expectation theories
These results are contrary to self-efficacy, reinforcement, and expectation theories
Mueller & Dweck, 1998 study takeaway
we should be focusing on effort rather than ability
Dweck on star qualities
- Parents spend time looking for star qualities in their children
- Dweck: this is a waste of time; we should be focusing on the motivational qualities that are essential to becoming skilled in any area
4 motivational qualities
- Challenge-seeking
- Resilience in the face of obstacles
- Effort when things get tough
- Strategies
how should parents view motivation factors according to Dweck?
They should realize that if children are displaying motivational qualities, they’ll be good at whatever they’re interested in
Dweck on little geniuses
- If we train kids to think they’re little geniuses, they will believe their ability is fixed and that they can count on it
- But, there’s no area in life without a learning curve that includes failure
- If kids think they are natural at something, they won’t respond well to setbacks
