The Experts below are selected from a list of 62700 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
David S. Yeager - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
What can be learned from growth Mindset controversies
The American psychologist, 2020Co-Authors: David S. Yeager, Carol S. DweckAbstract:The growth Mindset is the belief that intellectual ability can be developed. This article seeks to answer recent questions about growth Mindset, such as: Does a growth Mindset predict student outcomes? Do growth Mindset interventions work, and work reliably? Are the effect sizes meaningful enough to merit attention? And can teachers successfully instill a growth Mindset in students? After exploring the important lessons learned from these questions, the article concludes that large-scale studies, including preregistered replications and studies conducted by third parties (such as international governmental agencies), justify confidence in growth Mindset research. Mindset effects, however, are meaningfully heterogeneous across individuals and contexts. The article describes three recent advances that have helped the field to learn from this heterogeneity: standardized measures and interventions, studies designed specifically to identify where growth Mindset interventions do not work (and why), and a conceptual framework for anticipating and interpreting moderation effects. The next generation of Mindset research can build on these advances, for example by beginning to understand and perhaps change classroom contexts in ways that can make interventions more effective. Throughout, the authors reflect on lessons that can enrich metascientific perspectives on replication and generalization. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
-
using design thinking to improve psychological interventions the case of the growth Mindset during the transition to high school
Journal of Educational Psychology, 2016Co-Authors: David S. Yeager, Carissa Romero, Dave Paunesku, Chris S Hulleman, Barbara Schneider, Cintia P Hinojosa, Hae Yeon Lee, Joseph Obrien, Kate Flint, Alice RobertsAbstract:There are many promising psychological interventions on the horizon, but there is no clear methodology for preparing them to be scaled up. Drawing on design thinking, the present research formalizes a methodology for redesigning and tailoring initial interventions. We test the methodology using the case of fixed versus growth Mindsets during the transition to high school. Qualitative inquiry and rapid, iterative, randomized "A/B" experiments were conducted with ~3,000 participants to inform intervention revisions for this population. Next, two experimental evaluations showed that the revised growth Mindset intervention was an improvement over previous versions in terms of short-term proxy outcomes (Study 1, N=7,501), and it improved 9th grade core-course GPA and reduced D/F GPAs for lower achieving students when delivered via the Internet under routine conditions with ~95% of students at 10 schools (Study 2, N=3,676). Although the intervention could still be improved even further, the current research provides a model for how to improve and scale interventions that begin to address pressing educational problems. It also provides insight into how to teach a growth Mindset more effectively.
-
using design thinking to improve psychological interventions the case of the growth Mindset during the transition to high school
Journal of Educational Psychology, 2016Co-Authors: David S. Yeager, Carissa Romero, Dave Paunesku, Chris S Hulleman, Barbara Schneider, Cintia P Hinojosa, Joseph Obrien, Kate Flint, Alice Roberts, Jill TrottAbstract:There are many promising psychological interventions on the horizon, but there is no clear methodology for preparing them to be scaled up. Drawing on design thinking, the present research formalizes a methodology for redesigning and tailoring initial interventions. We test the methodology using the case of fixed versus growth Mindsets during the transition to high school. Qualitative inquiry and rapid, iterative, randomized “A/B” experiments were conducted with ∼3,000 participants to inform intervention revisions for this population. Next, 2 experimental evaluations showed that the revised growth Mindset intervention was an improvement over previous versions in terms of short-term proxy outcomes (Study 1, N = 7,501), and it improved 9th grade core-course GPA and reduced D/F GPAs for lower achieving students when delivered via the Internet under routine conditions with ∼95% of students at 10 schools (Study 2, N = 3,676). Although the intervention could still be improved even further, the current research provides a model for how to improve and scale interventions that begin to address pressing educational problems. It also provides insight into how to teach a growth Mindset more effectively. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
