Melanie Tannenbaum, profile picture
Uploaded byMelanie Tannenbaum
1,307 views

SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Attributions & Beliefs

This document discusses attributions and beliefs about intelligence. It begins by introducing attribution theory, which examines how people explain the causes of events. Key aspects of attributions include locus (internal vs. external), stability (stable vs. unstable), and controllability. Implicit theories, also known as naive theories, are beliefs about whether qualities like intelligence are fixed or can develop over time. Research shows these beliefs influence responses to failure, effort, and performance. An entity theory views intelligence as fixed while an incremental theory sees it as malleable. Studies demonstrate beliefs shape resilience and motivation after setbacks.

Embed presentation

Downloaded 50 times
Attributions & Beliefs Melanie Tannenbaum, M.A. Sociology 463/663 Spring 2015
This Week Attributions Attribution Theory Attribution Training Beliefs about Intelligence Implicit Theories Consequences
This Week Attributions Attribution Theory Attribution Training Beliefs about Intelligence Implicit Theories Consequences
Attributions
What’s Going On Here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FIEZXMUM2I ! Is the large triangle mean? Yes No Can’t Tell
Attribution Theory Theories about how people explain the causes of the events that they observe.
Attribution Theory People tend to make very complex inferences about motives and personalities based on very small amounts of information. ! We like to believe inferences, but there are many ways that they can fail us. The small shapes could have been trying to play with the large shape, who was just grumpy. The small shapes could have been trying to steal something from the large shape, who was rightfully mad. ! Also, they are shapes.
Attributions Subjective explanations (causal judgments) for why things are happening.
Attributions: What? B = f (P, E) Behavior is a function of the person and the environment. ! Causal attribution is the process of deciding if you think that someone’s behavior was caused more by P or by E. ! You can make these attributions for others and you can also make these attributions for yourself.
Attributions: When? When things go wrong When important things happen When expectancies are violated But… Often spontaneous and implicit assumptions of causality!
Attributions “Causal attributions answer ‘why’ questions, such as ‘Why did I fail this exam?’ or ‘Why don’t any of my classmates like me?’ It is intended that these examples describe situations of failure because we are more likely to want to know ‘why’ given negative, unexpected, or atypical outcomes.” - Graham, 1991
Attributions: Why? Fritz Heider People are “naive scientists” Goal is to accurately assess reasons Distinction between internal and external causes Internal: Ability, personality, effort, preferences External: Luck, task difficulty, circumstances
Weiner: Three Dimensions ControllabilityStabilityLocus Internal or External Constant or Varying Controllable or Uncontrollable
Ability or Effort? EffortAbility Internal Stable Uncontrollable Internal Unstable Controllable
Why did I fail that final exam? Locus of Causality Internal External Stability Stable Ability I’m stupid and bad at Calculus. Task Difficulty Calculus is really hard. Unstable Effort I didn’t work as hard as I should have. Luck This was a really tricky test.
Person Blame vs. System Blame
Sources of Info Prior performance history ! Social norms ! Teachers
Teacher Responses Teachers respond to student performance… Unintentionally & Spontaneously (Nonverbal) Deliberately (Praise, blame, helping) Students learn from teachers’ reactions… About themselves About their peers
Reactions to Others’ Outcomes Assumptions about teacher feedback When the teachers sees… Success and attributes it to high ability he/she responds with praise Success and attributes it to high effort he/she responds with praise Failure and attributes it to low ability he/she responds with pity Failure and attributes it to low effort he/she responds with anger/blame
Ability vs. Effort Naive theory of ability & effort as compensatory Ability makes up for lacking effort and vice versa “Smart students don’t have to study as much” Help-seeking “Avoid the kind of effort that implies a concession of lack of ability.” If two students achieve the same outcome, the one who tried harder is often seen as lower-ability.
Barker & Graham, 1987 Children watched videos of a pair of students working on easy math problems. ! Half of the children saw a video where both students solved all of the problems. One student received lots of praise and the other student received only neutral feedback (“Correct.”) ! The other half saw a video where both students failed all of the problems. One student was criticized and the other student received only neutral feedback (“Not correct.”) ! The students praised for success and the students not blamed for failure were both judged as likely lower-ability than their counterparts.
Attributional Consequences Responses to poor performance… Pity? Implies that student could not have changed the outcome Low ability inference Anger/Blame? Implies that the student could have changed the outcome Low effort inference, but often also a high ability inference!
Graham, 1984 Sixth graders tried (and failed) a novel puzzle task. ! A female experimenter posing as a teacher responded with pity, with anger, or with no emotion. ! Children were most likely to attribute their failure to low ability when the teacher conveyed pity, and most likely to attribute their failure to insufficient effort when the teacher conveyed anger.
Attributional Consequences Responses to good performance Positive feedback sustains motivation But…too much for low difficulty tasks? Signals low expectations Low ability inferences
Attributional Consequences Unsolicited help? Low ability inferences Blame? High ability inferences Naive Theories “Help is given to those who cannot help themselves” “Those who are blamed can help themselves”
Graham & Barker, 1990 Participants watched a video of two students working on math problems as their teacher walked around their desks. ! The teacher provided one student with unsolicited help very early on, before the student could even really be struggling. The teacher simply looked at the other student’s paper and kept walking. ! Participants assumed that the helped student was likely lower in ability than his unhelped counterpart.
Attributional Consequences Compared to letter grades, written feedback elicits… Greater task (mastery) orientation Focus on process of learning (mastery goals) Less ego-involvement Focus on grades, etc. (performance goals)
Explanatory Styles “Trait”-like ways that we explain things Do you tend to see events as internal/external? Stable/ unstable? Controllable/uncontrollable? Pessimistic Explanatory Style: Internal, Stable, Uncontrollable for negative events/failures.
Significant correlations between having a pessimistic explanatory style at age 25 and physical health problems at ages 45-60!
Fundamental Attribution Error The tendency to attribute a person’s behavior to personality while ignoring situational causes.
Fundamental Attribution Error A driver who cuts you off is automatically a jerk or a bad driver (or worse…) Maybe she was in a hurry, had to swerve to avoid an object in the street, had kids pulling her hair…
Fundamental Attribution Error Observers often don’t consider the situational advantages enjoyed by those who succeed. Bill Gates had access to real-time programming years before most people did.
Fundamental Attribution Error Observers often don’t consider the situational advantages enjoyed by those who succeed. A disproportionate number of pro hockey players have January, February, or March birthdays.
Fundamental Attribution Error Observers often don’t consider the situational advantages enjoyed by those who succeed. A disproportionate number of pro soccer players have September, October, or November birthdays.
