Mindset interventions have only a weak effect on later academic achievement¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A recent meta-analysis found that mindset interventions have only a weak effect on later academic achievement. → H. Moriah Sokolowski and Daniel Ansari 2018

Evidence¶

H. Moriah Sokolowski and Daniel Ansari 2018¶

H. Moriah Sokolowski and Daniel Ansari. (2018). Understanding the effects of education through the lens of biology. npj Science of Learning 3:17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0032-y

q3 · i? · review · r2

The review reports, citing a recent meta-analysis, that "mindset interventions have only a weak effect on later academic achievement"; the authors attribute this to the nurture assumption that individual differences lack a biological basis. No effect size is printed.

"However, a recent meta-analysis examining the effectiveness of mindset interventions on academic achievement revealed that mindset interventions have only a weak effect on later academic achievement."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Mind-set interventions show weak overall effects on achievement, with some support that low-SES or academically at-risk students might benefit — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• 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 — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Prior meta-analyses report mixed effects of growth mindset interventions on achievement, with estimates ranging from a non-significant d = 0.05 to d = 0.14 — related
• 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