Dweck’s Mindset Theory, Praise and Self-Efficacy

How beliefs about ability affect learning

Two learners can respond very differently to the same difficulty. One may stop practising because a mistake seems to show a lack of talent. Another may use the mistake to decide what to practise next. Psychologist Carol Dweck’s mindset theory explains these differences through beliefs about whether ability can change.

A fixed mindset is the belief that intelligence and ability are set, rather than developed through learning. Someone with this belief may think that people either have a talent or do not. Effort can therefore seem pointless, or even a sign of low ability: if you were naturally good, you would not need to try so hard.

This encourages performance goals, such as getting the highest mark or appearing talented. Difficult tasks threaten that image, so the learner may avoid them. Failure becomes evidence of low ability rather than an opportunity to improve.

A growth mindset is the belief that ability can develop through effort, practice and learning. This encourages learning goals, such as understanding a topic better or improving a skill. Challenges are worth attempting because they provide opportunities to develop. Failure can reveal what needs changing, rather than prove that improvement is impossible.

For example, a learner who struggles with a piano piece might think, ‘I have no musical talent, so there is no point practising.’ This reflects fixed-mindset thinking. ‘I need to practise the difficult section more slowly’ reflects growth-mindset thinking because it treats difficulty as something that learning can address.

Growth mindset does not mean that everyone can become the best at everything. Its central claim is that ability can improve. Nor are people permanently divided into two types: mindset lies on a continuum, can change over time and may differ between activities. Someone could believe they can improve at sport but think their mathematical ability is fixed.

Why the type of praise matters

Praise expresses approval for effort, behaviour or achievement. It can act as positive reinforcement: receiving approval feels rewarding, making the learner more likely to repeat the behaviour. Praise can also raise confidence and encourage further effort. To be useful, it needs to be sincere and deserved; praising everything regardless of what the learner has done can make it meaningless.

Dweck distinguishes praise directed at ability or performance from praise directed at effort. Saying ‘You are naturally brilliant at this’ can suggest that success reflects a fixed quality. The learner may then avoid harder work because failure could threaten the label of being clever or talented.

By contrast, ‘You kept practising that difficult section’ directs attention to something the learner can control. It suggests that improvement comes through action and can encourage persistence. Effort-focused praise also offers encouragement to learners who have worked hard without yet achieving the highest standard.

This does not mean achievement must never be praised. The important issue is the message praise communicates about learning. Approval that recognises genuine effort and improvement can encourage further learning, whereas a fixed label may make maintaining an appearance of ability more important than developing it.

Self-efficacy: expecting to succeed at a task

Self-efficacy is a person's belief in their ability to succeed at a particular task. It differs from mindset: mindset concerns whether ability can change, while self-efficacy concerns whether you believe you can accomplish something specific.

Past success can increase self-efficacy, while repeated failure can reduce it. Comments from teachers, parents and peers can also influence these expectations. A swimmer who has successfully completed a difficult training session may feel more capable of completing the next one.

High self-efficacy can encourage a learner to choose challenging tasks, invest effort and persist when difficulties arise. Low self-efficacy can lead to avoidance or early withdrawal: someone who expects to fail may see little reason to keep trying. These responses affect the opportunities the learner has to practise and improve.

Teachers can help by setting appropriately challenging tasks that allow learners to experience success and build towards harder work. Praise can support this process, but believable encouragement linked to actual progress is more useful than unsupported reassurance.

Evidence for useful classroom applications

Blackwell and colleagues (2007) taught low-achieving 12–13-year-olds that intelligence could develop. Their motivation and grades improved, while those of a control group did not. This supports Dweck’s argument that mindset can be taught and that changing beliefs may help learning. Yeager and colleagues (2019) also found that a brief growth-mindset programme improved grades among lower-achieving US secondary students.

Dweck (1975) found that students taught to attribute poor results to insufficient effort later persisted more on difficult tasks than students who were only praised. This suggests that simply providing approval is not enough: feedback that helps learners understand how they can improve may be more effective.

Spencer and colleagues (1999) gave a mathematics test to male and female psychology students of similar ability. When told that the test had shown gender differences, women performed worse than men; in the control condition there was no difference. One possible explanation is that the negative stereotype lowered women's expectations of success. This is consistent with beliefs influencing performance, although the result alone does not establish that self-efficacy caused the difference.

Limits of praise and mindset explanations

Praise may encourage learners to seek approval rather than enjoy learning for its own sake. Even effort-focused praise could leave a learner dependent on someone else's response. Lepper and colleagues (1973) found that nursery children rewarded for drawing later drew less than unrewarded children. This suggests external rewards can undermine intrinsic motivation. However, rewards for drawing are not identical to verbal praise, so the finding should not be treated as proof that all praise is harmful.

There is also a problem of cause and effect. High self-efficacy is associated with good performance, but success may build self-efficacy rather than self-efficacy alone producing success. The relationship could work in both directions.

Finally, emphasising mindset can place too much responsibility on the learner. Poor teaching or difficult home circumstances can obstruct progress even when someone is motivated and persistent. Overall, growth-oriented feedback and opportunities for success can support learning, but they should complement effective teaching and practical support, not replace them.