Implicit theories of intelligence

About: Implicit theories of intelligence is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 249 publications have been published within this topic receiving 35961 citations.

Motivational processes affecting learning.

Abstract: Motivational processes influence a child's acquisition, transfer, and use of knowledge and skills, yet educationally relevant conceptions of motivation have been elusive. Using recent research within the social-cognitive framework, Dweck describes adaptive and maladaptive motivational patterns and presents a research-based model of motivational processes. This model shows how the particular goals children pursue on cognitive tasks shape their reactions to success and failure and influence the quality of their cognitive performance. Dweck argues that this approach has important implications for practice and the design of interventions to change maladaptive motivational processes. She presents a compelling proposal for explaining motivational influences on gender differences in mathematics achievement and observes that empirically based interventions may prevent current achievement discrepancies.--The Editors Most research on effective learning and performance of cognitive tasks analyzes the particular cognitive skills required to succeed at those tasks. In contrast, the focus here is on motivational processes that affect success on cognitive tasks. That is, the focus is on psychological factors, other than ability, that determine how effectively the individual acquires and uses skills. It has long been known that factors other than ability influence whether children seek or avoid challenges, whether they persist or withdraw in the face of difficulty, and whether they use and develop their skills effectively. However, the components and bases of adaptive motivational patterns have been poorly understood. As a resuit, commonsense analyses have been limited and have not provided a basis for effective practices. Indeed, many \"commonsense\" beliefs have been called into question or seriously qualified by recent research--for example, the belief that large amounts of praise and success will establish, maintain, or reinstate adaptive patterns, or that \"brighter\" children have more adaptive patterns and thus are more likely to choose personally challenging tasks or to persist in the face of difficulty. In the past 10 to 15 years a dramatic change has taken place in the study of motivation. This change has resulted in a coherent, replicable, and educationally relevant body of findings--and in a clearer understanding of motivational phenomena. During this time, the emphasis has shifted to a social-cognitive approachwaway from external contingencies, on the one hand, and global, internal states on the other. It has shifted to an emphasis on cognitive mediators, that is, to how children construe the situation, interpret events in the situation, and process information about the situation. Although external contingencies and internal affective states are by no means ignored, they are seen as part of a process whose workings are best penetrated by focusing on organizing cognitive variables. Specifically, the social-cognitive approach has allowed us to (a) characterize adaptive and maladaptive patterns, (b) explain them in terms of specific underlying processes, and thus (c) begin to provide a rigorous conceptual and empirical basis for intervention and practice. Adaptive and Maladaptive Motivational Patterns The study of motivation deals with the causes of goaloriented activity (Atkinson, 1964; Beck, 1983; Dollard & Miller, 1950; Hull, 1943; Veroff, 1969). Achievement motivation involves a particular class of goals--those involving competence--and these goals appear to fall into two classes: (a) learning goals, in which individuals seek to increase their competence, to understand or master something new, and (b) performance goals, in which individuals seek to gain favorable judgments of their competence or avoid negative judgments of their competence (Dweck & Elliott, 1983; NichoUs, 1984; Nicholls & Dweck, 1979). l Adaptive motivational patterns are those that promote the establishment, maintenance, and attainment of personally challenging and personally valued achievement goals. Maladaptive patterns, then, are associated with a failure to establish reasonable, valued goals, to maintain effective striving toward those goals, or, ultimately, to attain valued goals that are potentially within one's reach. Research has clearly documented adaptive and maladaptive patterns of achievement behavior. The adaptive (\"mastery-oriented\") pattern is characterized by challenge seeking and high, effective persistence in the face of obstacles. Children displaying this pattern appear to enjoy exerting effort in the pursuit of task mastery. In contrast, the maladaptive (\"helpless\") pattern is characterized by challenge avoidance and low persistence in the face of difficulty. Children displaying this pattern tend to evidence negative affect (such as anxiety) and negative self-cogniCorrespondence concerning this article should be addressed to Carol S. Dweck, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, 603 E. Daniel, Champaign, IL 61820. l The word performance will be used in several ways, not only in connection with performance goals. It will also be used to refer to the child's task activity (performance of a task) and to the product of that activity (level of performance). The meaning should be clear from the context. 