Social Psychology of Education (2021) 24:1335–1362

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-021-09660-9

A review of growth mindset intervention in higher

education: the case for infographics in cultivating mindset
behaviors

Michelle W. T. Cheng1   · Man Lai Leung2 · Justin Chun‑Him Lau3

Received: 5 July 2021 / Accepted: 10 August 2021 / Published online: 23 August 2021
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2021

Abstract
To explore effective growth mindset intervention that is applicable for the higher
education setting, study 1 conducted a systematic review to analyze relevant liter-
ature published between 2010 and 2021. We identified 13 papers and synthesized
the results of these studies to understand how the intervention was designed, con-
ducted, and evaluated, pointing out the lack of attention to visual images as mindset
intervention in the existing literature. Accordingly, in study 2, a set of infographic
materials was developed and delivered to thirty participants recruited in a univer-
sity to cultivate a growth mindset. The participants were randomly assigned to an
experimental or control group. To measure the effectiveness of the intervention,
participants are required to complete a pre-and post-survey. Significant differences
were found between the two groups after 6-week intervention, as the experimental
group perceived intelligence significantly more malleable. Weekly reflections were
analyzed to evaluate the impacts of the designed materials.

Keywords  Growth mindset · Literature review · Experimental study · Mixed

methods

1 Introduction

According to the implicit theory (Dweck & Leggett, 1988), individuals hold
beliefs about the nature of personal attributes, such as intelligence and personal
ability. Having the belief that people are growth-oriented, malleable, and able to
make efforts to learn from experience is classified as growth mindset (Dweck,

* Michelle W. T. Cheng
chengwt@eduhk.hk
1
The Education University of Hong Kong, New Territories, Hong Kong
2
University of Sussex, Brighton, UK
3
The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 1336 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

2008); whereas attributing personal characteristics to fixed traits is categorized

as fixed mindset. Dweck (2000, 2008) argues that these two orientations influ-
ence how individuals act and eventually affect a person’s achievement. Building
on this foundation, an immense number of studies have conducted and found
that having a growth mindset could bring positive influence on students’ learn-
ing behaviors (e.g. Masters, 2014), improve their academic achievement (e.g.
Claro et al., 2016), and help students persist when they encounter academic set-
backs (Dweck, 2000). According to Judd (2017), who specifically examined the
importance of growth mindset among learners in the higher education setting,
“the ramifications of having a growth mindset appear to be resilience, grit, per-
sistence, social relating and teamwork, giving and receiving peer support (p. 2).”
These are essential generic competencies for college students to develop holisti-
cally (e.g. Cheng, 2019; Cheng et al., 2018) and are related to student retention
in higher education (Cotton et al., 2017). Seeing the importance of growth mind-
set to students, subsequently, recent studies have started to emphasize how to
cultivate growth mindset among students.
According to Dweck (2016), “[a] ‘pure’ growth mindset does not exist” (p.
214). This implies that every individual has a mixture of fixed and growth mind-
set, and the mixture evolves continuously with experience. Therefore, a number
of researchers have examined how one’s implicit beliefs about intelligence can
be changed under certain conditions (e.g. Blackwell et al., 2007; Burke & Wil-
liams, 2012) in order to design effective and impactful growth mindset inter-
ventions. Until now, no consensus was reached regarding the effectiveness of
growth mindset intervention. While Sisk et  al. (2018)’s meta-analysis reported
no significant relationship between growth mindset interventions and academic
achievement, Claro et al. (2016) suggested that mindset interventions may ben-
efit students from low socio-economic status families. Conversely, McPart-
lan et  al. (2020)’s study shows no evidence of such benefits. To design effec-
tive growth mindset interventions for students, it is crucial to take a step back
and evaluate what contributes to the success and failure of the existing mindset
interventions.
The social sciences and humanities fields are dedicatedly seeking “efficient,
low cost, and easy to implement growth-mindset interventions in higher edu-
cation” (Sahagun et  al., 2021, p. 5). Currently, a large body of literature has
examined the use of growth mindset in schools (Sisk et  al., 2018), especially
in primary school (Savvides & Bond, 2021). However, a paucity of studies has
reviewed growth mindset interventions in the higher education setting (Han
et  al., 2018). What is at issue in these studies, as we will demonstrate below,
is the inconsistent result regarding the designed growth mindset interventions.
To address such a research gap, this study first conducted a systematic review
to answer the following research question, “How is the growth mindset inter-
vention conducted in the higher education setting?” This was later broadened to
inspire the development of a new growth mindset intervention in this particular
setting. The current study serves as a starting point for educators, as it docu-
ments, examines, and develops interventions to promote growth mindset in the
higher education.

13
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1337

2 Study 1

Systematic review is crucial in informing the direction or value of evidence-based

practice (Bond et al., 2013). To better understand how growth mindset interven-
tions were designed, conducted and evaluated in the higher education setting, the
researchers of this study reviewed a set of empirical studies (including qualita-
tive, qualitative and mixed methods) that met the predetermined selection criteria.