Fundamental Attribution Error Observers often don’t consider the situational advantages enjoyed by those who succeed. Children born on opposite ends of the cutoff date differ by 12% in 4th grade standardized math & science scores.
Students trying to look good Desirable: High Ability Self-serving biases Taking credit for successes Deflecting blame for failure Problem: Claiming high ability in light of failure “What’s so great about self-esteem?”
Self-Serving Attributional Bias The tendency to attribute failures to external causes and successes to internal causes. This usually occurs because people want to maintain a positive image of themselves. Think for a moment… The last time you got an A, was it because you were smart & prepared, or because the test was easy? The last time you got a C, was it because you weren’t smart or prepared, or because the test was hard or unfair?
Self-Serving Attributional Bias After a professional sports game, 80% of statements made about the victory by coaches/athletes cited internal causes (“we trained hard”), while 47% of the statements made about the loss cited external causes (“bad calls”). ! In shareholder business letters, CEOs claimed credit for 83% of positive events but only claimed blame for 19% of negative events.
Reactions to Own Outcomes When I experience…. Success and attribute it to high ability I feel pride Success and attribute it to high effort I feel contentment Failure and attribute it to low ability I feel shame Failure and attribute it to low effort I feel guilt
Consequences of Attributions Motivations & expectations depend on attributions Ability vs. Effort How will I do next time? What do I need to do next time? Amount of effort/studying needed Should I seek help or not?
What To Do? Perry et al., 2010 Two types of dysfunctional attributional thinking Relinquished Control Bad luck, low ability, test difficulty, and poor teaching Rely on uncontrollable causes Devalued Control Discount effort & strategy Rely on controllable causes
Bad Starts and Better Finishes Perry et al., 2010 Attributional Re-Training Three components administered in a 1-hour session Causal Search Activation Attribution Induction Attribution Consolidation First-year students in Intro Psych class after 1st exam
Bad Starts and Better Finishes Perry et al., 2010 Attribution Consolidation Attribution Induction Causal Search Activation Initiate attributional thinking about causes of success & failure after feedback on 1st exam ! 10-item survey assessing various attributions ! “If I study in appropriate ways, I will be able to learn the material in my courses.” ! Estimates roles of ability & effort in exam performance 10-minute videotape ! Encourages controllable causal attributions for bad performance ! Two students talking about how poor performance can be changed & how their performance can improve with hard work & effort, with a professor agreeing at the end GRE-type aptitude test; intentionally difficult. ! Rated own perceptions of success/performance on test. ! Discussion of the videotape, highlighting adaptive & maladaptive attributions. ! 1-page handout summarizing good attributions; encouraged to keep it close as a reference.
Bad Starts and Better Finishes Perry et al., 2010 Students who got Attributional Retraining performed better on second exam, got better final grades, and had higher overall GPAs at the end of the semester! These benefits happened only in the low- and average- performance groups, not the high-performance groups Attributional retraining has the most potential benefit for the students who need the most help.
Bad Starts and Better Finishes Perry et al., 2010
Bad Starts and Better Finishes Perry et al., 2010
Discussion Questions! If children are praised just for effort and how hard they are trying, does that remove motivation to actually complete a task/succeed/do well? How can teachers & parents “train” good attributions? What are other ways that teachers communicate ability/effort inferences in the classroom & through feedback?
This Week Attributions Attribution Theory Attribution Training Beliefs about Intelligence Implicit Theories Consequences
Beliefs About Intelligence
What is Intelligence?
Scientific Study of Intelligence What is it? Where does it come from? How stable/flexible is it? How measurable is it?
The Origin Story of Intelligence Alfred Binet Creator of the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) Divide “intelligence age” by actual age Devised tests for identifying weak students Remedial instruction Why? Advances in statistical techniques Need for classification in the US Army during WWI
Issues How can we really measure “intelligence”? What does “intelligence” look like? One global intelligence? (Spearman, g) Multiple intelligences? (Gardner) Genetic vs. Environmental bases? Cultural influences?
Wisconsin Model Revisited SES of Origin Family Structure Ability Educational Attainment Academic Performance Influence of significant others Educational Ambition
Wisconsin Model Revisited SES of Origin Family Structure Ability Educational Attainment Academic Performance Influence of significant others Educational Ambition Intelligence
Predictive Power of Intelligence Life Outcomes Intelligence Socioeconomic Status Parenting Style
What Kinds of Beliefs?
Naïve Theories of Intelligence Carol Dweck: Implicit Naïve Theories Entity vs. Incremental Theories Intelligence is fixed Intelligence is malleable Why are they important? Shape inferences/attributions about own ability Shape inferences/attributions about others
Implicit Theories Core assumptions about the malleability of personal qualities Incremental or Malleable Entity or Fixed Things like intelligence, personality traits, or abilities are fixed, unchangeable, and innate. Things like intelligence, personality traits, or abilities can be grown or developed over time.
Implicit Theories Entity (Stable) Your personality/abilities are fixed No matter what you do, they pretty much stay the same. ! Incremental (Unstable) Your personality/abilities are malleable If you want to change them, you can do so with enough effort.
Implicit Theories The entity theory world is about measuring your ability, and everything (challenging tasks, effort, setbacks) measures your ability. It is a world of threats and defenses. ! The incremental world is about learning and growth, and everything (challenges, effort, setbacks) is seen as being helpful to learn and grow. It is a world of opportunities to improve.
Why Do Beliefs Matter?
Resilience Good outcomes in spite of serious threats to adaptation or development (Masten, 2001) Any behavioral, attributional, or emotional response to an academic or social challenge that is positive and beneficial for development, such as seeking new strategies, putting forth greater effort, or solving conflicts peacefully (Yeager & Dweck, 2012)
Entity vs. Incremental Theories Your response to failure greatly depends on these mindsets. ! Entity theorists see failure as a threat. If “you are who you are,” failing means that you are a failure. Incremental theorists see failure as a cue to work harder. If you can change, failing just means you need to put in more effort.
Implicit Theories of Intelligence Fixed Malleable Student Goal Look smart (even if you sacrifice learning) Learn new things (even if it’s hard or risky) Failure Implications Low Intelligence Low Effort/Poor Strategy Effort Implications Low Intelligence Activate & Grow Intelligence Post-Difficulty Strategy Less Effort More Effort Self-Defeating Behavior High Low Post-Difficulty Performance Impaired Equal or Improved
Implicit Theories & IQ Performance Cury, Da Fonseca, Zahn & Elliot (2008) JESP Entity Theory High Worry Lower IQ Test Performance Low Willingness to Practice Incremental Theory Low Worry Higher IQ Test Performance High Willingness to Practice
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping 110 participants at a private, elite university Performed problem-solving sets & received feedback Manipulated… (1) Theory of Intelligence (Entity vs. Incremental) (2) Problem-Solving Experience (Success vs. Failure) Performed second pattern-completion task Would they self-handicap?