Alia J Crum - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effects of physical activity recommendations on Mindset behavior and perceived health
Preventive medicine reports, 2020Co-Authors: Octavia H Zahrt, Alia J CrumAbstract:Abstract This research sought to understand if physical activity recommendations––an integral component of many interventions aiming to promote physical activity––may have unexpected effects on individuals’ Mindsets (in this case about the adequacy and health consequences of their physical activity) that can strengthen or weaken recommendation effectiveness. Participants were students and staff at a U.S. West Coast private university, recruited between 2016 and 2019. Two experiments with one-week follow-up periods investigated the effects of viewing recommendations that prescribe a lower (vs. higher) amount of physical activity and provide a liberal (vs. stringent) definition of what counts as physical activity on individuals’ Mindsets about the adequacy and health consequences of their physical activity, as well as physical activity-related self-efficacy, physical activity behavior, and perceived health. Study 1 (N = 157) showed that exposure to low-and-liberal recommendations (vs. high-and-stringent recommendations) caused participants to adopt the Mindset that their physical activity was more adequate, which in turn predicted greater engagement in physical activity and perceived health one week later. Study 2 (N = 272) showed that regardless of definition of physical activity (liberal vs. stringent), a lower (vs. higher) amount of recommended physical activity led participants to adopt the Mindset that their activity was more adequate. This more adaptive Mindset predicted greater self-efficacy and engagement in physical activity in the following week, in addition to better perceived health. Rather than inducing complacency, recommendations prescribing a relatively lower (vs. higher) amount of physical activity may be more effective at promoting physical activity and health by inducing adaptive Mindsets.
-
changing patient Mindsets about non life threatening symptoms during oral immunotherapy a randomized clinical trial
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice, 2019Co-Authors: Lauren C Howe, Ted J Kaptchuk, Kari A Leibowitz, Margaret A Perry, Julie M Bitler, Whitney Block, Kari C Nadeau, Alia J CrumAbstract:Background Oral immunotherapy (OIT) can lead to desensitization to food allergens, but patients can experience treatment-related symptoms of allergic reactions that cause anxiety and treatment dropout. Interventions to improve OIT for patients are needed. Objective To determine whether fostering the Mindset that non–life-threatening symptoms during OIT can signal desensitization improves treatment experience and outcomes. Methods In a randomized, blinded, controlled phase II study, 50 children/adolescents (28% girls, aged 7-17 years, M = 10.82, standard deviation = 3.01) completed 6-month OIT for peanut allergies. Patients and their parent(s) had monthly clinic visits at the Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research between January 5, 2017, and August 3, 2017. All families received identical symptom management training. In a 1:1 approach, 24 patients and their families were informed that non–life-threatening symptoms during OIT were unfortunate side effects of treatment, and 26 patients and their families were informed that non–life-threatening symptoms could signal desensitization. Families participated in activities to reinforce these symptom Mindsets. Results Compared with families informed that symptoms are side effects, families informed that symptoms can signal desensitization were less anxious (B = −0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.76 to −0.16; P = .003), less likely to contact staff about symptoms (5/24 [9.4%] vs 27/154 [17.5%] instances; P = .036), experienced fewer non–life-threatening symptoms as doses increased (BInteraction = −0.54, 95% CI: −0.83 to −0.27; P Conclusions Fostering the Mindset that symptoms can signal desensitization improves OIT experience and outcomes. Changing how providers inform patients about non–life-threatening symptoms is a promising avenue for improving treatment.