2.1 Methods

2.1.1 Phase 1: article identification process

A list of keywords [(“growth mindset”) AND (“intervene*” OR “train*” OR

“activity”) AND (“higher education” OR “vocational education” OR “post-sec-
ondary” OR “college” OR “institution”)] formulated by taking references from
prior literature were used to search articles about growth mindset intervention in
the higher education setting. The researchers limited the search to articles pub-
lished between 2010 and 2020 to align with Carol Dweck’s (2000) “growth mind-
set” theory, which was backed by a burgeoning body of empirical research in the
last decade. A total of nine databases were chosen based on their relevance to the
subject area of research, including ProQuest, ERIC, Education Database, APA
PsyInfo, Education Research Complete, Academic Search Alumni, Academic
Search Ultimate, Research Library, Publicly Available Content Database. The
researchers initially generated 629 results, and after removing duplicates, 551
articles were amassed.

2.1.2 Phase 2: identifying relevant articles

After identifying the initial list of articles, the inclusion criteria for this review
were formalized. Only peer-reviewed journal articles that met the following crite-
ria were included: (1) conducted a growth mindset intervention, (2) higher educa-
tion setting, (3) effectiveness of the intervention is being evaluated, (4) provided
a full-test, (5) written in English. After researchers have agreed on the inclusion
criteria, the exclusion criteria were defined clearly (Table 1).
After setting the criteria, each title and abstract was independently evaluated
by the first two authors to decide whether an article should be included. In the
event of disagreement, the article was included for further examination in the
subsequent round of review. Only the ten articles that were marked for inclusion
by the two reviewers would be subject to further analysis. We identified an addi-
tional three studies through backward and forward search from the selected arti-
cles. Altogether, a total of thirteen articles were included in this study.

13
 1338 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

Table 1  Exclusion criteria of this systematic review and example of excluded articles

Exclusion criteria Examples

Non-English text Chen (2019) wrote the articles in Chinese;

Not conducted in higher education
The growth mindset intervention is only a by-
product of the training
The growth mindset intervention was not con-
ducted
The effectiveness of the intervention was not
evaluated
Šimenc and Štraus (2020) wrote in Slovenian
Binning et al (2019) conducted mindset interven-
tions to promote student achievement in the
US. Participants were seventh- and ninth-grade
students recruited from two public schools
Gheith and Aljaberi (2017) conducted an interactive
training program to develop undergraduates’ non-
cognitive skills. Growth mindset is only one of the
six non-cognitive skills that aims to be developed
Both Deluliis and Saylor (2021) and Pueschel and
Tucker (2018) studies proposed the elements for
growth mindset intervention, but did not carry out
the study
Lindsay et al. (2015) introduced 1st-year law
students to the theory and practice of mindful-
ness meditation over 6-week to promote growth
mindset. No evaluation of the intervention was
stated in the study

2.1.3 Phase 3: synthesizing the literature

Since there is only a small number of studies identified, the researchers did not
further categorize the literature. For the selected studies, we identified the num-
ber of participants, study context, and intervention design in Table 2. We looked
at patterns and trends among the studies, for similarities and dissimilarities in the
data to understand the literature.

2.2 Results and discussion

The full literature identification process is summarized in Fig.  1. In general, a

small number of identified studies reflect that educators and researchers have put
less emphasis on growth mindset intervention in the higher education setting.
Many existing studies aim to cultivate a growth mindset approach among chil-
dren and adolescents (e.g. DeBacker et  al., 2018; Lum, 2018). However, these
interventions are far less apparent in the higher education settings, as many seem
to share Yeager et al. (2016a, 2016b)’s thought, which suggests college students
already have a strong growth mindset by the time they enter higher education.
Yet, this belief does not necessarily hold true outside Western context.
This systematic review has confirmed that studies related to growth mindset
interventions are most prevalent in the US. With only one out of thirteen studies
conducted in Asian countries, it is not irrational to assume that the idea of growth
mindset is still not very common in the Chinese setting. Our results also indirectly

13
 Table 2  Overview of the selected articles regarding the growth mindset intervention
Authors Intervention manipulation Duration Context Participants

Bostwick and Becker-Blease (2018) Growth mindset intervention letter One-off US, a public university, psychology 278
(contain a notable quote relate to students
the condition)
Broda et al. (2018) Read a short scientific article online first two semesters + summer orien- US, a public university 7,686 students
about brain plasticity + wrote tation program
open-length responses (identify
moments in lives when one may
have adopted a growth mindset)
Fink et al. (2018) Read a related short article online 3 1-h lectures per week in the first US, a private university, chemistry 565
and completed a comprehen- semester students
sion quiz, wrote a reflection
how it influences perception and
behavior
Glerum et al. (2020) Watched three related short video 10 weeks Netherlands, a vocational training 55
clips + two post-videos short writ- school students
ing exercises
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:…