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Entity Message A lot of research suggests that giftedness is strongly fixed through genetics. It’s either something you have or you don’t have. So as expected, we’ve found in our own research that high ability, like what we’ve identified in you, results in fairly stable performance. It’s the kind of thing that results in really consistent performance across our different study tasks.
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Incremental Message We’ve found that achieving at such a high level, like you have, requires not just high ability but also hard work and persistence. Things like effort, really sticking it out during a difficult task — those things are really important so that you can continually improve even from your high skill level. We’re actually pretty excited about these findings. It means that effort is still important, even for gifted students like you.
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Success I can see you’ve done really well on these problems and you got [#] correct. That’s really great and right in line with the other participants we’ve had in the gifted study. Failure It looks like you had some trouble with these problems. You didn’t get any correct…usually our gifted participants get at least three of these questions right. I don’t really know if the gifted label actually applies now but let’s just move on to the next gifted task.
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Claimed Self-Handicapping on Task #2 14 factors like test anxiety, illness, fatigue, etc. “How likely is ___ to negatively impact your performance?” Behavioral Self-Handicapping on Task #2 Allowed to choose the level of light on a dimmer Told that bright light would help, low light would hurt
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Claimed Self-Handicapping: Women
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Claimed Self-Handicapping: Men
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping
Snyder et al., 2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping
How Are Beliefs Formed… And Can They Be Changed?
The Role of Praise Ability Praise (“You’re so smart!”) Effort Praise (“You worked so hard!”) Promoted Theory of Intelligence Entity/Fixed Incremental/Malleable Student Goal Look smart (even if you sacrifice learning) Learn new things (even if it’s hard or risky) Failure Implications Low Intelligence Low Effort/Poor Strategy Post-Difficulty Enjoyment & Persistence Low High Defensiveness (Denial, Lying, etc.) High Low Post-Difficulty Performance Impaired Improved
Interventions! Aronson et al., 2002: Intervention group increased GPA by ≈ 0.23 grade points ! Good et al., 2003: Intervention group had significantly higher math & verbal achievement scores
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence 40% of respondents in 1 study rated adolescence as the worst time of life - more than any other stage Core beliefs can set up different patterns of response to challenge & setbacks Longitudinal study of students in junior high school 373 students in 4 consecutive 7th-grade classes
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Time 1: Motivational Questionnaire Intelligence theories, goals, effort beliefs, responses to failure Entity vs. Incremental Theories Mastery vs. Performance Goals Beliefs that effort leads to positive outcomes (or is ineffective) Responses to Failure Helpless: Ability-Based, Uncontrollable Positive: Effort-Based Subsequent Measures Math Grades
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Incremental Theory Correlates With… Positive effort beliefs (r = 0.54) Learning goals (r = 0.34) Fewer helpless attributions (r = 0.44) More positive response strategies (r = 0.45) Higher math achievement scores
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence 99 low-achieving 7th-graders in NYC Time 1: Achievement, motivational questionnaire Intervention Time 2: Achievement, motivational questionnaire
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Both Groups Sessions 1 & 2 ! The Brain - Structure & Function Sessions 5 & 6 ! Anti-Stereotyping Lesson Study Skills & Time Management Lesson Eight 25-minute periods 1 period each week
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Attribution Consolidation Control Sessions 3 & 4 ! Memory Lesson Activity: “Grocery Store Tricks” Sessions 7 & 8 ! Discussion on how learning makes you smarter & smart/dumb labels should be avoided Sessions 3 & 4 ! Incremental Theory Intervention Activity: “Neural Network Maze” Sessions 7 & 8 ! Discussion on academic difficulties & successes, memory, and the brain
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence 4 4.25 4.5 4.75 5 Control Group Intervention Group Pre-Intervention Post-Intervention Endorse Incremental Theory
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence 0 10 20 30 40 50 Control Group Intervention Group Teachers Spontaneously Citing Positive Change
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Teachers Spontaneously Citing Positive Change “L., who never puts in any extra effort and doesn’t turn in homework on time, actually stayed up late working for hours to finish an assignment early so I could review it and give him a chance to revise it. He earned a B+ on the assignment (he had been getting C’s and lower).”
Blackwell et al., 2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence
Is It Just About Intelligence?
Peer Exclusion Adolescents increasingly seem to believe that social labels, once acquired, are fixed entities that cannot change. (Birnbaum et al., 2010; Diesendruck & haLevi, 2006; Killen et al, 2010)
Peer Exclusion ! People with entity theories of personality are more likely to see their own & others’ negative behaviors as stemming from fixed, personal deficienies. (Chiu et al., 1997; Erdley et al., 1997)
Yeager et al., 2011 Implicit Theories & Peer Conflicts High school students Entity vs. Incremental Theories of Personality “Bullies and victims are types of people that really can’t be changed.” Write about a time a peer upset or hurt you Rate your desire for vengeance Teens with higher entity theories reported significantly higher desires for revenge & a reduced desire to forgive the peer.
Yeager et al., 2011 Implicit Theories & Peer Conflicts High school students Read a story about a student who was bullied 1/2 of students learned that people’s characteristics can be developed and are not fixed (intervention) Students in the intervention group were significantly less likely to endorse aggressive, vengeful responses to the bullies
Yeager et al., 2011 Implicit Theories & Peer Conflicts Entity Shame after Exclusion Revenge & Punishment Incremental Less Shame Less Need for Revenge Incremental intervention = less aggressive retaliation, more prosocial action towards the excluder/aggressor
Yeager et al., 2011 Implicit Theories & Peer Conflicts We have found that what students need the most is not self-esteem boosting or trait labeling; instead, they need mindsets that represent challenges as things that they can take on and overcome over time with effort, new strategies, learning, help from others, and patience. ! When we emphasize people’s potential to change, we prepare our students to face life’s challenges resiliently.
Motivations Motivations to hold different theories of intelligence? ! Theories Conflict Theory Human Capital Theory Policies Tracking/Ability Grouping Open Access Policy
Discussion If people aren’t “vengeful” towards aggressors, how does that motivate change? Is it always best to be forgiving? Do you have more of an entity or incremental mindset? Why do you think this is the case? Do you think that there are any benefits of entity mindsets or disadvantages of incremental mindsets? What does it mean to “underachieve” as discussed in the Snyder article? Is “underachieving” more about objective standards, other- perceptions, or self-perceptions? Do you think gender plays a role in mindset/belief development? Race/ethnicity? SES? If so, how and why?