-
Catechol-O-Methyltransferase moderates effect of stress Mindset on affect and cognition
PLOS ONE, 2018Co-Authors: Alia J Crum, Bradley P. Turnwald, Modupe Akinola, Ted J Kaptchuk, Kathryn T. HallAbstract:There is evidence that altering stress Mindset—the belief that stress is enhancing vs. debilitating—can change cognitive, affective and physiological responses to stress. However individual differences in responsiveness to stress Mindset manipulations have not been explored. Given the previously established role of catecholamines in both placebo effects and stress, we hypothesized that genetic variation in catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT), an enzyme that metabolizes catecholamines, would moderate responses to an intervention intended to alter participants’ Mindsets about stress. Participants (N = 107) were exposed to a stress Mindset manipulation (videos highlighting either the enhancing or debilitating effects of stress) prior to engaging in a Trier Social Stress task and subsequent cognitive tasks. The associations of the COMT rs4680 polymorphism with the effect of stress Mindset video manipulations on cognitive and affective responses were examined. Genetic variation at rs4680 modified the effects of stress Mindset on affective and cognitive responses to stress. Individuals homozygous for rs4680 low-activity allele (met/met) were responsive to the stress-is-enhancing Mindset manipulation as indicated by greater increases in positive affect, improved cognitive functioning, and happiness bias in response to stress. Conversely, individuals homozygous for the high-activity allele (val/val) were not as responsive to the stress Mindset manipulation. These results suggest that responses to stress Mindset intervention may vary with COMT genotype. These findings contribute to the understanding of gene by environment interactions for Mindset interventions and stress reactivity and therefore warrant further investigations.
-
the role of stress Mindset in shaping cognitive emotional and physiological responses to challenging and threatening stress
Anxiety Stress and Coping, 2017Co-Authors: Alia J Crum, Modupe Akinola, Ashley E Martin, Sean FathAbstract:Background and objectives Prior research suggests that altering situation-specific evaluations of stress as challenging versus threatening can improve responses to stress. The aim of the current study was to explore whether cognitive, physiological and affective stress responses can be altered independent of situation-specific evaluations by changing individuals' Mindsets about the nature of stress in general. Design Using a 2 × 2 design, we experimentally manipulated stress Mindset using multi-media film clips orienting participants (N = 113) to either the enhancing or debilitating nature of stress. We also manipulated challenge and threat evaluations by providing positive or negative feedback to participants during a social stress test. Results Results revealed that under both threat and challenge stress evaluations, a stress-is-enhancing Mindset produced sharper increases in anabolic ("growth") hormones relative to a stress-is-debilitating Mindset. Furthermore, when the stress was evaluated as a challenge, a stress-is-enhancing Mindset produced sharper increases in positive affect, heightened attentional bias towards positive stimuli, and greater cognitive flexibility, whereas a stress-is-debilitating Mindset produced worse cognitive and affective outcomes. Conclusions These findings advance stress management theory and practice by demonstrating that a short manipulation designed to generate a stress-is-enhancing Mindset can improve responses to both challenging and threatening stress.
-
rethinking stress the role of Mindsets in determining the stress response
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2013Co-Authors: Alia J Crum, Peter Salovey, Shawn AchorAbstract:This article describes 3 studies that explore the role of Mindsets in the context of stress. In Study 1, we present data supporting the reliability and validity of an 8-item instrument, the Stress Mindset Measure (SMM), designed to assess the extent to which an individual believes that the effects of stress are either enhancing or debilitating. In Study 2, we demonstrate that stress Mindsets can be altered by watching short, multimedia film clips presenting factual information biased toward defining the nature of stress in 1 of 2 ways (stress-is-enhancing vs. stress-is-debilitating). In Study 3, we demonstrate the effect of stress Mindset on physiological and behavioral outcomes, showing that a stress-is-enhancing Mindset is associated with moderate cortisol reactivity and high desire for feedback under stress. Together, these 3 studies suggest that stress Mindset is a distinct and meaningful variable in determining the stress response.
