How to Enhance Performance & Learning by Applying a Growth Mindset

The episode opens by calling growth mindset one of the most interesting and powerful concepts in psychology. The host describes it as a way of embracing challenge and interpreting the body's and brain's response to challenge so that performance can be optimized. A key feature singled out early is the ability to distance one's identity from whatever challenge one is taking on. The host acknowledges this may surprise listeners, since many people grow up hearing that they are smart, talented, a good athlete or a good artist.

The central claim is counterintuitive: praise or feedback that attaches identity to performance can undermine performance, and this is described as especially problematic for people who already perform well. A strong student, athlete or musician who is told they are excellent has "much to lose" whenever they do not perform well, because their identity has been integrated with their performance. Growth mindset, in this framing, moves identity, effort and motivation away from outcomes and toward effort itself and the process of enjoying learning and getting better at learning.

The host also promises to correct how growth mindset is often described, saying it is frequently discussed in terms that "frankly are not accurate to the science." A second mindset, the stress-is-enhancing mindset, is introduced as something that can act synergistically with growth mindset. The host claims the combination has been shown to vastly improve performance in essentially anything. The discussion is set to cover Carol Dweck's classic work, which the host credits as founding the field, and newer research by David Yeager, Ali Crum and others on applying these mindsets in and out of the classroom, in children and adults.

The host defines growth mindset as the idea that abilities are not fixed but malleable, and links it to the brain's capacity to change in response to experience, known as neuroplasticity. The host adds a framing note that the podcast is separate from the host's teaching and research roles at Stanford.

According to the episode, neuroplasticity occurs across the whole lifespan but is far more robust from birth until about age 25, when it is essentially the default process shaped by everyday experience. After 25, and the host says even well into people's 90s, the brain can still change if we want it to. It can change for the worse through injury or disease. It can also change for the better through "deliberate, focused bouts of learning," such as learning languages, art or music, provided attentional resources are devoted to the task. The host therefore treats any discussion of growth mindset as carrying neuroplasticity as a subtext.

The host deliberately limits the scope here. The neural circuit and neurochemical mechanisms are said to have been covered in earlier episodes, so this one focuses mainly on psychology studies and on everyday tools. The host previews one later point: teaching growth mindset to others turns out to be an excellent way to reinforce one's own. The concept is credited to the host's colleague Carol Dweck in Stanford's Department of Psychology.

Before turning to the evidence, the episode argues that most people hold a loose idea of a mindset as a positive or negative mental stance or a belief. The host instead uses a more specific definition from Dr. Alia Crum, a Stanford psychology professor whose laboratory studies stress-related and other mindsets, and who has appeared on the podcast before.

A mental frame or lens that selectively organizes and encodes information.

The host emphasizes the word "organizes." People are constantly bombarded with external sensory information, from what they see, hear and feel, and with internal sensations such as hunger, fatigue, anxiety or calm. Mindsets help sort this flood so that we attend and respond to some things and not others. The host adds that mindsets organize information toward specific actions or inactions, simplifying the world and letting us set aside other kinds of information.

A further property is that mindsets contain whole narratives that usually operate without our awareness. Nobody approaches a chance to improve at fitness, music or arithmetic by consciously asking which lens is organizing their information. Instead, people carry stories, and those stories are usually tied to their sense of identity.

The host offers personal examples in both directions. On music, the host says, "I consider myself a terrible musician," noting an inability to read music or play instruments despite enjoying listening. On science, after close to three decades in the field and years running a laboratory, the host feels proficient at designing experiments, writing papers and writing grants. The general observation is that people decide whether they are good or bad at things and fold that judgment into their identity to a greater or lesser degree, depending on whether they are professionals or amateurs and how much they engage in the activity.

Because these narratives often run unexamined through school, work and relationships, the host presents growth mindset as a prompt to step back and ask some simple questions. Listeners are encouraged to ask them right away:

What have I been told I'm really good at, and what have I been told I'm poor at? What have I told myself I'm good at or bad at? What am I good at and why: did it come naturally, did it come from years of effort, or both? Why am I not good at other things: lack of effort, an early failure, or years of trying without reaching a satisfying level of proficiency? Where did the messages come from: parents, coaches, teachers, or my own conclusion despite positive feedback? To what extent are my labels, my identity, attached to the things I'm good or bad at?

The host also notes the opposite pattern: some people respond to negative feedback by persisting harder, digging their heels in to prove they can become good at something. The self-audit is presented as preparation for the research that follows.

The host describes research from Carol Dweck's laboratory as the seed of the growth mindset field. Its core finding, as summarized, is that the kind of feedback we receive sends us down very different performance paths in the short and long run. One kind attaches an identity label such as smart, great athlete or talented. The other is based on effort, such as having tried hard or persisted until getting the right answer. The host stresses that this applies to adults taking on or expanding a skill, as well as to young children, and that such feedback gets integrated into core beliefs about what is possible. The host's encouraging point is that those beliefs can also be modified by changing the feedback we give ourselves.

The specific paper is by Claudia Mueller and Carol Dweck. The host says the title "essentially says it all":

Praise for Intelligence Can Undermine Children's Motivation and Performance.

The host admits the intuitive expectation runs the other way. Genuine praise like "You're so smart. You're so talented" would seem likely to bolster motivation and improve performance, especially if it comes from people the child cares about. The host's answer is blunt: "It does not. In fact, the exact opposite happens."