Haynes et al. (2016)
McCabe et al. (2020)
McPartlan et al. (2020)
Forestry camp: effort-tracking grids Camp: US, two natural science courses in Camp:
(identify strategies used in spe- 3 weeks a college 35 students
cific learning situations) + three Course: Course:
weekly reflection summary 1 fall semester 25 students
paragraphs
Horticulture course: flash cards,
mnemonics, poetry (strategies
that encourage meaningful and
mindful effort) + effort portfolio
Online TED Talks and infographics Over the 1st-year course US, a private liberal arts college 229
students
Review a set of slides fostering the Throughout the fall semester US, a public university, biological 1,091 students
belief that intelligence is malle- science program
able but not fixed + response to a
1339

13
writing prompt
 Table 2  (continued)
1340

Authors Intervention manipulation Duration Context Participants

13
Petjärva et al. (2019) Seminars on implicit ability 2-h Estonia, a public university, engi- 37
beliefs neering education students
Saraff and Tiwari (2020) Mediation discussions and 12 sessions India, a private university 450
exercises (1 h each) students
Singer-Freeman and Bastone (2017) Study 1: Worksheet or ePortfolio During the fall semester US, a community college, summer Study 1:
(journal entries with image) research program 38 students
Study 2: Graded ePortfolio or Study 2:
paper (reflective autobiographical 56 students (2015)
writing) and
54 students (2016)
Smith et al. (2018) Instructors gave growth mindset 6 sessions of the course US, a private university, psychol- 106 students
feedback in the particular condi- ogy course
tion group
Woods (2020) Goal setting activities: personal Throughout the IT course US, a public university, information 1st semester
improvement project + 3 to technology course 31 students
4-week long research pro- and
ject + student performance 2nd semester
planning 11 students
Yamauchi (2018) Concept learning task (move the 20 min US, a public university 253
cursor and select one of the two students
buttons)
M. W. T. Cheng et al.
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1341

Phase 1
Phase 2
Serached 9 databases
Phase 3
-551 possible articles Applied inclusion
(exclude duplication) criteria
Backward and forward
- Selected 10 possbile search from the
articles selected articles

- Included 3 more
potential articles
(A total of 13 articles)

Fig. 1  Overview of methodology

aligned with Asbury et  al. (2016)’s study, which found those brought up in the
UK were significantly more growth-minded than those brought up in East Asia.
The idea of cultivating students’ growth mindset has rarely been applied outside
of the Western countries. Therefore, it would be insensible to expect college stu-
dents in Asia to have a strong growth mindset. In addition, it is worth mentioning
that as Chinese students are more exam-oriented, they were driven to succeed and
are expected to invest a great deal of time and energy in their studies. However,
if a person only puts efforts into studying and disregard the learning process and
outcome, the individual will have less academic engagement, positive mood, and
the continued intention to learn from failure, that is what Dweck (2008) refers to
as “false growth mindset”.
The researchers also scaffolded how the growth mindset interventions were
designed and manipulated among the selected studies. Due to limited time and
resources, it is not surprising to find that there is a paucity of research on the effects
of longitudinal interventions. For instance, Saraff and Tiwari (2020) organized
twelve regular face-to-face mediation exercise classes to promote students’ growth
mindset. In contrast, most of the identified studies adopted a “light-touch” approach,
which is to conduct the intervention in a relatively brief and efficient way (Yeager
& Walton, 2011, p. 285). In general, when designing their growth mindset interven-
tions, these studies bombard participants with lots of existing mindset related infor-
mation at the beginning, such as reading published scientific articles, watching TED
talks/video clips, attending seminars, and reviewing slides/letters/feedback etc. After
that, participants were required to provide responses based on the received infor-
mation through writing exercises/assignments/journal entries/reflections, doing pro-
jects and creating (e-) portfolios etc. While it is necessary to provide materials for
participants to increase their knowledge pertaining to the relation between mindset
and intelligence and skills, most of the above studies on growth mindset intervention
are single-shot and show “a lack of understanding on what long-term growth mind-
set trajectories might look like” (Vongkulluksn et  al., 2021, p. 139). More impor-
tantly, focusing exclusively on texts and videos as intervention tends to neglect the
potential of graphics. An expanding body of literature has already elucidated how

