Mindset: The New Psychology of Success

Part of Ellen Leggett’s 1985 implicit theory of intelligence, entity theory is marked by the belief that intelligence is a fixed entity that cannot be changed. Though people may learn and increase their knowledge levels, their overall intelligence remains static. Dweck’s research builds on Leggett’s work; her concept of the fixed mindset is rooted in the entity theory of intelligence. Dweck’s discussion in Chapter 3 of ability and achievement reflects these ideas and the ways that teachers who subscribe to them can negatively impact their students. For example, entity theory can drive feelings of low self-esteem in people with a fixed mindset, because they ascribe their failures or shortcomings to a lack of ability or intelligence. This can drive them to give up because they determine that they simply aren’t good at a particular activity or in a school subject, rather than attempting to increase their effort and develop their skills.

Whereas a true growth mindset is one in which individuals believe that effort and learning can increase base abilities and skills, misunderstandings and misuse of the term have created individuals who claim to have a growth mindset but who do not actually commit to creating growth for themselves. Dweck points out that often a false growth mindset arises from the belief that having a growth mindset is desirable. Thus, people adopt the term, but it becomes a hollow label because they don’t follow through with the process of developing themselves. Individuals may also believe that character traits like open-mindedness and flexibility indicate a growth mindset, but Dweck points out that it is possible to have those traits but still believe that abilities are fixed.

Dweck’s concept of the fixed mindset is rooted in the entity theory of intelligence, which views intelligence as finite. In this view, people may gain knowledge, but they cannot increase their intelligence. People who have this perspective focus on factors such as natural talent or ability—rather than on effort-making and tackling new challenges—in school, work, and relationships. They can become very frustrated and stifled by failures because they see them as confirmation of their limited abilities, rather than seeking new ways to develop their skills and overcome challenges. This view is opposed to the growth mindset, which focuses on development, tackling challenges, and exerting effort to improve.

The term groupthink refers to a psychosocial phenomenon in which groups of people who desire to maintain an established dynamic and hierarchy believe that an idea or plan represents a group consensus, no matter how irrational it is. Members then move quickly to show support for the idea or plan without pausing to evaluate, consider alternatives, or imagine consequences. Dweck concludes that groupthink arises in company cultures that promote fixed-mindset messaging because leaders with fixed mindsets require constant validation. Thus, they may use tactics that elevate their own ideas, belittle those that question them, undermine innovators, and silence critics to maintain their own sense of superiority.

Dweck’s concept of growth mindset is rooted in the incremental theory of intelligence; in this view, intelligence levels can change throughout life and be increased through learning. The growth mindset emphasizes development through practice, effort, tackling new challenges, and evaluating and applying feedback from others. Those who share this perspective persist after failures due to their belief that they can work to find new ways to succeed, instead of deciding that they simply aren’t good at something if they don’t naturally do it well. Dweck provides numerous examples of leaders who excelled in their fields through commitment to intense practice, effort, and learning from feedback, despite physical obstacles or limited innate talent for their fields. This view is in contrast to the fixed mindset, which focuses on natural talent or aptitude rather than growth and practice.