Daphna Oyserman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
what does a priming perspective reveal about culture culture as situated cognition
Current opinion in psychology, 2016Co-Authors: Daphna OysermanAbstract:‘Between-group’ comparison models of culture imply that adaptations to group living are not represented cross-culturally, but if people are either individualists who make sense of the world by separating out main issues and underlying rules or collectivists who make sense of the world by connecting and relating, how is it that people can do both? Culture-as-situated cognition theory explains how: Many seemingly fixed cultural differences can be traced to differences in the accessible constructs — cultural Mindsets — that come to mind when situations render them accessible. Social priming paradigms demonstrate that people from ostensibly different cultures have more than their chronically accessible cultural Mindset available for use, and that momentarily accessible Mindset matters, influencing cognitive processing, judgment, reasoning, and performance.
-
culture as situated cognition
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Searchable and Linkable Resource, 2015Co-Authors: Daphna OysermanAbstract:Culture-as-situated-cognition (CSC) theory proposes that culture can be thought of at three levels. At the highest level, culture is a human universal, a “good enough” solution to universal needs. At the intermediate level, culture is a specific meaning-making framework, a “Mindset” that influences what is attended to, which goals or mental procedure is salient. At the most proximal level, culture is a set of particular practices within a specific society, time, and place which influences what feels fluent and to-be-expected. Cross-national comparisons demonstrate that differences exist. To understand what observed differences imply for underlying process, a situated cognition framework and experimental methods are needed. Indeed, individualistic and collectivistic Mindsets are accessible cross-culturally, so both can be primed. Whether an individualistic or collectivistic cultural Mindset is salient in the moment matters, resulting in downstream consequences for meaning making, self-processes, willingness to invest in relationships, and for complex mental procedures. Between-group differences arise in part from momentary cues that make either individualistic or collectivistic Mindset accessible. Within a culture, people experience cultural fluency if situations match their expectations and cultural disfluency if they do not. Cultural disfluency has downstream consequences for choice and behavior. Moving from one culture to another is difficult because people experience many situations in which they either do not know what to expect or their expectations are not met and feedback as to the nature of the mismatch is almost always ambiguous. For these reasons, while cultural processes are universal, acculturation is often fraught, lengthy, and incomplete. Keywords: culture; individualism; collectivism; priming; between-group difference; neuroscience; mind; brain
-
Integrating culture-as-situated-cognition and neuroscience prediction models
Culture and Brain, 2014Co-Authors: Daphna Oyserman, Sheida Novin, Nic Flinkenflögel, Lydia KrabbendamAbstract:The interface of mind, brain, culture, and behavior has provided rich ground for speculation, theorizing and empirical research. To date, theorizing has focused on between-country difference and much research has focused on quasi-experimental design in which groups are compared and the reasons for found differences imputed to be about the culture-brain interface. The authors of this paper argue for a somewhat different approach. We conceptualize culture as a set of human universals that are dynamically triggered in context. In doing so we integrate culture-as-situated-cognition (CSC) and neuroscience prediction (NP) models to yield a number of novel predictions: first, all societies include cues triggering both individualistic and collectivistic Mindsets. Second, whether a Mindset is triggered by a particular cue and what a triggered Mindset implies for judgment, affective and behavioral response depends on spreading activation within the associative network activated at that moment. Third, universal features of culture are likely necessary from an evolutionary perspective; societies develop and sustain specific instantiations of these universals whether or not these particular instantiations were ever optimal, simply because they are the way ‘we’ do things. The CSC–NP model explains why models that assume fixed differences do not always find behavioral differences; effects are probabilistic, not deterministic. It also explains why models that assume that particular cultural practices are functional are unlikely to be supported. We review extant studies that combine neuroscientific and priming methods and highlight what needs to be done in future studies to address gaps in current understanding of the mind–brain–culture–behavior interface.