13
 1342 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

infographics can distill complex ideas and enhance students’ creativity and motiva-
tions in the education setting (Alyahya, 2019; Bicen & Beheshti, 2017). Yet, the
degree to which infographic can change students’ mindset, in addition to improving
one’s learning experience, is unknown. The relation between infographics and mind-
set intervention thus warrants our attention.
Table 3 summarized how the intervention was evaluated, as well as the results,
limitations and challenges of the selected studies. Pre-posttest measurement is the
most commonly adopted intervention evaluation method, and Dweck’s implicit theo-
ries of intelligence scale is the most frequently adopted inventory to assess students’
mindset changes before and after the intervention. Aligned with previous research
(McCabe et  al., 2020), growth mindset interventions have shown mixed results in
undergraduates. This systematic review also reveals that no consensus was reached
regarding the effectiveness of the growth mindset interventions. Only 9 out of the 13
studies were able to claim that their interventions are effective to promote growth
mindset among students in higher education, whereas the others yielded inconclu-
sive results. Among the nine studies, nearly none of them provided effect size for
the readers to assess the extent to which the intervention is effective. These stud-
ies relied heavily on significance tests and p-values to draw conclusions, neglecting
that these statistics cannot illustrate the magnitude or practice relevance of a finding
(Kraft, 2020). This reflects the importance for future studies to report effect size
when evaluating growth mindset intervention.
To enhance the effectiveness of growth mindset interventions, the challenges and
limitations encountered among the selected studies were examined. Tips that may
lead to more effective and efficient intervention were identified based on Table  3.
To begin, many studies were one-off or only conducted for a short period of time.
Longer intervention periods would be more desirable to track the effectiveness of
the intervention. Regarding the arrangement of the participants, it is important to set
up control groups, ensure the groups have similar sizes, randomly assign participants
to different groups to control group differences, and avoid potential cross-contami-
nation between intervention and conditions etc. Although these are basic research
design elements, many studies did not plan well in their intervention (as shown in
Table 3). Last but not least, future studies should consider how to minimize the pres-
ence of intervening variables, such as peer factor, university environment, course
design and roles of teachers. A detailed intervention can certainly enhance its poten-
tial to be effective and impactful to the intervention group.

2.3 Limitations

In this study, we chose to review peer-reviewed journals since the quality of these
articles is theoretically more assuring. Thus, according to de Araujo et  al. (2018),
a systematic way to search conference proceedings and book chapters is currently
unavailable. Another limitation is that a number of studies were highly relevant to
growth mindset intervention but were not focused on the higher education setting.
For example, Rhew et al. (2018)’s study about the effects of growth mindset inter-
vention on self-efficacy and motivation was excluded from this review because the

13
 Table 3  Summary of the analyzed papers
Authors
Bostwick and Becker-Blease (2018) One pre-intervention midterm exam, three Growth mindset group significantly
Broda et al. (2018)
Fink et al. (2018)
Glerum et al. (2020)
Haynes et al. (2016)
13
Evaluation methods Results
post-intervention midterm exams, and a outperformed fixed mindset group on
final exam of a psychology course midterm and final exam
College GPA of fall and spring semester Growth mindset intervention significantly
academic outcome improved GPA for Latino/a students by
about 0.4 points
-Performance data: final chemistry exam Mindset condition performed better than
score; ACT math scores; AP scores control group. It has positive effects
-Content analysis of the written responses among underrepresented minority
(reflection prompts) students but had no effect among white
students. The intervention neutralized
the racial achievement gap
Pre-posttest measurement: Math per- No significant differences between condi-
formance online math test + Dweck’s tion and control groups on mathematics
implicit theories of intelligence scales test score. No relation between mindset
and academic achievement was found
Pre-posttest measurement: indicate knowl- -Significant increase for mindset knowl-
edge levels pertaining to mindset/beliefs edge
about intelligence/skills +  -Horticulture course: increased their
student portfolios for textual analysis ability to identify and remember plant
names
- Forestry course: self-identified a number
of effective learning skills
Limitations/challenges
Low response rate; Unequal group size,
unable to eliminate cross-contamination
between intervention conditions
Short time period between administra-
tion of intervention and measurement of
academic outcomes. Longitudinal study
is needed
The course involves multiple instructors,
supplements, and sessions which may
affect students’ performance in this
research
-Several factors may influence the experi-
ment, e.g. peer pressure, role of teachers
during experiment
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:…
-Posttest measurement took place 10 weeks
after the intervention and hence the effect
might have faded
How the improved skills and the increased
mindset knowledge are correlated was not
proved in the study
1343
 Table 3  (continued)
Authors
13
McCabe et al. (2020)
McPartlan et al. (2020)
Petjärva et al. (2019)
Saraff and Tiwari (2020)
Singer-Freeman and Bastone (2017) Study 1: Assignment qualitative coding
Study 2: Assignment analysis + Pre-post-
Evaluation methods
Pre-posttest measurement: 10-item
Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability
Scale + GPA
Pre-posttest measurement: growth mindset Increasing growth mindset does not
scale + belonging uncertainty + perfor- result in higher academic achievement
mance and enrollment measures + demo-
graphics
Pre-posttest measurement
Pre-posttest measurement: intelligence
mindset scale + adolescents self-concept
short scale + Rosenberg self-esteem
scale
test measurement: intelligence mindset
scale
Results
Growth mindset intervention showed a
small positive increase in self-report
toward growth mindset but it did not
lead to enhanced academic outcomes.
The intervention also did not improve
at-risk students interests
for students; and mindset beliefs do
not present a barrier to success for the
targeted students
There is a growing awareness about the
malleability of academic abilities only
found in the intervention group but not
the control group
Mindfulness can improve growth mindset
of students is proved. Significant mean
difference between groups in their
self-concept, self-esteem, and growth
mindset of students after implementa-
tion of the intervention program
All students were influenced by the com-
pletion of the mindset assignment. But
study 2 couldn’t replicate the findings
in study 1 where a high proportion of
students reported a shifting mindset in
ePortfolios than in another format
1344
Limitations/challenges
TED Talk and infographic may not contain
sufficient information to impact students’
interest
The intervention is short and low cost but
not impactful
Only confirmed the possibility to influence
the implicit ability beliefs of students
towards growth mindset, but the lasting
effect is still an unknown
-University environment and peer factor
may act as intervening variable
-No control over the gain on post-test
Nonrandom assignment to conditions leads
to uncontrolled differences between the
comparison groups
M. W. T. Cheng et al.
 Table 3  (continued)
Authors Evaluation methods Results Limitations/challenges

