↓ Skip to main content

Beware False Growth Mindset: Building Growth Mindset in Medical Education Is Essential but Complicated

Overview of attention for article published in Academic medicine, August 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
33 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Beware False Growth Mindset: Building Growth Mindset in Medical Education Is Essential but Complicated
Published in
Academic medicine, August 2023
DOI 10.1097/acm.0000000000005448
Pubmed ID
Authors

Milad Memari, Katherine Gavinski, Marie K. Norman

Abstract

Mindset theory explains how learners' beliefs about intelligence and learning affect how they perceive effort, react to failure, and respond to feedback in challenging learning contexts. Mindset theory distinguishes between growth mindset (the belief that human capacities can be developed over time) and fixed mindset (the belief that human capacities are inherent and unchangeable). Efforts to develop growth mindset in learners have shown a wide range of benefits, including positive effects on students' resilience, commitment to lifelong learning, and persistence in a field of study, with notable impacts on learners who are struggling, learners from minoritized groups, and women in scientific fields. In recent years, mindset theory interventions have caught the interest of medical educators, who recognize that traditional medical education, with its emphasis on grades, standardized examination performance, and high perceived cost of failure, may actually reinforce fixed mindsets and thus erode resilience among learners. However, the increased popularity of mindset theory must be met with a more nuanced understanding of the theory, including increased awareness of the concept of "false growth mindset," a term coined by Carol Dweck to refer to common pitfalls in the theory's application. In this article, the authors highlight important findings from mindset interventions in medical education, identify common pitfalls of false growth mindset in the context of medical learners, and offer suggestions for how educators and institutions can better instigate changes to promote growth mindsets within medical education.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 25%
Other 1 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Lecturer 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 17%
Social Sciences 2 17%
Environmental Science 1 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 8%
Psychology 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,691,474
of 25,816,430 outputs
Outputs from Academic medicine
#829
of 6,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,249
of 358,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic medicine
#3
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,816,430 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,836 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 358,352 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.