Knowledge or Abilities? How Undergraduates Define Intelligence

Abstract

Whether students view intelligence as a fixed or malleable trait (i.e., their “mindset”) has significant implications for their responses to failure and academic outcomes. Despite a long history of research on mindset and its growing popularity, recent meta-analyses suggest that mindset does a poor job of predicting academic outcomes for undergraduate populations. Here, we present evidence that these mixed results could be due to ambiguous language on the mindset scale. Specifically, the term “intelligence” is a referent in every item of the mindset scale but is never defined, which could result in differing interpretations and measurement error. Therefore, we conducted an exploratory, qualitative study to characterize how undergraduate students define intelligence and how their definitions may influence how they respond to the mindset scale. We uncovered two distinct ways that undergraduates define intelligence: knowledge and abilities (e.g., ability to learn, solve problems). Additionally, we found that students’ definitions of intelligence can vary across contexts. Finally, we present evidence that students who define intelligence differently also interpret and respond to the items on the mindset scale differently. We discuss implications of these results for the use and interpretation of the mindset scale with undergraduate students.

Quantifying fear of failure in STEM: modifying and evaluating the Performance Failure Appraisal Inventory (PFAI) for use with STEM undergraduates

“…It is clear from this work and others (e.g., Knekta et al 2019;Knekta et al 2020;Rowland et al 2019) that considering how to accurately assess these complex elements in STEM contexts may be imperative to gain an understanding of their roles in influencing student outcomes. Currently, there is a paucity of instruments available to measure intrapersonal elements in STEM contexts (Henry et al 2019) and more generally a need to improve the quality of measurements for latent variables in STEM populations (Knekta et al 2019;Limeri et al 2020;Rowland et al 2019). Intrapersonal elements tend to consist of latent variables that require more complex means of assessment, often construction of survey instruments with multiple items (Knekta et al 2019).…”

Growth mindset interventions improve academic performance but not mindset in biochemistry

“…Some students may view "intelligence" as knowledge whereas others may view it as "abilities" thus not reliably measuring mindset in the appropriate context. 36 This may influence how students respond to mindset questions. Therefore, future surveys using the mindset scale will be more specific and clear about the context of the questions about intelligence.…”

Using Metacognitive Strategies to Improve Academic Performance in Biochemistry

“…Moreover, undergraduate students' definitions of "intelligence" are highly context specific and may vary. Some students may view "intelligence" as knowledge whereas others may view it as "abilities'' thus not reliably measuring mindset in the appropriate context [33]. This may influence how students respond to mindset questions.…”