A growth-mindset intervention teaches the belief that intellectual abilities can be developed. Where does the intervention work best? Prior research examined school-level moderators using data from the National Study of Learning Mindsets (NSLM), which delivered a short growth-mindset intervention during the first year of high school. In the present research, we used data from the NSLM to examine moderation by teachers’ mindsets and answer a new question: Can students independently implement their growth mindsets in virtually any classroom culture, or must students’ growth mindsets be supported by their teacher’s own growth mindsets (i.e., the mindset-plus-supportive-context hypothesis)? The present analysis (9,167 student records matched with 223 math teachers) supported the latter hypothesis. This result stood up to potentially confounding teacher factors and to a conservative Bayesian analysis. Thus, sustaining growth-mindset effects may require contextual supports that allow the proffered beliefs to take root and flourish. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Social-evaluative stressors-experiences in which people feel they could be judged negatively-pose a major threat to adolescent mental health(1-3) and can cause young people to disengage from stressful pursuits, resulting in missed opportunities to acquire valuable skills. Here we show that replicable benefits for the stress responses of adolescents can be achieved with a short (around 30-min), scalable 'synergistic mindsets' intervention. This intervention, which is a self-administered online training module, synergistically targets both growth mindsets(4) (the idea that intelligence can be developed) and stress-can-be-enhancing mindsets(5) (the idea that one's physiological stress response can fuel optimal performance). In six double-blind, randomized, controlled experiments that were conducted with secondary and post-secondary students in the United States, the synergistic mindsets intervention improved stress-related cognitions (study 1, n = 2,717; study 2, n = 755), cardiovascular reactivity (study 3, n = 160; study 4, n = 200), daily cortisol levels (study 5, n = 118 students, n = 1,213 observations), psychological well-being (studies 4 and 5), academic success (study 5) and anxiety symptoms during the 2020 COVID-19 lockdowns (study 6, n = 341). Heterogeneity analyses (studies 3, 5 and 6) and a four-cell experiment (study 4) showed that the benefits of the intervention depended on addressing both mindsets-growth and stress-synergistically. Confidence in these conclusions comes from a conservative, Bayesian machine-learning statistical method for detecting heterogeneous effects(6). Thus, our research has identified a treatment for adolescent stress that could, in principle, be scaled nationally at low cost.

Mindset interventions, which shift students' beliefs about classroom experiences, have shown promise for promoting diversity in science, technology, engineering, and mathe-matics (STEM). Psychologists have emphasized the importance of customizing these inter-ventions to specific courses, but there is not yet a protocol for doing so. We developed a protocol for creating customized peer-modeled mindset interventions that elicit advice from former students in videotaped interviews. In intervention activities, clips from these interviews, in which the former students' stories model the changes in thinking about chal-lenge and struggle that helped them succeed in a specific course, are provided to incom-ing life sciences students. Using this protocol, we developed a customized intervention for three sections of Introductory Biology I at a large university and tested it in a randomized controlled trial (N = 917). The intervention shifted students' attributions for struggle in the class away from a lack of potential to succeed and toward the need to develop a better ap-proach to studying. The intervention also improved students' approaches to studying and sense of belonging and had promising effects on performance and persistence in biology. Effects were pronounced among first-generation college students and underrepresented racial/ethnic minority students, who have been historically underrepresented in the STEM fields.

This registered study aimed at testing the role of emotion in the intervention effect of an experimental intervention study in academic settings. Previous analyses of the National Study of the Learning Mindset (Yeager et al., 2019) showed that in a randomized controlled trial, high school students who were given the growth mindset intervention had, on average higher GPA than did students in the control condition. Previous analyses also showed that school achievement levels moderated the intervention effect. This study applied a sentence level text analysis strategy to detect participants' attentional focus in five emotional dimensions (valence, arousal, dominance/control, approach-avoidant, and uncertainty) across three writing prompts students wrote during the intervention. Linear mixed models were conducted to test if emotional dimension scores computed using the text analysis predicted a higher intervention effect (i.e., higher post-intervention GPA given pre intervention GPA). The moderating role of school achievement levels was also examined. The results of this study have implications on the possibility of applying text analysis strategies on open-ended questions in interventions or experimental studies to examine the role of the emotion-attentional focus of participants during intervention or experimental studies on the intervention or experimental outcomes, especially those that are conducted in academic settings.