More Related Content

PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Teachers
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
EXPLAINING BEHAVIOR (Psych 201 - Chapter 5 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Gender & Education
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PPTX
Teaching with Poverty (The Impact and Strategies) (July 2014)
byMatt Bergman
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Goals & Motivation
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PPTX
Strategies for Empathy, Grit and Resilience Part 2 of 2
byMann Rentoy
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Waiting For Superman
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Intergroup Relations & Cooperative ...
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Teachers
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
EXPLAINING BEHAVIOR (Psych 201 - Chapter 5 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Gender & Education
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
Teaching with Poverty (The Impact and Strategies) (July 2014)
byMatt Bergman
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Goals & Motivation
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
Strategies for Empathy, Grit and Resilience Part 2 of 2
byMann Rentoy
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Waiting For Superman
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Intergroup Relations & Cooperative ...
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 

What's hot

PPTX
DEVELOPING GRIT, RESILIENCE & EMPATHY
byMann Rentoy
 
PDF
ATTITUDES (Psych 201 - Chapter 7 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PPTX
BUILDING MORAL INTELLIGENCE (June 22)
byMann Rentoy
 
PDF
Class Advisory
byMann Rentoy
 
PPTX
DEVELOPING GRIT, RESILIENCE AND EMPATHY
byMann Rentoy
 
PDF
SOCIAL PSYCH INTRO (Psych 201 - Chapter 1 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PPTX
Teaching with poverty in mind by eric jensen
byrobinlstewart
 
PPTX
BETTER CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT
byMann Rentoy
 
PPTX
Teaching for Impact
byMann Rentoy
 
PPTX
MAY 29: CREATING SAFE AND CARING SCHOOLS
byMann Rentoy
 
PPTX
"Bully Proof" powerpoint from the author of "The Hero in Me"
byannieglass
 
PPTX
CREATING A KIND AND CARING CLASSROOM
byMann Rentoy
 
PPTX
S.T.E.M: Strategies That Engage Minds of High Poverty Students
byNorth Carolina Association for Middle Level Education
 
PPTX
Strategies for Empathy, Grit and Resilience Part 1 of 2
byMann Rentoy
 
PPTX
BETTER CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT (June 25)
byMann Rentoy
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Culture & Education
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PPTX
Methods and madness
byMann Rentoy
 
PPTX
Power point from poverty to potential
byallysonschoenlein
 
PPT
Teaching_Poverty_in_Mind
byWestcottJ
 
PPTX
Disrupting class
byPippaDavies
 
DEVELOPING GRIT, RESILIENCE & EMPATHY
byMann Rentoy
 
ATTITUDES (Psych 201 - Chapter 7 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
BUILDING MORAL INTELLIGENCE (June 22)
byMann Rentoy
 
Class Advisory
byMann Rentoy
 
DEVELOPING GRIT, RESILIENCE AND EMPATHY
byMann Rentoy
 
SOCIAL PSYCH INTRO (Psych 201 - Chapter 1 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
Teaching with poverty in mind by eric jensen
byrobinlstewart
 
BETTER CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT
byMann Rentoy
 
Teaching for Impact
byMann Rentoy
 
MAY 29: CREATING SAFE AND CARING SCHOOLS
byMann Rentoy
 
"Bully Proof" powerpoint from the author of "The Hero in Me"
byannieglass
 
CREATING A KIND AND CARING CLASSROOM
byMann Rentoy
 
S.T.E.M: Strategies That Engage Minds of High Poverty Students
byNorth Carolina Association for Middle Level Education
 
Strategies for Empathy, Grit and Resilience Part 1 of 2
byMann Rentoy
 
BETTER CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT (June 25)
byMann Rentoy
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Culture & Education
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
Methods and madness
byMann Rentoy
 
Power point from poverty to potential
byallysonschoenlein
 
Teaching_Poverty_in_Mind
byWestcottJ
 
Disrupting class
byPippaDavies
 

Viewers also liked

PPT
If you cannot change attitude, then change behavior ?
byMaxwell Ranasinghe
 
PPTX
Attribution
byCol Mukteshwar Prasad
 
PPTX
Protection, support and movement in animals
byAndrea Lim
 
PPTX
Human body
byKarl Pointer
 
PPTX
Phil.mythology
byDraizelle Sexon
 
PPT
28 Lecture Ppt
byWesley McCammon
 
PPTX
Philippine mythology
byjaycel mae tayco
 
PPTX
Biology M3 Movement in plants and animals
byeLearningJa
 
PPTX
Plant and Animal Responses to the Environment
byngibellini
 
PPTX
8 8. movement in plant
byAlfie Kesturi
 
PPT
Stimuli and responses in plants
bylanilana
 
PPTX
Attribution Theory
byAin-ul-Moiz Khawaja
 
PPT
Basic mythology
bymalama777
 
PPT
Psychology 101 Chapter 10 Social Psychology
bydborcoman
 
PPTX
Myths, beliefs, values
bytrosteck
 
PPT
Plant responses to the environment
bySian Ferguson
 
PPT
Basic mythology
bymalama777
 
PDF
ECPR Lisbon: Attributions of Responsibility Dynamics and Determinants
byThorsten Faas
 
PPT
SociologyExchange.co.uk Shared Resource
bysociologyexchange.co.uk
 
PPTX
Beliefs in society student blog
byfarzana0596
 
If you cannot change attitude, then change behavior ?
byMaxwell Ranasinghe
 
Attribution
byCol Mukteshwar Prasad
 
Protection, support and movement in animals
byAndrea Lim
 
Human body
byKarl Pointer
 
Phil.mythology
byDraizelle Sexon
 
28 Lecture Ppt
byWesley McCammon
 
Philippine mythology
byjaycel mae tayco
 
Biology M3 Movement in plants and animals
byeLearningJa
 
Plant and Animal Responses to the Environment
byngibellini
 
8 8. movement in plant
byAlfie Kesturi
 
Stimuli and responses in plants
bylanilana
 
Attribution Theory
byAin-ul-Moiz Khawaja
 
Basic mythology
bymalama777
 
Psychology 101 Chapter 10 Social Psychology
bydborcoman
 
Myths, beliefs, values
bytrosteck
 
Plant responses to the environment
bySian Ferguson
 
Basic mythology
bymalama777
 
ECPR Lisbon: Attributions of Responsibility Dynamics and Determinants
byThorsten Faas
 
SociologyExchange.co.uk Shared Resource
bysociologyexchange.co.uk
 
Beliefs in society student blog
byfarzana0596
 

Similar to SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Attributions & Beliefs

PDF
Teori atribusi
byNur Agustinus
 
PDF
Attribution Theory Essays
byPaper Writing Services
 
PPT
Lecture2.ppt
byPankajTripathi94
 
PDF
Black and Red Elegant Corporate Marketing Plan Presentation.pdf
byashutoshr160
 
PPTX
Theories of attribution ppt psychology ma.pptx
bypriya778087
 
PPTX
Introduction to the theories of attribution(1).pptx
byANNTHOMAS430706
 
PPTX
Attribution theory
byMuhammad Sohaib Afzaal
 
PPTX
Attribution Theory ppt
byAbhishek Panda
 
PPTX
Attribution Theory Powerpoint.pptx
byShoPee3
 
PPTX
Perception and Communications in Business Organization by Ofelia , Jericho & ...
byJay Gonzales
 
PPTX
Perception mod.
byJanak Secktoo
 
PPTX
Attribution theory final
bynikki marie apilando
 
PPTX
Attribution theory final
bynikki marie apilando
 
PPTX
Cognitive, Humanistic approach on motivation
byEl Sameeha
 
PPTX
Attribution power point
byabonica
 
PPT
Attribution Theory
bysoumya.parhi
 
PPTX
Attribution theory wg
byguertinw
 
PPTX
Attributiontheory 140519061214-phpapp01
byRajesh Dey
 
PPTX
Attribution theory wg
byguertinw
 
PPT
attribution & values.ppt
byPriya Sharma
 
Teori atribusi
byNur Agustinus
 
Attribution Theory Essays
byPaper Writing Services
 
Lecture2.ppt
byPankajTripathi94
 
Black and Red Elegant Corporate Marketing Plan Presentation.pdf
byashutoshr160
 
Theories of attribution ppt psychology ma.pptx
bypriya778087
 
Introduction to the theories of attribution(1).pptx
byANNTHOMAS430706
 
Attribution theory
byMuhammad Sohaib Afzaal
 
Attribution Theory ppt
byAbhishek Panda
 
Attribution Theory Powerpoint.pptx
byShoPee3
 
Perception and Communications in Business Organization by Ofelia , Jericho & ...
byJay Gonzales
 