Smith et al. (2018) Pre-posttest measurement: Research
Methods Skill Assessment + mindset
assessment + demographic data
Woods (2020) Survey: attitudes towards the interven-
tion + required efforts and difficulty of
the intervention
Yamauchi (2018) Implicit belief questionnaire + task per-
formance
Students receiving growth comments
moved towards growth mindset beliefs
more so than those who received fixed
mindset comments and had higher quiz
scores when compared to the control
group
Instructor feedback promoted a growth
mindset
Mindset induction was effective as par-
ticipants in the fixed mindset condition
showed a lower mean growth-mindset
score than those in the growth mindset
condition
Result from behavioral analysis: partici-
pants with fixed-mindset condition spent
Lack of investigation into potential group
differences e.g. race, ethnicity, socioeco-
nomic status, and the subject’s students
are studying
Goal setting is just one process that can
support a growth mindset, other aspects
have not been reviewed
Kalman filter can only analyses simple
motor behavior and unable to analyze
complex tasks
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:…

less time in each trial than those with

growth-mindsets
Result from cursor trajectories: fixed-
mindset participants moved the cursor
faster than those in the growth-mindset
condition
Result from Kalman Filter analysis: mind-
sets most likely influenced that actuator
of motor commands, rather than the
sensory feedback system
1345

13
 1346 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

participants were from middle schools. Because of the predetermined selection cri-
teria, several commonly cited articles were excluded, but we consciously made this
decision to bound our review. Only studies that conducted and evaluated growth
mindset intervention were selected. Although this may limit the number of reviewed
articles, this study focused on how to effectively promote growth mindset interven-
tion, instead of examining how growth mindset is related to different concepts, such
as academic achievements (e.g. Corradi et al., 2019) and persistence (e.g. Buzzetto-
Hollywood et al., 2019) of university students.

2.4 Implication

After conducting the literature review, the researchers have identified the research
gap regarding the growth mindset interventions in the higher education setting,
which is to use non-text and video materials to deliver growth mindset messages.
Therefore, this study aims to develop a set of infographic materials to cultivate a
growth mindset among students in higher education.

3 Study 2

Neuroscience studies proved that subtle feedback and messages related to growth
mindset can have a significant impact on students’ attitudes and motivations that
may translate into long-term outcomes (Ng, 2018). Since a fixed mindset does not
need to be permanent and a growth mindset can be learned, a set of intervention for
the higher education setting was developed with the support of neuroscience, psy-
chology, and education literature. Building on previous mindset interventions, we
developed a set of online infographic materials to promote growth mindsets. The
materials are designed to be self-explanatory so that they can be circulated without
the needs of explanation from anyone, minimizing potential intervening variables
caused by teachers, peers, or instructors. To be able to establish the effect of the
designed infographic materials, this study was set up as a two-group pretest–post-
test design. By manipulating a control group, the research held other factors in the
experimental group in constant and attributed all changes to the infographics so that
the results can be compared (Allen, 2017).

3.1 Method

3.1.1 Sampling

Thirty current postgraduate students enrolled in the same master program were
recruited from a public-funded university in Hong Kong. Students were required
to study a compulsory research methodology course, which they were randomly
assigned to one of the two classes. Taught by the same teacher, students in the exper-
imental class would receive infographic materials while the control class would
not receive anything apart from the class materials. This study does not provide

13
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1347

Table 4  Demographic data of participants who completed both pre-test and post-test

Experimental group (n = 11) Control group (n = 12)

Age (years) 27.9 (3.59) 25.25 (5.28)

Gender 10 Female; 1 Male 10 Female; 2 Male
Place of origin • Scotland (1) • Pakistan (1)
• Hong Kong (3) • Hong Kong (4)
• China (7) • China (7)

participant incentives, after 6-week, three and four students from the control and
experimental group withdrew respectively because of personal reasons; as a result,
only twenty-three participants completed the whole study (Table 4).

