Abstract

Research on growth mindset, the belief that one’s cognitive abilities are malleable and can be developed through dedication and practice, has received considerable media attention and influenced educational policy and practice. However, mindset theory and measurement have also drawn criticism. In the present paper, we add a cautionary note pertaining to the conceptualization and measurement of growth mindset. Through a critical reanalysis of a large-scale representative study of adolescents from the US (N = 15,362), we show that a growth (i.e., forward-keyed) and a fixed (i.e., reverse keyed) mindset item from a widely used scale are only moderately correlated (r = −.31). Further, we demonstrate that the two items are very differently related with a range of educationally relevant criteria such as learning engagement and self-efficacy, and sociodemographic characteristics such as sex. This leads us to conclude that the growth and fixed mindset items are not mutually interchangeable (apart from keying) indicators of a unidimensional construct that has fixed and growth mindset at its opposing poles. Which items researchers choose to measure mindset (fixed, growth, or a blend thereof) may therefore have a significant impact on the findings they obtain. Our insights highlight the need for greater attention to the conceptual foundations and measurement of mindset in future studies.

中文翻译：

---

固定并不与成长相反：项目键控对于衡量心态很重要

摘要

关于成长心态的研究，相信一个人的认知能力是可塑的，可以通过奉献和实践来发展，受到了媒体的广泛关注，并影响了教育政策和实践。然而，心态理论和测量也招致了批评。在本文中，我们添加了有关成长心态的概念化和测量的警告注释。通过对美国青少年的一项大规模代表性研究 (N = 15,362) 进行批判性重新分析，我们表明，增长（即向前-键控）和广泛使用量表中的固定（即反向键控）心态项目仅具有中等相关性 (r = −.31)。此外，我们证明这两个项目与一系列教育相关标准（例如学习参与度和自我效能感）以及社会人口特征（例如性别）之间的关系非常不同。这使我们得出结论，成长型思维和固定型思维项目不是可相互互换的（除了关键性的）单维结构的指标，固定型思维和成长型思维处于其对立的两极。因此，研究人员选择哪些项目来衡量心态（固定、成长或其混合）可能会对他们获得的发现产生重大影响。我们的见解强调，在未来的研究中需要更多地关注概念基础和心态测量。