Perception mod.
byJanak Secktoo
 
Attribution theory final
bynikki marie apilando
 
Attribution theory final
bynikki marie apilando
 
Cognitive, Humanistic approach on motivation
byEl Sameeha
 
Attribution power point
byabonica
 
Attribution Theory
bysoumya.parhi
 
Attribution theory wg
byguertinw
 
Attributiontheory 140519061214-phpapp01
byRajesh Dey
 
Attribution theory wg
byguertinw
 
attribution & values.ppt
byPriya Sharma
 

More from Melanie Tannenbaum

PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Academic Self-Concept
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOCIAL PSYCH INTRO (Psych 201 - Chapter 1 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
AGGRESSION (Psych 201 - Chapter 13 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
METHODS (Psych 201 - Chapter 2 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOCIAL COGNITION (Psych 201 - Chapter 4 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
STEREOTYPES PREJUDICE & DISCRIMINATION (Psych 201 - Chapter 11 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Intro & Theories
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
EMOTION (Psych 201 - Chapter 6 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
THE SOCIAL SELF (Psych 201 - Chapter 3 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Diversity, Stigma, and Affirmative ...
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOCIAL INFLUENCE (Psych 201 - Chapter 9 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Tracking & Ability Grouping
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Stratification
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
ALTRUISM & COOPERATION (Psych 201 - Chapter 14 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
Essay Handout
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Socialization
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Grades & Cultural Capital
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Race/Ethnicity & Education
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Spring 2015 Syllabus
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
PDF
Writing Workshop - SOC 463/663, Spring 2015
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Academic Self-Concept
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOCIAL PSYCH INTRO (Psych 201 - Chapter 1 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
AGGRESSION (Psych 201 - Chapter 13 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
METHODS (Psych 201 - Chapter 2 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOCIAL COGNITION (Psych 201 - Chapter 4 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
STEREOTYPES PREJUDICE & DISCRIMINATION (Psych 201 - Chapter 11 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Intro & Theories
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
EMOTION (Psych 201 - Chapter 6 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
THE SOCIAL SELF (Psych 201 - Chapter 3 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Diversity, Stigma, and Affirmative ...
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOCIAL INFLUENCE (Psych 201 - Chapter 9 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Tracking & Ability Grouping
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Stratification
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
ALTRUISM & COOPERATION (Psych 201 - Chapter 14 - Spring 2014)
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
Essay Handout
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Socialization
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Grades & Cultural Capital
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Race/Ethnicity & Education
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Spring 2015 Syllabus
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 
Writing Workshop - SOC 463/663, Spring 2015
byMelanie Tannenbaum
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
Result Analysis of the Pre Board 2025 .pdf
byDirectorate of Education Delhi
 
PPTX
OCCULTISM IN JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES' ARTWORK
byDaniel Barnea
 
PDF
A Short Guide to Clinical Pharmacokinetics - Krishnaveni Manubolu, Raveesha P...
byMan_Ebook
 
PPTX
2. Classification of vegetable and spice crops.pptx
byUmeshTimilsina1
 
PPTX
Structure and function of Integumentary system (skin).pptx
byAshish Umale
 
PPTX
How to Manage Margin & Cost in Odoo 18 POS
byCeline George
 
PPTX
L5 DRG Pulsed Radiofrequency ablation.pptx
bySandeep Margan
 
PPTX
All Things 2025 - A Year in Review Quiz!
byShashank Jogani
 
PDF
Gaming Quiz 2025- 27th October 2025, Quiz Club NITW
byQuiz Club NITW
 
PPT
Blood Grouping.ppt - Hematology -Physiology
bykishorkumar396
 
PPTX
Haemolytic_Anaemia_UG_MBBS_Haemolysis_haemolysis
byDibyajyoti Prusty
 
PPTX
Aplastic_Anaemia_PA17.1_Presentation.pptx
byDibyajyoti Prusty
 
PDF
The Industrialisation of Deception: An Analysis of the 2024 Cybercrime Landscape
bykrutivyas2005
 
PDF
• Reinforcing the Human Firewall: Moving From Awareness to Applied Skill
byAdityarajsinh Gohil
 
PDF
Life-Processes-in-Animals PPT/7TH CLASS NEW NCERT /CURIOSITY SCIENCE /BY K SA...
bySandeep Swamy
 
PDF
W.B. Yeats: The Visionary & The Observer A Comprehensive Study of 'The Second...
bykrutivyas2005
 
PPT
Clotting time - Practical - Hematology Physiology
bykishorkumar396
 
PPTX
Non aqueous titration First Year B. Pharm.pptx
byMs. Ashatai Patil
 
PPTX
Details Study of Joints (articulation).pptx
byAshish Umale
 
PPTX
Cultivation Practice of Major Cole crops in Nepal.pptx
byUmeshTimilsina1
 
Result Analysis of the Pre Board 2025 .pdf
byDirectorate of Education Delhi
 
OCCULTISM IN JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES' ARTWORK
byDaniel Barnea
 
A Short Guide to Clinical Pharmacokinetics - Krishnaveni Manubolu, Raveesha P...
byMan_Ebook
 
2. Classification of vegetable and spice crops.pptx
byUmeshTimilsina1
 
Structure and function of Integumentary system (skin).pptx
byAshish Umale
 
How to Manage Margin & Cost in Odoo 18 POS
byCeline George
 
L5 DRG Pulsed Radiofrequency ablation.pptx
bySandeep Margan
 
All Things 2025 - A Year in Review Quiz!
byShashank Jogani
 
Gaming Quiz 2025- 27th October 2025, Quiz Club NITW
byQuiz Club NITW
 
Blood Grouping.ppt - Hematology -Physiology
bykishorkumar396
 
Haemolytic_Anaemia_UG_MBBS_Haemolysis_haemolysis
byDibyajyoti Prusty
 
Aplastic_Anaemia_PA17.1_Presentation.pptx
byDibyajyoti Prusty
 
The Industrialisation of Deception: An Analysis of the 2024 Cybercrime Landscape
bykrutivyas2005
 
• Reinforcing the Human Firewall: Moving From Awareness to Applied Skill
byAdityarajsinh Gohil
 
Life-Processes-in-Animals PPT/7TH CLASS NEW NCERT /CURIOSITY SCIENCE /BY K SA...
bySandeep Swamy
 
W.B. Yeats: The Visionary & The Observer A Comprehensive Study of 'The Second...
bykrutivyas2005
 