3.1.2 Measures

Self-reported measure was adopted to gauge participants’ implicit beliefs about

intelligence. Dewck’s implicit theories of intelligence scale (2000) was used to
assess the mindset changes of the students before and after the intervention. The
8-item questionnaire (using six-point Likert scales) includes statements, such as
“Your intelligence is something about you that you can’t change very much” and
“No matter how much intelligence you have, you can always change it quite a bit.”
Responses were reversely coded such that higher scores indicate stronger incremen-
tal beliefs.

3.1.3 Procedure

A set of social media infographics (6-week intervention) was developed with dif-
ferent topics for each week, such as “Learning”, “Challenge”, “Failure”, and “Suc-
cess” etc. (see Fig. 2). Under each theme, we designed narratives and visual images
that were based on and modified from existing growth-mindset intervention and
theory (e.g. Dweck, 2000, 2015; Paunesku et al., 2015; Yeager et al, 2016a, 2016b)
to ensure that the infographics could communicate abstract ideas clearly (Bicen &
Beheshti, 2017) (Figs.  3 and 4). For instance, a quote from the ‘Learning’ theme
(see Fig.  5) was derived from a mindset intervention experiment conducted by
Blackwell and colleagues (2007) which compared the brain with a muscle that could
be trained through exercise (Fig. 6). For the ‘Challenge’ theme, we selected a quote
developed by Dweck (2015) to trigger growth mindset (see Fig.  7). The ‘Failure’
theme took reference from Hymer and Gershon’s (2014) theorization of failure as
part of one’s learning experience (see Fig. 8). These infographic materials were only
received by students in the experimental group through a private Instagram account.
To ensure the participants have read the materials, they were instructed to submit a
written reflection based on the weekly materials. Guiding questions were given to
prompt reflective thinking (Table 5).

13
 1348 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

P.1 P.2 P.3

P.4 P.5 P.6

Fig. 2  Infographic materials for week 5

3.1.4 Data analysis

Gliner et al., (2003) compared different statistical methods to analyze and interpret
pretest–posttest comparison group designs, and their study found that the analysis
of covariance (ANCOVA) is one of the most powerful and optimal ways for such
analysis. Therefore, ANCOVA, which reduces error variance, was used in this study
to test for differences between groups (control and experimental) for the dependent
variable change scores using the pre-test values as a covariate. The Statistical Pack-
age for Social Science (version 25) was used to analyze the quantitative data, with
alpha value established priori at p < 0.05. For the students’ weekly reflection, con-
tent analysis was used.

3.2 Results

3.2.1 Quantitative analysis on the effectiveness of the intervention materials

Pre-post test results were reported in the implicit theories of intelligence (Dweck,
2000), test of normality using Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test and the
Shapiro–Wilk Normality test indicated that dependent variables were normally dis-
tributed. The mean and standard deviation for times of the groups was shown in

13
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1349

Fig. 3  A matrix scatter show-

casing the linear relationships
between pretest and posttest

Fig. 4  Week 1 “Introduction”

13
 1350 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

Fig. 5  Week 2 “Learning”

Fig. 6  Week 3 “Effort”

Fig. 7  Week 4 “Challenges”

13
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1351

Fig. 8  Week 5 “Failures”

Table 6. For students in the experimental group, there was a mean positive change
of 3 standard points. They showed stronger belief that intelligence is malleable and
controllable, while the control group did not.
A few assumptions must be satisfied to conduct ANCOVA, first, the Shapiro Wilk
test reveals non-statistically significant result that indicates post-test would be nor-
mally distributed in both control (p = 0.913) and experimental (p = 0.502) groups.
Second, relationships between the pretest and posttest scores were found to be linear
as Fig. 3 showing elliptical shape from bottom left to top right among the pretest and
posttest scatter plots for both groups. Third, checked by the Levene’s Test, homo-
geneity of variance was insignificant F(1,21) = 2.737, p = 0.113. Fourth, the homo-
geneity of regression slope assumption was also met as the group × pre-test is F (1,
19) = 0.830, p = 0.374. With no significant statistical difference between the experi-
mental and control groups on pre-test F (1, 21) = 0.247, p = 0.624 were found, the
single factor ANCOVA revealed a significant statistical difference on the post-test F
(1, 20) = 5.6 53, p = 0.028, ηp2 = 0.22 when controlling the pre-test result. The over-
all results indicated that the significant differences illustrated in the condition group
is brought by the growth mindset intervention.