-
Culture as situated cognition: Cultural Mindsets, cultural fluency, and meaning making
European Review of Social Psychology, 2011Co-Authors: Daphna OysermanAbstract:Culture is a human universal, a “good enough” solution to universal needs. It is also a specific meaning-making framework, a “Mindset” that influences what feels fluent, what is attended to, which goals or mental procedures are salient. Cross-national comparisons demonstrate both universality and between-group difference (specificity) but cannot address underlying process or distinguish fixed from context-dependent effects. I use a situated cognition framework and experimental methods to address these gaps, demonstrating that salient cultural Mindsets have causal downstream consequences for meaning making, self-processes, willingness to invest in relationships, and complex mental procedures. Moreover, individualistic and collectivistic Mindsets are accessible cross-culturally so both can be primed. Between-group differences arise in part from momentary cues that make either individualistic or collectivistic Mindset accessible.
Carol S. Dweck - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a strategic Mindset an orientation toward strategic behavior during goal pursuit
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020Co-Authors: Patricia Chen, Joseph Powers, Kruthika R Katragadda, Geoffrey L Cohen, Carol S. DweckAbstract:Many attractive jobs in today's world require people to take on new challenges and figure out how to master them. As with any challenging goal, this involves systematic strategy use. Here we ask: Why are some people more likely to take a strategic stance toward their goals, and can this tendency be cultivated? To address these questions, we introduce the idea of a domain-general "strategic Mindset." This Mindset involves asking oneself strategy-eliciting questions, such as "What can I do to help myself?", "How else can I do this?", or "Is there a way to do this even better?", in the face of challenges or insufficient progress. In three studies (n = 864), people who scored higher on (or were primed with) a strategic Mindset reported using more metacognitive strategies; in turn, they obtained higher college grade point averages (GPAs) (Study 1); reported greater progress toward their professional, educational, health, and fitness goals (Study 2); and responded to a challenging timed laboratory task by practicing it more and performing it faster (Study 3). We differentiated a strategic Mindset from general self-efficacy, self-control, grit, and growth Mindsets and showed that it explained unique variance in people's use of metacognitive strategies. These findings suggest that being strategic entails more than just having specific metacognitive skills-it appears to also entail an orientation toward seeking and employing them.
-
What can be learned from growth Mindset controversies
The American psychologist, 2020Co-Authors: David S. Yeager, Carol S. DweckAbstract:The growth Mindset is the belief that intellectual ability can be developed. This article seeks to answer recent questions about growth Mindset, such as: Does a growth Mindset predict student outcomes? Do growth Mindset interventions work, and work reliably? Are the effect sizes meaningful enough to merit attention? And can teachers successfully instill a growth Mindset in students? After exploring the important lessons learned from these questions, the article concludes that large-scale studies, including preregistered replications and studies conducted by third parties (such as international governmental agencies), justify confidence in growth Mindset research. Mindset effects, however, are meaningfully heterogeneous across individuals and contexts. The article describes three recent advances that have helped the field to learn from this heterogeneity: standardized measures and interventions, studies designed specifically to identify where growth Mindset interventions do not work (and why), and a conceptual framework for anticipating and interpreting moderation effects. The next generation of Mindset research can build on these advances, for example by beginning to understand and perhaps change classroom contexts in ways that can make interventions more effective. Throughout, the authors reflect on lessons that can enrich metascientific perspectives on replication and generalization. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
-
Growth Mindset tempers the effects of poverty on academic achievement
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016Co-Authors: Susana Claro, David Paunesku, Carol S. DweckAbstract:Two largely separate bodies of empirical research have shown that academic achievement is influenced by structural factors, such as socioeconomic background, and psychological factors, such as students' beliefs about their abilities. In this research, we use a nationwide sample of high school students from Chile to investigate how these factors interact on a systemic level. Confirming prior research, we find that family income is a strong predictor of achievement. Extending prior research, we find that a growth Mindset (the belief that intelligence is not fixed and can be developed) is a comparably strong predictor of achievement and that it exhibits a positive relationship with achievement across all of the socioeconomic strata in the country. Furthermore, we find that students from lower-income families were less likely to hold a growth Mindset than their wealthier peers, but those who did hold a growth Mindset were appreciably buffered against the deleterious effects of poverty on achievement: students in the lowest 10th percentile of family income who exhibited a growth Mindset showed academic performance as high as that of fixed Mindset students from the 80th income percentile. These results suggest that students' Mindsets may temper or exacerbate the effects of economic disadvantage on a systemic level.
