57 pages • 1 hour read
Carol S. DweckMindset: The New Psychology of Success
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2006A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Chapter 3Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Chapter 3 Summary: “The Truth About Ability and Accomplishment”
Dweck opens this chapter with stories about two well-regarded geniuses, Thomas Edison and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. She details their talents and triumphs but then retells the story, focusing on their failures instead. Next, to show the relationship between mindset and achievement, she describes a pair of experiments, one with students just entering junior high and the other with pre-med hopefuls starting college chemistry. In both instances, she measured their mindsets at the start by asking whether they agreed or disagreed with a set of statements. She and her team then monitored the students’ progress throughout the semester, checking in with neutral questionnaires to measure the impact of their mindsets on their experiences. In both cases, fixed mindsets tracked with lower grades over time, and growth mindsets tracked with higher grades over time.
One of the first things she noticed was that many of the seventh graders simply stopped working. Sometimes, these were historically low-achieving students, but formerly high-achieving students also responded this way regularly. This was true almost exclusively of those with the most fixed mindsets. This low-effort phenomenon did not occur among the pre-med hopefuls, who were used to a heavy workload and intense study, but Dweck noticed that those with the growth mindset carried higher grades and bounced back from setbacks better than their fixed-minded peers. Whereas the fixed-mindset students relied on strategies like rereading books and notes and memorization with a focus on passing their tests, growth-mindset students emphasized learning; they actively connected the material to larger themes and went over their mistakes from previous tests. They also sustained a higher level of interest in the class despite the challenge, whereas the fixed-mindset students lost interest and motivation and began to believe they simply weren’t good at chemistry if they didn’t do well. Fixed mindsets, Dweck concludes, correlate with lower achievement.
Dweck uses real-world case studies, as well as experimental studies conducted by herself and other psychologists, to develop the nuances of her thesis. She takes the reader through the research and rationale that convinced her that the fixed mindset hinders human growth. Dweck asserts that students with fixed-mindset beliefs experience deeper loss after a bad grade or performance. They see their setbacks as proof of permanent failures, so they learn to avoid challenges; this allows them to sustain their belief in their innate abilities and avoid exposing permanent weaknesses. It also creates a belief that effort and strategies cannot change outcomes, so, Dweck reasons, these students do not learn proactive skills such as better study strategies or how to use feedback to improve their performance. As a result, they unconsciously create conditions that are antithetical to learning. By contrast, growth-minded students do not view failure as permanent; thus, they use setbacks and low grades as feedback and adjust their study strategies and approaches, leading to higher grades. Growth-minded students also sustained higher motivation levels for challenging areas of study because of their belief that effort produces success, whereas fixed-minded students lost motivation to fear and feelings of inadequacy.
Drilling down, Dweck describes adolescents from her studies with fixed mindsets who simply stopped doing math when it became hard and pretended not to care about learning. When they were asked how to improve, they seriously considered cheating or simply believed they were too dumb to improve. Often, they were previously labeled as good students. Dweck describes fixed-mindset prodigies, athletes, and musicians who spend more effort chasing praise and protecting their egos than improving their skills, often at the ultimate expense of their own success.
Dweck concludes the chapter with a closer look at labels’ disproportionate impact on fixed-minded students. Both positive labels, such as those associated with praise for abilities or traits, and negative labels, including stereotypes, distracted them and negatively impacted their performance by triggering fears of either disproving the positive or proving the negative. Furthermore, Dweck’s studies reveal that those who already display strong fixed-mindset traits are more impacted by anxieties that are related to stereotypes, while those with a growth mindset could overcome and perform just as well, despite facing the same stereotypes.
Dweck concludes the chapter with exercises for self-reflection that guide the reader through their own examination of how mindset and labels impact those around them.
Chapter 3 Analysis
After setting up the foundation for her thesis in the previous chapters and helping the reader see the different worldviews that each mindset creates, Dweck dives deeper into her research and studies. This is the book’s densest, most research-oriented chapter, but she showcases studies not with raw data but by detailing and deconstructing them to show how the two different mindsets create or deter achievement. To begin, she concedes that prodigies and geniuses exist and acknowledges their above-average starting abilities, but she argues that talent accounts for only some of their individual achievements and successes.
To engage the reader and prove that fixed mindsets inhibit individual ability and achievement, Dweck tells the version of Edison’s story that she assumes the reader knows: A lone genius has a brilliant thought and invents the light bulb. Then, she retells the story as it occurred, focusing less on Edison’s individual genius and more on the long processes, many helpers, and countless failed experiments that led to the creation of a working light bulb. Dweck connects with the reader using the narrative and counternarrative approach because the familiar subject matter illustrates that mindsets shape the ways people view those who are famous for their talents and abilities. This perception directly contributes to how people view their personal capabilities. The narrative of the lone genius is intimidating and unapproachable, setting Edison above average people, while the second version makes him and his work approachable, something an average person might achieve with the right resources, curiosity, and motivation. In this way, Dweck disabuses readers of the notion that natural talent is the only way to success and instead promotes the view that all humans possess the potential to achieve big things if they work strategically. By telling a fixed-mindset tale that intimidates but counterbalancing it with a growth-minded tale that encourages, Dweck primes the reader to accept her research regarding Developing Growth and Potential in Others and to be open to shifting toward a mindset that creates a more approachable view of the world.
Dweck spends the rest of the chapter supporting her controversial observation that the fixed mindset, not initial endowment, limits human ability, achievement, and success. Aware that her stance is new and controversial, Dweck relies most heavily on her studies and those of other psychologists to establish credibility and convince readers of the veracity of her reasoning.
To support her premise that the fixed mindset limits achievement, she uses two case studies. The first is of educator Marva Collins, who took hundreds of students who were labeled academic failures in inner-city Chicago schools and, by treating them as capable of learning, engaged them in a robust classical education just like that of children enrolled in elite prep schools. In a context that labeled students as failures, they failed, supporting Dweck’s conclusions that fixed labeling limits achievement. When they were told they could grow if they tried, they grew far more than anyone expected. This, Dweck illustrates, is the power of the growth mindset: Not everyone is a genius or can become one, but with effort, coaching, and strategies, people stretch their limits further and achieve more. As further proof, she cites Falko Rheinberg, whose study proved that teachers who believed students’ abilities were fixed did not close the gap between low- and high-performing students, but those with a growth mindset did so over time. Dweck writes, “The fixed mindset limits ability. It fills people’s minds with interfering thoughts, it makes effort disagreeable, and it leads to inferior learning strategies. What’s more, it makes other people into judges rather than allies” (67). She concludes that although a growth mindset does not guarantee success, its nature encourages people to put in the effort it takes to stretch toward a goal.
In addition, she explores the implications of earlier research by Claude Steele and Joshua Aronson, who found that simply identifying with a stereotyped group by filling out boxes identifying race and gender before a test can lead to lower test scores. Showcasing her own study that borrowed from their work, Dweck explains that students with a fixed mindset are most prone to having their performance disrupted by stereotypes. This is because “the growth mindset takes the teeth out of the stereotype and makes people better able to fight back. They don’t believe in permanent failure” (76). Therefore, they are not afraid their performance will prove the stereotypes correct. Furthermore, those with a growth mindset do not believe a stereotype means they do not belong in certain settings, such as that of a woman in an advanced math class. In fact, Dweck puts it simply: “The fixed mindset, plus stereotyping plus women’s trust in others’ assessments of them: All these contribute to the gender gap in math and science” (79). This statement highlights the relevance of Dweck’s findings to both individuals and society at large.