Clotting time - Practical - Hematology Physiology
bykishorkumar396
 
Non aqueous titration First Year B. Pharm.pptx
byMs. Ashatai Patil
 
Details Study of Joints (articulation).pptx
byAshish Umale
 
Cultivation Practice of Major Cole crops in Nepal.pptx
byUmeshTimilsina1
 

SOC 463/663 (Social Psych of Education) - Attributions & Beliefs

  • 1.
    Attributions & Beliefs MelanieTannenbaum, M.A. Sociology 463/663 Spring 2015
  • 2.
    This Week Attributions Attribution Theory AttributionTraining Beliefs about Intelligence Implicit Theories Consequences
  • 3.
    This Week Attributions Attribution Theory AttributionTraining Beliefs about Intelligence Implicit Theories Consequences
  • 4.
  • 5.
    What’s Going OnHere? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FIEZXMUM2I ! Is the large triangle mean? Yes No Can’t Tell
  • 6.
    Attribution Theory Theories abouthow people explain the causes of the events that they observe.
  • 7.
    Attribution Theory People tendto make very complex inferences about motives and personalities based on very small amounts of information. ! We like to believe inferences, but there are many ways that they can fail us. The small shapes could have been trying to play with the large shape, who was just grumpy. The small shapes could have been trying to steal something from the large shape, who was rightfully mad. ! Also, they are shapes.
  • 8.
  • 9.
    Attributions: What? B =f (P, E) Behavior is a function of the person and the environment. ! Causal attribution is the process of deciding if you think that someone’s behavior was caused more by P or by E. ! You can make these attributions for others and you can also make these attributions for yourself.
  • 10.
    Attributions: When? When thingsgo wrong When important things happen When expectancies are violated But… Often spontaneous and implicit assumptions of causality!
  • 11.
    Attributions “Causal attributions answer‘why’ questions, such as ‘Why did I fail this exam?’ or ‘Why don’t any of my classmates like me?’ It is intended that these examples describe situations of failure because we are more likely to want to know ‘why’ given negative, unexpected, or atypical outcomes.” - Graham, 1991
  • 12.
    Attributions: Why? Fritz Heider Peopleare “naive scientists” Goal is to accurately assess reasons Distinction between internal and external causes Internal: Ability, personality, effort, preferences External: Luck, task difficulty, circumstances
  • 13.
  • 14.
  • 15.
    Why did Ifail that final exam? Locus of Causality Internal External Stability Stable Ability I’m stupid and bad at Calculus. Task Difficulty Calculus is really hard. Unstable Effort I didn’t work as hard as I should have. Luck This was a really tricky test.
  • 16.
  • 17.
    Sources of Info Priorperformance history ! Social norms ! Teachers
  • 18.
    Teacher Responses Teachers respondto student performance… Unintentionally & Spontaneously (Nonverbal) Deliberately (Praise, blame, helping) Students learn from teachers’ reactions… About themselves About their peers
  • 19.
    Reactions to Others’Outcomes Assumptions about teacher feedback When the teachers sees… Success and attributes it to high ability he/she responds with praise Success and attributes it to high effort he/she responds with praise Failure and attributes it to low ability he/she responds with pity Failure and attributes it to low effort he/she responds with anger/blame
  • 20.
    Ability vs. Effort Naivetheory of ability & effort as compensatory Ability makes up for lacking effort and vice versa “Smart students don’t have to study as much” Help-seeking “Avoid the kind of effort that implies a concession of lack of ability.” If two students achieve the same outcome, the one who tried harder is often seen as lower-ability.
  • 21.
    Barker & Graham,1987 Children watched videos of a pair of students working on easy math problems. ! Half of the children saw a video where both students solved all of the problems. One student received lots of praise and the other student received only neutral feedback (“Correct.”) ! The other half saw a video where both students failed all of the problems. One student was criticized and the other student received only neutral feedback (“Not correct.”) ! The students praised for success and the students not blamed for failure were both judged as likely lower-ability than their counterparts.
  • 22.
    Attributional Consequences Responses topoor performance… Pity? Implies that student could not have changed the outcome Low ability inference Anger/Blame? Implies that the student could have changed the outcome Low effort inference, but often also a high ability inference!
  • 23.
    Graham, 1984 Sixth graderstried (and failed) a novel puzzle task. ! A female experimenter posing as a teacher responded with pity, with anger, or with no emotion. ! Children were most likely to attribute their failure to low ability when the teacher conveyed pity, and most likely to attribute their failure to insufficient effort when the teacher conveyed anger.
  • 24.
    Attributional Consequences Responses togood performance Positive feedback sustains motivation But…too much for low difficulty tasks? Signals low expectations Low ability inferences
  • 25.
    Attributional Consequences Unsolicited help? Lowability inferences Blame? High ability inferences Naive Theories “Help is given to those who cannot help themselves” “Those who are blamed can help themselves”
  • 26.
    Graham & Barker,1990 Participants watched a video of two students working on math problems as their teacher walked around their desks. ! The teacher provided one student with unsolicited help very early on, before the student could even really be struggling. The teacher simply looked at the other student’s paper and kept walking. ! Participants assumed that the helped student was likely lower in ability than his unhelped counterpart.
  • 27.
    Attributional Consequences Compared toletter grades, written feedback elicits… Greater task (mastery) orientation Focus on process of learning (mastery goals) Less ego-involvement Focus on grades, etc. (performance goals)
  • 28.
    Explanatory Styles “Trait”-like waysthat we explain things Do you tend to see events as internal/external? Stable/ unstable? Controllable/uncontrollable? Pessimistic Explanatory Style: Internal, Stable, Uncontrollable for negative events/failures.
  • 29.
    Significant correlations between havinga pessimistic explanatory style at age 25 and physical health problems at ages 45-60!
  • 30.
    Fundamental Attribution Error Thetendency to attribute a person’s behavior to personality while ignoring situational causes.
  • 31.
    Fundamental Attribution Error Adriver who cuts you off is automatically a jerk or a bad driver (or worse…) Maybe she was in a hurry, had to swerve to avoid an object in the street, had kids pulling her hair…
  • 32.
    Fundamental Attribution Error Observersoften don’t consider the situational advantages enjoyed by those who succeed. Bill Gates had access to real-time programming years before most people did.
  • 33.
    Fundamental Attribution Error Observersoften don’t consider the situational advantages enjoyed by those who succeed. A disproportionate number of pro hockey players have January, February, or March birthdays.
  • 34.
    Fundamental Attribution Error Observersoften don’t consider the situational advantages enjoyed by those who succeed. A disproportionate number of pro soccer players have September, October, or November birthdays.
  • 35.
    Fundamental Attribution Error Observersoften don’t consider the situational advantages enjoyed by those who succeed. Children born on opposite ends of the cutoff date differ by 12% in 4th grade standardized math & science scores.
  • 36.
    Students trying tolook good Desirable: High Ability Self-serving biases Taking credit for successes Deflecting blame for failure Problem: Claiming high ability in light of failure “What’s so great about self-esteem?”
  • 37.