-
leveraging Mindsets to promote academic achievement policy recommendations
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2015Co-Authors: Aneeta Rattan, Krishna Savani, Dolly Chugh, Carol S. DweckAbstract:The United States must improve its students’ educational achievement. Race, gender, and social class gaps persist, and, overall, U.S. students rank poorly among peers globally. Scientific research shows that students’ psychology—their “academic Mindsets”—have a critical role in educational achievement. Yet policymakers have not taken full advantage of cost-effective and well-validated Mindset interventions. In this article, we present two key academic Mindsets. The first, a growth Mindset, refers to the belief that intelligence can be developed over time. The second, a belonging Mindset, refers to the belief that people like you belong in your school or in a given academic field. Extensive research shows that fostering these Mindsets can improve students’ motivation; raise grades; and reduce racial, gender, and social class gaps. Of course, Mindsets are not a panacea, but with proper implementation they can be an excellent point of entry. We show how policy at all levels (federal, state, and local) can le...
Alice Roberts - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
using design thinking to improve psychological interventions the case of the growth Mindset during the transition to high school
Journal of Educational Psychology, 2016Co-Authors: David S. Yeager, Carissa Romero, Dave Paunesku, Chris S Hulleman, Barbara Schneider, Cintia P Hinojosa, Hae Yeon Lee, Joseph Obrien, Kate Flint, Alice RobertsAbstract:There are many promising psychological interventions on the horizon, but there is no clear methodology for preparing them to be scaled up. Drawing on design thinking, the present research formalizes a methodology for redesigning and tailoring initial interventions. We test the methodology using the case of fixed versus growth Mindsets during the transition to high school. Qualitative inquiry and rapid, iterative, randomized "A/B" experiments were conducted with ~3,000 participants to inform intervention revisions for this population. Next, two experimental evaluations showed that the revised growth Mindset intervention was an improvement over previous versions in terms of short-term proxy outcomes (Study 1, N=7,501), and it improved 9th grade core-course GPA and reduced D/F GPAs for lower achieving students when delivered via the Internet under routine conditions with ~95% of students at 10 schools (Study 2, N=3,676). Although the intervention could still be improved even further, the current research provides a model for how to improve and scale interventions that begin to address pressing educational problems. It also provides insight into how to teach a growth Mindset more effectively.
-
using design thinking to improve psychological interventions the case of the growth Mindset during the transition to high school
Journal of Educational Psychology, 2016Co-Authors: David S. Yeager, Carissa Romero, Dave Paunesku, Chris S Hulleman, Barbara Schneider, Cintia P Hinojosa, Joseph Obrien, Kate Flint, Alice Roberts, Jill TrottAbstract:There are many promising psychological interventions on the horizon, but there is no clear methodology for preparing them to be scaled up. Drawing on design thinking, the present research formalizes a methodology for redesigning and tailoring initial interventions. We test the methodology using the case of fixed versus growth Mindsets during the transition to high school. Qualitative inquiry and rapid, iterative, randomized “A/B” experiments were conducted with ∼3,000 participants to inform intervention revisions for this population. Next, 2 experimental evaluations showed that the revised growth Mindset intervention was an improvement over previous versions in terms of short-term proxy outcomes (Study 1, N = 7,501), and it improved 9th grade core-course GPA and reduced D/F GPAs for lower achieving students when delivered via the Internet under routine conditions with ∼95% of students at 10 schools (Study 2, N = 3,676). Although the intervention could still be improved even further, the current research provides a model for how to improve and scale interventions that begin to address pressing educational problems. It also provides insight into how to teach a growth Mindset more effectively. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