1040 October 1986 9 American Psychologist Copyrisht 1986 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0003-066X/86/$00.75 Vol. 41, No. 10, 1040-1048 Table 1 Achievement Goals and Achievement Behavior Confidence in Theory of intelligence Goal orientation present ability Behavior pattern Entity theory (Intelligence is fixed) Incremental theory (Intelligence is malleable) > Performance goal (Goal is to gain positive judgments/avoid negative judgments of competence) > Learning goal (Goal is to increase competence) If high ---> Mastery-oriented Seek challenge but High persistence If low ~ Helpless Avoid challenge Low persistence If high > Mastery-oriented ioOr ~ ' Seek challenge (that fosters learning) High persistence tions when they confront obstacles (e.g., Ames, 1984; C. Diener & Dweck, 1978, 1980; Dweck & Reppucci, 1973; Nicholls, 1975). Although children displaying the different patterns do not differ in intellectual ability, these patterns can have profound effects on cognitive performance. In experiments conducted in both laboratory and classroom settings, it has been shown that children with the maladaptive pattern are seriously hampered in the acquisition and display of cognitive skills when they meet obstacles. Children with the adaptive pattern, by contrast, seem undaunted or even seem to have their performance facilitated by the increased challenge. If not ability, then what are the bases of these patterns? Most recently, research has suggested that children's goals in achievement situations differentially foster the two patterns. That is, achievement situations afford a choice of goals, and the one the child preferentially adopts predicts the achievement pattern that child will display. Table 1 summarizes the conceptualization that is emerging from the research. BasieaUy, children's theories of intelligence appear to orient them toward different goals: Children who believe intelligence is a fixed trait tend to orient toward gaining favorable judgments of that trait (performance goals), whereas children who believe intelligence is a malleable quality tend to orient toward developing that quality (learning goals). The goals then appear to set up the different behavior patterns. 2 Learning and Performance Goals Contrasted How and why do the different goals foster the different patterns? How do they shape task choice and task pursuit to facilitate or impede cognitive performance? The research reviewed below indicates that with performance goals, the entire task choice and pursuit process is built around children's concerns about their ability level. In contrast, with learning goals the choice and pursuit processes involve a focus on progress and mastery through 2 See M. Bandura and Dweck (1985), Dweck and Elliott (1983), and Leggett (1985) for a more extensive treatment of children's theories of intelligence. The present article will focus on achievement goals and their allied behavior patterns. effort. Further, this research shows how a focus on ability judgments can result in a tendency to avoid and withdraw from challenge, whereas a focus on progress through effort creates a tendency to seek and be energized by challenge. Although relatively few studies as yet have explicitly induced and compared (or measured and compared) learning versus performance goals (see M. Bandura & Dweck, 1985; Elliott & Dweck, 1985; FarreU & Dweck, 1985; Leggett, 1985, 1986), many have manipulated the salience and value of performance goals, and hence the relative value of the two types of goals. This has been done, for example, by instituting a competitive versus individual reward structure (e.g., Ames, 1984; Ames, Ames, & Felker, 1977), by varying the alleged diagnosticity of the task vis vis important abilities (e.g., Nicholls, 1975), by introducing an audience or evaluator versus allowing the individual to perform privately or focusing his or her attention on the task (e.g., Brockner & Hulton, 1978; Carver & Scheier, 1981; E. Diener & SruU, 1979), and by presenting the task with \"test\" instructions versus \"game\" or neutral instructions (e.g., Entin & Raynor, 1973; Lekarczyk & Hill, 1969; McCoy, 1965; Sarason, 1972). Taken together, the results suggest that highlighting performance goals relative to learning goals can have the following effects on achievement behavior. Goals and Task Choice Appropriately challenging tasks are often the ones that are best for utilizing and increasing one's abilities. Recent research has shown that performance goals work against the pursuit of challenge by requiring that children's perceptions of their ability be high (and remain high) before the children will desire a challenging task (M. Bandura & D

