Unexpected improvement, decline, and stasis: A prediction confidence perspective on achievement success and failure.

Abstract

The authors hypothesized that reactions to performance feedback depend on whether one's lay theory of intelligence is supported or violated. In Study 1, following improvement feedback, all participants generally exhibited positive affect, but entity theorists (who believe that intelligence is fixed) displayed more anxiety and more effort to restore prediction confidence than did incremental theorists (who believe that intelligence is malleable). Similarly, when performance declined, entity theorists displayed more anxiety and compensatory effort than incremental theorists. However, when performance remained rigidly static despite a learning opportunity, incremental theorists evinced more anxiety and compensatory effort than entity theorists. In Study 2, this pattern was replicated when the entity and incremental theories were experimentally manipulated. Study 3 demonstrated that for both groups, theory violation impairs subsequent task performance. Taken together, these studies provide evidence that lay theory violation and damaged prediction confidence have significant and measurable effects on emotion and motivation. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for the literature on achievement success and failure.

Changing theories of change: Strategic shifting in implicit theory endorsement.

“…These findings are highly consistent with the body of work demonstrating that implicit theories are sensitive to situational feedback, context and argument (Blackwell et al, 2007;Dweck, 2002;Hong et al, 1999;Molden et al, 2006;Murphy & Dweck, 2010;Plaks & Stecher, 2007. Unlike past Changing Theories of Change 46 research, however, we demonstrate that people alter their theories without any direct message priming or encouragement to take one perspective or the other: they appear to have access to both and can toggle toward one or the other as the situation demands.…”

“…Past research shows that implicit theories can quite readily be shifted by feedback, argument or intervention favoring one perspective (Good et al, 2012;Mueller & Dweck, 1998;Aronson, et al, 2002;Hong et al, 1999;Plaks & Stecher, 2007); Dweck and Leggett (1988) recognized the possibility that yet other situational factors might alter people's implicit beliefs.…”

When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence

“…This may result in more fluid, clear, concise speech and smoother social interactions. Past studies have found that lower anxiety relates to higher performance on a variety of tasks, from academic tests to interpersonal interactions (Brooks & Schweitzer, 2001;Glass, Merluzzi, Biever, & Larsen, 1982;Littlepage, Morris, & Poole, 1991;Osborne, 2001;Plaks & Stecher, 2007;Steele, 1997). With less anxiety, confident individuals, even when their confidence is unjustified by actual task ability, may be more articulate and attentive to others.…”

The neural correlates of implicit theory violation

“…Therefore, encountering information that violates one's implicit theories can create significant distress and psychological conflict (Plaks, Grant, & Dweck, 2005;Plaks & Stecher, 2007). For example, research has shown that people exhibit higher levels of anxiety after being exposed to information that violates their core implicit theory (Plaks & Stecher, 2007). In one study, participants who believed that intelligence remains fixed throughout life were told that their performance on an intelligence test had either declined or even improved over a period of training.…”

“…First, whereas attitudes are by definition prescriptive, implicit theories are descriptive (Plaks et al, 2009 Because of the important role implicit theories play in structuring and lending meaning to social information, people are motivated to believe that their theories are accurate. Therefore, encountering information that violates one's implicit theories can create significant distress and psychological conflict (Plaks, Grant, & Dweck, 2005;Plaks & Stecher, 2007). For example, research has shown that people exhibit higher levels of anxiety after being exposed to information that violates their core implicit theory (Plaks & Stecher, 2007).…”