    Self-Serving Attributional Bias Thetendency to attribute failures to external causes and successes to internal causes. This usually occurs because people want to maintain a positive image of themselves. Think for a moment… The last time you got an A, was it because you were smart & prepared, or because the test was easy? The last time you got a C, was it because you weren’t smart or prepared, or because the test was hard or unfair?
  • 38.
    Self-Serving Attributional Bias Aftera professional sports game, 80% of statements made about the victory by coaches/athletes cited internal causes (“we trained hard”), while 47% of the statements made about the loss cited external causes (“bad calls”). ! In shareholder business letters, CEOs claimed credit for 83% of positive events but only claimed blame for 19% of negative events.
  • 39.
    Reactions to OwnOutcomes When I experience…. Success and attribute it to high ability I feel pride Success and attribute it to high effort I feel contentment Failure and attribute it to low ability I feel shame Failure and attribute it to low effort I feel guilt
  • 40.
    Consequences of Attributions Motivations& expectations depend on attributions Ability vs. Effort How will I do next time? What do I need to do next time? Amount of effort/studying needed Should I seek help or not?
  • 41.
    What To Do? Perryet al., 2010 Two types of dysfunctional attributional thinking Relinquished Control Bad luck, low ability, test difficulty, and poor teaching Rely on uncontrollable causes Devalued Control Discount effort & strategy Rely on controllable causes
  • 42.
    Bad Starts andBetter Finishes Perry et al., 2010 Attributional Re-Training Three components administered in a 1-hour session Causal Search Activation Attribution Induction Attribution Consolidation First-year students in Intro Psych class after 1st exam
  • 43.
    Bad Starts andBetter Finishes Perry et al., 2010 Attribution Consolidation Attribution Induction Causal Search Activation Initiate attributional thinking about causes of success & failure after feedback on 1st exam ! 10-item survey assessing various attributions ! “If I study in appropriate ways, I will be able to learn the material in my courses.” ! Estimates roles of ability & effort in exam performance 10-minute videotape ! Encourages controllable causal attributions for bad performance ! Two students talking about how poor performance can be changed & how their performance can improve with hard work & effort, with a professor agreeing at the end GRE-type aptitude test; intentionally difficult. ! Rated own perceptions of success/performance on test. ! Discussion of the videotape, highlighting adaptive & maladaptive attributions. ! 1-page handout summarizing good attributions; encouraged to keep it close as a reference.
  • 44.
    Bad Starts andBetter Finishes Perry et al., 2010 Students who got Attributional Retraining performed better on second exam, got better final grades, and had higher overall GPAs at the end of the semester! These benefits happened only in the low- and average- performance groups, not the high-performance groups Attributional retraining has the most potential benefit for the students who need the most help.
  • 45.
    Bad Starts andBetter Finishes Perry et al., 2010
  • 46.
    Bad Starts andBetter Finishes Perry et al., 2010
  • 47.
    Discussion Questions! If childrenare praised just for effort and how hard they are trying, does that remove motivation to actually complete a task/succeed/do well? How can teachers & parents “train” good attributions? What are other ways that teachers communicate ability/effort inferences in the classroom & through feedback?
  • 48.
    This Week Attributions Attribution Theory AttributionTraining Beliefs about Intelligence Implicit Theories Consequences
  • 49.
  • 50.
  • 51.
    Scientific Study ofIntelligence What is it? Where does it come from? How stable/flexible is it? How measurable is it?
  • 52.
    The Origin Storyof Intelligence Alfred Binet Creator of the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) Divide “intelligence age” by actual age Devised tests for identifying weak students Remedial instruction Why? Advances in statistical techniques Need for classification in the US Army during WWI
  • 53.
    Issues How can wereally measure “intelligence”? What does “intelligence” look like? One global intelligence? (Spearman, g) Multiple intelligences? (Gardner) Genetic vs. Environmental bases? Cultural influences?
  • 54.
    Wisconsin Model Revisited SESof Origin Family Structure Ability Educational Attainment Academic Performance Influence of significant others Educational Ambition
  • 55.
    Wisconsin Model Revisited SESof Origin Family Structure Ability Educational Attainment Academic Performance Influence of significant others Educational Ambition Intelligence
  • 56.
    Predictive Power ofIntelligence Life Outcomes Intelligence Socioeconomic Status Parenting Style
  • 57.
    What Kinds ofBeliefs?
  • 58.
    Naïve Theories ofIntelligence Carol Dweck: Implicit Naïve Theories Entity vs. Incremental Theories Intelligence is fixed Intelligence is malleable Why are they important? Shape inferences/attributions about own ability Shape inferences/attributions about others
  • 59.
    Implicit Theories Core assumptionsabout the malleability of personal qualities Incremental or Malleable Entity or Fixed Things like intelligence, personality traits, or abilities are fixed, unchangeable, and innate. Things like intelligence, personality traits, or abilities can be grown or developed over time.
  • 60.
    Implicit Theories Entity (Stable) Yourpersonality/abilities are fixed No matter what you do, they pretty much stay the same. ! Incremental (Unstable) Your personality/abilities are malleable If you want to change them, you can do so with enough effort.
  • 61.
    Implicit Theories The entitytheory world is about measuring your ability, and everything (challenging tasks, effort, setbacks) measures your ability. It is a world of threats and defenses. ! The incremental world is about learning and growth, and everything (challenges, effort, setbacks) is seen as being helpful to learn and grow. It is a world of opportunities to improve.
  • 62.
  • 63.
    Resilience Good outcomes inspite of serious threats to adaptation or development (Masten, 2001) Any behavioral, attributional, or emotional response to an academic or social challenge that is positive and beneficial for development, such as seeking new strategies, putting forth greater effort, or solving conflicts peacefully (Yeager & Dweck, 2012)
  • 64.
    Entity vs. IncrementalTheories Your response to failure greatly depends on these mindsets. ! Entity theorists see failure as a threat. If “you are who you are,” failing means that you are a failure. Incremental theorists see failure as a cue to work harder. If you can change, failing just means you need to put in more effort.
  • 65.
    Implicit Theories ofIntelligence Fixed Malleable Student Goal Look smart (even if you sacrifice learning) Learn new things (even if it’s hard or risky) Failure Implications Low Intelligence Low Effort/Poor Strategy Effort Implications Low Intelligence Activate & Grow Intelligence Post-Difficulty Strategy Less Effort More Effort Self-Defeating Behavior High Low Post-Difficulty Performance Impaired Equal or Improved
  • 66.
    Implicit Theories &IQ Performance Cury, Da Fonseca, Zahn & Elliot (2008) JESP Entity Theory High Worry Lower IQ Test Performance Low Willingness to Practice Incremental Theory Low Worry Higher IQ Test Performance High Willingness to Practice
  • 67.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping 110 participants at a private, elite university Performed problem-solving sets & received feedback Manipulated… (1) Theory of Intelligence (Entity vs. Incremental) (2) Problem-Solving Experience (Success vs. Failure) Performed second pattern-completion task Would they self-handicap?
  • 68.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Entity Message A lot of research suggests that giftedness is strongly fixed through genetics. It’s either something you have or you don’t have. So as expected, we’ve found in our own research that high ability, like what we’ve identified in you, results in fairly stable performance. It’s the kind of thing that results in really consistent performance across our different study tasks.