Mindset: The New Psychology of Success

Abstract: Every so often a truly groundbreaking idea comes along. This is one. Mindset explains: Why brains and talent don’t bring success How they can stand in the way of it Why praising brains and talent doesn’t foster self-esteem and accomplishment, but jeopardizes them How teaching a simple idea about the brain raises grades and productivity What all great CEOs, parents, teachers, athletes know Mindset is a simple idea discovered by world-renowned Stanford University psychologist Carol Dweck in decades of research on achievement and success—a simple idea that makes all the difference. In a fixed mindset, people believe their basic qualities, like their intelligence or talent, are simply fixed traits. They spend their time documenting their intelligence or talent instead of developing them. They also believe that talent alone creates success—without effort. They’re wrong. In a growth mindset, people believe that their most basic abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work—brains and talent are just the starting point. This view creates a love of learning and a resilience that is essential for great accomplishment. Virtually all great people have had these qualities. Teaching a growth mindset creates motivation and productivity in the worlds of business, education, and sports. It enhances relationships. When you read Mindset, you’ll see how.

Self-theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development

Abstract: Preface. Introduction. 1. What Promotes Adaptive Motivation? Four Beliefs and Four Truths about Ability, Success, Praise, and Confidence. 2. When Failure Undermines and When Failure Motivates: Helpless and Mastery-Oriented Responses. 3. Achievement Goals: Looking Smart vs. Learning. 4. Is Intelligence Fixed or Changeable? Students' Theories About Their Intelligence Foster Their Achievement Goals. 5. Theories of Intelligence Predict (and Create) Differences in Achievement. 6. Theories of Intelligence Create High and Low Effort. 7. Theories and Goals Predict Self-Esteem Loss and Depressive Reactions. 8. Why Confidence and Success Are Not Enough. 9. What Is IQ and Does It Matter? 10. Believing in Fixed Social Traits: Impact on Social Coping. 11. Judging and Labeling Others: Another Effect of Implicit Theories. 12. Belief in the Potential to Change. 13. Holding and Forming Stereotypes. 14. How Does It All Begin? Young Children's Theories about Goodness and Badness. 15. Kinds of Praise and Criticism: The Origins of Vulnerability. 16. Praising Intelligence: More Praise that Backfires. 17. Misconceptions about Self-Esteem and about How to Foster It. 18. Personality, Motivation, Development, and the Self: Theoretical Reflections. 19. Final Thoughts on Controversial Issues.

A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation

Abstract: A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation was proposed and tested in a college classroom. Mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goals were assessed and their antecedents and consequences examined. Results indicated that mastery goals were grounded in achievement motivation and high competence expectancies; performance-avoidance goals, in fear of failure and low competence expectancies; and performance-approach goals, in ach.ievement motivation, fear of failure, and high competence expectancies. Mastery goals facilitated intrinsic motivation, performance-approach goals enhanced graded performance, and performanceavoidance goals proved inimical to both intrinsic motivation and graded performance. The proposed model represents an integration of classic and contemporary approaches to the study of achievement motivation. Achievement motivation is a ubiquitous feature of daily life. In the classroom, at the workplace, and on the ballfield individuals strive to be competent in their effortful activities. In the past decade, many theorists have utilized a social-cognitive, achievement goal approach in accounting for individuals' competence-relevant strivings. "Achievement goal" is commonly defined as the purpose of task engagement (Maehr, 1989), and the specific type of goal adopted is posited to create a framework for how individuals interpret, experience, and act in their achievement pursuits (Dweck, 1986; Nicholls, 1989). Achievement goal theorists commonly identify two distinct orientations toward competence: a performance goal focused on the demonstration of competence relevant to others, and a mastery goal focused on the development of competence and task mastery (Ames & Archer, 1987; for similar conceptualizations with different nomenclature see Dweck, 1986; NichoUs, 1984). The adoption of a performance goal is hypothesized to produce susceptibility to a "helpless" pattern of responses in achievement settings (e.g., a preference for easy or difficult tasks, withdrawal of effort in the face of failure, and decreased task enjoyment), whereas the adoption of a mastery goal is presumed to lead to a "mastery" motivational pattern (e.g., a preference for moderately challenging tasks, persistence in the face of failure, and enhanced task enjoyment; Ames, 1992; Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Nicholls, 1989). Most achievement goal theorists conceptualize both perfor

Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: a longitudinal study and an intervention

Abstract: Two studies explored the role of implicit theories of intelligence in adolescents' mathematics achievement. In Study 1 with 373 7th graders, the belief that intelligence is malleable (incremental theory) predicted an upward trajectory in grades over the two years of junior high school, while a belief that intelligence is fixed (entity theory) predicted a flat trajectory. A mediational model including learning goals, positive beliefs about effort, and causal attributions and strategies was tested. In Study 2, an intervention teaching an incremental theory to 7th graders (N=48) promoted positive change in classroom motivation, compared with a control group (N=43). Simultaneously, students in the control group displayed a continuing downward trajectory in grades, while this decline was reversed for students in the experimental group.