Behavioral science interventions have the potential to address longstanding policy problems, but their effects are typically heterogeneous across contexts (e.g., teachers, schools, and geographic regions). This contextual heterogeneity is poorly understood, however, which reduces the field's impact and its understanding of mechanisms. Here, we present an efficient way to interrogate heterogeneity and address these gaps in knowledge. This method a) presents scenarios that vividly represent different moderating contexts, b) measures a short-term behavioral outcome (e.g., an academic choice) that is known to relate to typical intervention outcomes (e.g., academic achievement), and c) assesses the causal effect of the moderating context on the link between the psychological variable typically targeted by interventions and this short-term outcome. We illustrated the utility of this approach across four experiments (total n = 3,235) that directly tested contextual moderators of the links between growth mindset, which is the belief that ability can be developed, and students' academic choices. The present results showed that teachers' growth mindset-supportive messages and the structural opportunities they provide moderated the link between students' mindsets and their choices (studies 1 to 3). This pattern was replicated in a nationally representative sample of adolescents and did not vary across demographic subgroups (study 2), nor was this pattern the result of several possible confounds (studies 3 to 4). Discussion centers on how this method of interrogating contextual heterogeneity can be applied to other behavioral science interventions and broaden their impact in other policy domains.

The contributed papers in this special issue each provide valuable perspectives on how social processes are relevant to academic motivation. Yet a critical question remains: How can this research lead to concrete guidance for educators who wish to create motivating and equitable classrooms? We propose this complex task can be simplified by encouraging educators to address students' concerns about how they are viewed by instructors in school. Our review of the literature suggests that two meta-concerns are particularly important to address for students from groups marginalized in education: whether instructors may (1) see them as limited in academic potential and (2) narrowly define them by their academic success. We argue that effective teaching practices address these concerns by communicating two corresponding messages: (1) inclusive expectations, I recognize your potential for academic growth and (2) broad regard, I regard you as a whole person, with a range of personal values, social identities, and relationships. These messages can shift students away from a narrow sense of self, in which their value is defined by current academic performance, and towards an expansive sense of self, in which students feel both academically capable and valued for more than just their academic success. We present evidence that novice instructors can use this framework to develop or adapt practices that are attuned to marginalized students' two meta-concerns and enhance student motivation and engagement. Throughout this commentary, we describe how this framework can build on the important theoretical advances presented elsewhere in this special issue.

Growth mindset interventions foster students' beliefs that their abilities can grow through effort and appropriate strategies. However, not every student benefits from such interventions - yet research identifying which student factors support growth mindset interventions is sparse. In this study, we utilized machine learning methods to predict growth mindset effectiveness in a nationwide experiment in the U.S. with over 10,000 students. These methods enable analysis of arbitrarily-complex interactions between combinations of student-level predictor variables and intervention outcome, defined as the improvement in grade point average (GPA) during the transition to high school. We utilized two separate machine learning models: one to control for complex relationships between 51 student-level predictors and GPA, and one to predict the change in GPA due to the intervention. We analyzed the trained models to discover which features influenced model predictions most, finding that prior academic achievement, blocked navigations (attempting to navigate through the intervention software too quickly), self-reported reasons for learning, and race/ethnicity were the most important predictors in the model for predicting intervention effectiveness. As in previous research, we found that the intervention was most effective for students with prior low academic achievement. Unique to this study, we found that blocked navigations predicted an intervention effect as low as 0.185 GPA points (on a 0-4 scale) less than the mean. This was a notable negative prediction given that the mean intervention effect in our sample was just 0.026 GPA points, though few students (4.4%) experienced a substantial number of blocked navigation events. We also found that some minoritized students were predicted to benefit less (or even not at all) from the intervention. Our findings have implications for the design of computer-administered growth mindset interventions, especially in relation to students who experience procedural difficulties completing the intervention.

Beliefs play a central role in human development. For instance, a growth mindset-a belief about the malleability of intelligence-can shape how adolescents interpret and respond to academic difficulties and how they subsequently navigate the educational system. But do usually-adaptive beliefs have the same effects for adolescents regardless of the contexts they are in? Answering this question can reveal new insights into classic developmental questions about continuity and change. Here we present the Mindset x Context framework and we apply this model to the instructive case of growth mindset interventions. We show that teaching students a growth mindset is most effective in educational contexts that provide affordances for a growth mindset; that is, contexts that permit and encourage students to view ability as developable and to act on that belief. This evidence contradicts the beliefs alone hypothesis, which holds that teaching adolescents a growth mindset is enough and that students can profit from these beliefs in almost any context, even unsupportive ones. The Mindset x Context framework leads to the realization that in order to produce more widespread and lasting change, we must complement the belief-changing interventions that have been aimed at students with new interventions that guide teachers toward classroom policies and practices that allow students' growth mindset beliefs to take root and yield benefits.