  • 69.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Incremental Message We’ve found that achieving at such a high level, like you have, requires not just high ability but also hard work and persistence. Things like effort, really sticking it out during a difficult task — those things are really important so that you can continually improve even from your high skill level. We’re actually pretty excited about these findings. It means that effort is still important, even for gifted students like you.
  • 70.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Success I can see you’ve done really well on these problems and you got [#] correct. That’s really great and right in line with the other participants we’ve had in the gifted study. Failure It looks like you had some trouble with these problems. You didn’t get any correct…usually our gifted participants get at least three of these questions right. I don’t really know if the gifted label actually applies now but let’s just move on to the next gifted task.
  • 71.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Claimed Self-Handicapping on Task #2 14 factors like test anxiety, illness, fatigue, etc. “How likely is ___ to negatively impact your performance?” Behavioral Self-Handicapping on Task #2 Allowed to choose the level of light on a dimmer Told that bright light would help, low light would hurt
  • 72.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Claimed Self-Handicapping: Women
  • 73.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping Claimed Self-Handicapping: Men
  • 74.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping
  • 75.
    Snyder et al.,2014 Giftedness Beliefs & Self-Handicapping
  • 76.
    How Are BeliefsFormed… And Can They Be Changed?
  • 77.
    The Role ofPraise Ability Praise (“You’re so smart!”) Effort Praise (“You worked so hard!”) Promoted Theory of Intelligence Entity/Fixed Incremental/Malleable Student Goal Look smart (even if you sacrifice learning) Learn new things (even if it’s hard or risky) Failure Implications Low Intelligence Low Effort/Poor Strategy Post-Difficulty Enjoyment & Persistence Low High Defensiveness (Denial, Lying, etc.) High Low Post-Difficulty Performance Impaired Improved
  • 78.
    Interventions! Aronson et al.,2002: Intervention group increased GPA by ≈ 0.23 grade points ! Good et al., 2003: Intervention group had significantly higher math & verbal achievement scores
  • 79.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence 40% of respondents in 1 study rated adolescence as the worst time of life - more than any other stage Core beliefs can set up different patterns of response to challenge & setbacks Longitudinal study of students in junior high school 373 students in 4 consecutive 7th-grade classes
  • 80.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Time 1: Motivational Questionnaire Intelligence theories, goals, effort beliefs, responses to failure Entity vs. Incremental Theories Mastery vs. Performance Goals Beliefs that effort leads to positive outcomes (or is ineffective) Responses to Failure Helpless: Ability-Based, Uncontrollable Positive: Effort-Based Subsequent Measures Math Grades
  • 81.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Incremental Theory Correlates With… Positive effort beliefs (r = 0.54) Learning goals (r = 0.34) Fewer helpless attributions (r = 0.44) More positive response strategies (r = 0.45) Higher math achievement scores
  • 82.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence
  • 83.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence 99 low-achieving 7th-graders in NYC Time 1: Achievement, motivational questionnaire Intervention Time 2: Achievement, motivational questionnaire
  • 84.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Both Groups Sessions 1 & 2 ! The Brain - Structure & Function Sessions 5 & 6 ! Anti-Stereotyping Lesson Study Skills & Time Management Lesson Eight 25-minute periods 1 period each week
  • 85.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Attribution Consolidation Control Sessions 3 & 4 ! Memory Lesson Activity: “Grocery Store Tricks” Sessions 7 & 8 ! Discussion on how learning makes you smarter & smart/dumb labels should be avoided Sessions 3 & 4 ! Incremental Theory Intervention Activity: “Neural Network Maze” Sessions 7 & 8 ! Discussion on academic difficulties & successes, memory, and the brain
  • 86.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence 4 4.25 4.5 4.75 5 Control Group Intervention Group Pre-Intervention Post-Intervention Endorse Incremental Theory
  • 87.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence 0 10 20 30 40 50 Control Group Intervention Group Teachers Spontaneously Citing Positive Change
  • 88.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence Teachers Spontaneously Citing Positive Change “L., who never puts in any extra effort and doesn’t turn in homework on time, actually stayed up late working for hours to finish an assignment early so I could review it and give him a chance to revise it. He earned a B+ on the assignment (he had been getting C’s and lower).”
  • 89.
    Blackwell et al.,2007 Implicit Theories & Adolescence
  • 90.
    Is It JustAbout Intelligence?
  • 91.
    Peer Exclusion Adolescents increasinglyseem to believe that social labels, once acquired, are fixed entities that cannot change. (Birnbaum et al., 2010; Diesendruck & haLevi, 2006; Killen et al, 2010)
  • 92.
    Peer Exclusion ! People withentity theories of personality are more likely to see their own & others’ negative behaviors as stemming from fixed, personal deficienies. (Chiu et al., 1997; Erdley et al., 1997)
  • 93.
    Yeager et al.,2011 Implicit Theories & Peer Conflicts High school students Entity vs. Incremental Theories of Personality “Bullies and victims are types of people that really can’t be changed.” Write about a time a peer upset or hurt you Rate your desire for vengeance Teens with higher entity theories reported significantly higher desires for revenge & a reduced desire to forgive the peer.
  • 94.
    Yeager et al.,2011 Implicit Theories & Peer Conflicts High school students Read a story about a student who was bullied 1/2 of students learned that people’s characteristics can be developed and are not fixed (intervention) Students in the intervention group were significantly less likely to endorse aggressive, vengeful responses to the bullies
  • 95.
    Yeager et al.,2011 Implicit Theories & Peer Conflicts Entity Shame after Exclusion Revenge & Punishment Incremental Less Shame Less Need for Revenge Incremental intervention = less aggressive retaliation, more prosocial action towards the excluder/aggressor
  • 96.
    Yeager et al.,2011 Implicit Theories & Peer Conflicts We have found that what students need the most is not self-esteem boosting or trait labeling; instead, they need mindsets that represent challenges as things that they can take on and overcome over time with effort, new strategies, learning, help from others, and patience. ! When we emphasize people’s potential to change, we prepare our students to face life’s challenges resiliently.
  • 97.
    Motivations Motivations to holddifferent theories of intelligence? ! Theories Conflict Theory Human Capital Theory Policies Tracking/Ability Grouping Open Access Policy
  • 98.
    Discussion If people aren’t“vengeful” towards aggressors, how does that motivate change? Is it always best to be forgiving? Do you have more of an entity or incremental mindset? Why do you think this is the case? Do you think that there are any benefits of entity mindsets or disadvantages of incremental mindsets? What does it mean to “underachieve” as discussed in the Snyder article? Is “underachieving” more about objective standards, other- perceptions, or self-perceptions? Do you think gender plays a role in mindset/belief development? Race/ethnicity? SES? If so, how and why?