3.2.2 Qualitative analysis on participants’ responses towards delivered materials

Participants were invited to reflect on the delivered materials at the end of each
week. It has been addressed explicitly to the participants that any comments were
welcomed. Guiding questions were provided to illustrate possible directions of com-
menting which has been listed in Table 5. Has the effectiveness of the implemented
intervention been affirmed in the last section, this section embarks on the goal of
illustrating participants’ reflection on the concept of growth mindset. The identities
of the participants are anonymized using pseudonyms.
Figure 4 shows how the concept of Growth Mindset is introduced to students
in the 1st week. The returned written reflections indicated that the majority of
participants endorse and acknowledge the beliefs, benefits, and the imperative

13

13
Table 5  Details of the 6-week intervention protocol
Week Theme
1 Introduction
2 Learning
3 Effort
4 Challenge
5 Failure
6 Success
1352
Reflection questions
What kind of mindset do you usually have, growth or fixed mindset?
How is your recent learning experience?
Do you allow yourself to experience productive struggle or you simply seek for the correct solution?
Which one of the two can reflect your worth better, result or the effort you have paid?
Would you consider yourself good at facing challenges, why/why not?
Do you believe actively developing a good behavior pattern could lead to a better mindset?
Do you think “failing” and “learning” are interchangeable perspectives?
Do you see ‘learning from mistakes’ as an important part of personal growth?
On the scale of 1–10, how important is it for you to perform better than the others?
How do you see the action of comparing yourself with others?
M. W. T. Cheng et al.
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1353

Table 6  The mean scores of the implicit theories of intelligence test for all subjects in experimental and
control groups at pre-test and post-test
Pre-test (SD) Post-test (SD)

Experimental group (n = 11) 27.18 (7.52) 30.18 (6.63)

Control group (n = 12) 28.67 (6.80) 28.42 (6.19)

of developing a growth mindset after reading the Instagram post. Further, the
growth mindset is considered superior to fixed mindset by participants. In other
words, the 1st week of intervention implemented in this study has delivered both
the meaning of growth mindset and its advantage to its participants successfully.
Reflecting upon her own learning experience, Samantha noted:
I personally tend to have a fixed mindset most of the time but I know that a
growth mindset is the way to go. By having a growth mindset, we can learn
more and adapt to new ideas more positively.
More than half of the respondents in the experimental group indicated that it is
their first time to learn about the idea of growth and fixed mindset. Jay believed
“it is a good thing for people to think of their potential as something that they can
maximize, based on how they approach situations”. Given that this is a relatively
new idea for the majority of respondents, Samantha deemed that these infograph-
ics are easy to access at any time and can help remind her not to stick with a fixed
mindset, as she elaborated,
Sometimes we might have a fixed mindset because of the feeling of not
wanting to change [what] we have gotten used to … I think it is good to see
the pictures and keep reminding me to be conscious about the way I think.
The introduction of mindset concepts prompted participants to reflect upon how
they usually approach difficult situation and to think about the multiple possibili-
ties in learning. By illustrating the strength of growth mindset, the infographics
exposed participants to a new set of beliefs that may maximize their potential.
Yet, instead of simply endorsing these beliefs, participants also sought to apply
the growth mindset principles in different learning stages to which this paper now
turns.
For week two, “Learning” was chosen as the key site for intervention as it is
an indispensable part of students’ experience. Rather than restrict the meaning of
“Learning” to “academic learning”, “Learning” was emphasized as a potential chal-
lenging and frustrating process in the delivered materials. However, individuals
equipped with a growth mindset will see “Learning” as a trial-and-error process that
bestows them with unpredictable fruits regardless of the academic outcomes. It has
been observed that participants have been able to pick up this specific implication
and raise aligning comments such as the following,
I always encounter failure when learning something new. But I think I am
quite good at coping with failure, it means there is space to improve. (Janice)

