GMT as a standalone intervention shows small average effects that approach zero when publication bias is controlled, per the review's account of Macnamara and Burgoyne's meta-analysis¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i0 The review reports that Macnamara and Burgoyne's meta-analysis found a mean effect size of d = 0.05 for GMT, dropping to 0.01–0.03 when controlling for publication bias, with no effect in best-practices studies. → Anne M. Cleary 2026

Evidence¶

Anne M. Cleary 2026¶

Anne M. Cleary, Daniel H. Robinson. (2026). Why Growth Mindset Training Alone may not Improve Academic Outcomes: A Call for Research on Bundling Growth Mindset and Retrieval Practice Interventions. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10188-7

q2 · i0 · review · r2

Narrative review attributing this to Macnamara and Burgoyne (2023a): their meta-analysis of the GMT literature found a "mean effect size estimate (d) of 0.05", falling to 0.01 and 0.03 after publication-bias correction; best-practices studies showed no effect on academic performance.

"In their meta-analytic review of the GMT literature, Macnamara and Burgoyne (2023a) found a mean effect size estimate (d) of 0.05. When controlling for publication bias, the estimate dropped to 0.01 and 0.03 (i.e., no effect at all)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Authors with a financial interest in GMT were 2.5 times as likely to report significant effects, per the review's account of Macnamara and Burgoyne — related
• A large randomized controlled trial in England found no advantages for students who received GMT, as reported by the review — related
• Mind-set interventions show weak overall effects on achievement, with some support that low-SES or academically at-risk students might benefit — a broader claim this one bears on
• Growth-mindset interventions have weak average effects on achievement, including a negligible GPA gain (d = 0.11) for lower-achieving US ninth-graders in one preregistered national trial — related