In Study 1, the revised intervention reduced fixed-trait attributions and performance-avoidance goals relative to the original, with small effects¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr3·q3·i0negligible
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i0 The revised intervention significantly reduced fixed-trait, person-focused attributions (d=.07) and performance avoidance goals (d=.06) compared with the original intervention. → Yeager 2016
Evidence¶
Yeager 2016¶
Yeager, D. S., Romero, C., Paunesku, D., Hulleman, C. S., Schneider, B., Hinojosa, C., Lee, H. Y., O'Brien, J., Flint, K., Roberts, A., Trott, J., Greene, D., Walton, G. M., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Using Design Thinking to Improve Psychological Interventions: The Case of the Growth Mindset During the Transition to High School. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 374–391. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000098
q3 · i0 · causal · r3
Study 1 proxy outcomes measured after two sessions; effects were "small, ds = .07 and 06" — both below d = 0.2 — because the contrast was "the group difference between two growth mindset interventions."
"The revised intervention significantly reduced fixed-trait, person-focused attributions as well as performance avoidance goals, compared to the original intervention, ps<.01 (see Table 3). These effects were small, ds = .07 and 06, but recall that this is the group difference between two growth mindset interventions."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Achievement Goal Orientation — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- In Study 1, the revised intervention reduced self-reported fixed mindset more than the original intervention — related
- In Study 1, the revised intervention reduced hypothetical choice of the easy math assignment from 60% to 51% relative to the original (d=.19) — related
- In Study 1, the revised growth mindset intervention reduced choosing easy over hard math problems more than the original intervention (d=.19) — related
- In Study 1, measured fixed mindset correlated with fixed-trait attributions (r=.28), performance avoidance goals (r=.23), and hypothetical easy-problem choice (r=.12) — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
revised-mindset-intervention-attributions-goals-study1 |
title |
In Study 1, the revised intervention reduced fixed-trait attributions and performance-avoidance goals relative to the original, with small effects |
description |
In Study 1, the revised intervention reduced fixed-trait attributions and performance-avoidance goals relative to the original, with small effects |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2016 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — yeager-2016 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.