13
 1354 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

Not only did the delivered materials instill the growth-mindset thinking in students’
mode of learning, but the infographics also resonated with students’ postgraduate
learning experience. For instance, Eleanor shared her unease about learning statis-
tics as she was not good at mathematics. Nevertheless, she learnt to be patient and
began to accept that the brain “takes time to absorb” knowledge.
Janice and Eleanor’s reflections speak to the crux of resilience in learning.
Despite facing the possibility of failure, the students stressed the willingness to
improve and the determination to overcome difficulties in learning. “Learning” is no
longer seen as a one-off process but a dialectical practice where participants can go
back and forth to gradually acquire the knowledge and achieve the aim they desire.
Such a resilient learning experience, however, also demands students to recognize
their efforts put into achieving goals.
The topic of “Effort” was discussed during week three. Following the spirit
behind the growth mindset, the infographics portrayed that a consistent input of
effort would be an important component leading to success. Nevertheless, without
timely motivations and rewards, the consistent input may lead to “burnout” and in
turn have a fixed mindset formed for the individual. Hence, the materials included
contents that reminded participants to properly reward and recognize their own
efforts, regardless of the result (see Fig.  6). Alex, for instance, supported the idea
that appropriate rewards “will make the study process more enjoyable”. Giving
rewards not just provides psychological pleasures to students. It is also an act to vali-
date one’s effort. The reflection shared by Samantha is a case in point, where par-
ticipants considered self-appreciation one of the indispensable components to attain
success:
If I encounter difficulties, I will stick to it and try again. Most problems in
postgraduate studies require long-term research and effort. When the problem
is solved, there will be a strong sense of satisfaction, which feels very good.
I guess this is what motivates me to continue to give effort. I will now also
remind myself that even if I fail, it is still great to be able to persist in solving
the problems.
Students’ efforts may come to fruition after a long duration and, as a consequence,
the participants may not be able to see the results of their endeavors immediately. It
is, therefore, paramount to learn to stay motivated. Samantha’s narrative precisely
demonstrates how the self-validation and self-appreciation acquired through the
growth-mindset model help inspire her to make persistent efforts, paving the way to
achievement. Meanwhile, the journey to success is anything but easy. To empower
students to cope with unknown challenges, a next set of infographics was delivered
to foster possibility thinking in lieu of doubts in learning.
In week 4, the ways in which individuals could grapple with “Challenges”
were discussed. It is not uncommon for students to feel that there is a long way
from achieving the specific goal set out in the first place. Crossing such a long
journey to reach the goal would be “Challenges”. To cultivate a growth mind-
set, participants were advised to, for example, add the word “yet” when in doubt
(Fig.  7). The aim of this prompt is to provide tips for participants to recognize
their own potential to grow and achieve the plausible goals. Instead of treating

13
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1355

challenges as deterrents that forestall possible means to accomplish goals, the

materials stressed perseverance and possibilities brought about by challenges. “I
am willing to face the challenges because they can make me learn more and grow
stronger (mentally)”, stated Winnie. The infographics guided Winnie to see chal-
lenges as exercises or practices that test and expand her knowledge, preparing for
success in the future. This realization, however, not only requires persistence but
also a positive mindset, as evidenced by Jay’s reflection:.
I think developing a good behavioral pattern will lead to a better mindset.
Like some say, practice makes perfect. The more we do something that is
positive, it will lead to a positive result. Positive behavioral patterns can
promote our mental and physical health, which guide us to actively face life
and challenges.
Jay asserted the salience of perseverance as well as positivity in growth mindset
to confront challenges. Further, thinking positively refers not merely to a state
of mind. As Jay and Winnie showed, it is a repetitive practice to realize different
possibilities in life such that individuals can act proactively to deal with, rather
than be held back by, challenges. Nevertheless, positivity and perseverance do not
necessarily guarantee a plain sailing future. Students will inevitably encounter
failures at some stage. It is necessary to train participants to handle failures.
The issue of “Failures” was addressed during week 5. The infographics,
delivered to students, emphasized that a growth mindset would treat “Failures”
as opportunities to learn and grow (Fig. 8). People with a fixed mindset, on the
contrary, will see “Failures” as the evidence of unintelligence and self-doubt.
Although “Failures” do indicate one’s insufficiency, the imperfect flaws in life
should not define the value of individuals. Rather, interpreting the infographics
messages as encouraging and inspiring, participants illuminated the inextricable
link between failure and success.
This message has been a really good one. Failure and learning should be
seen as interlinked, a key part of personal growth. Failure should not be
seen as the "dirty word" of life; instead, it should be viewed as a necessary
and important part of life. (Alex)
Recognizing such a linkage is just a first step to develop a growth mindset.
Another student, Janice also pointed out that “learning from the mistake is an
important part of personal growth as it provides [her] a chance to better [her]
self”. In other words, Janice’s narrative underscores a sense of transformability.
That is, the ability to transform the experience of failure to invaluable learning
lessons. In this line of thought, students not just embrace the prospect of failures
in learning as they also seek to convert mistakes and “falls” to fuel that propels
future success.
For the last week of the intervention, “Success” has been put under the spot-
light. With a fixed mindset, “Success” would become an attribute adhered to indi-
viduals that can be measured and compared. Based on this idea, the “Success” of
others would be threatening to the self. In contrast, informed by growth mindset,

13
 1356 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

Fig. 9  Week 6 “Success”

Fig.  9 was designed to illustrate how each individual has a different learning
curve and, as such, it would be futile to see the “Success” of others as threats.
Connecting the infographics with her learning experience, Eleanor stated the
need to not compete with others:
I see the action of comparing my results (with others) as entirely pointless as I
do not see myself in competition with anybody else. My motivation should be
my interest in the task, and if the task carries value, I will give my maximum
effort to the task and do the best I can (regardless of others).
Contrary to the fixed mindset rhetoric that frames “Success” as a competition, Elea-
nor followed her own learning curve to achieve her goals patiently. Similarly, John
maintained that if he compared himself with his peers, he would feel stressed as this
would “force (himself) to win over others”. Their responses reflected that “Success”
is not driven by the desire to outperform the others but by the passion to material-
ize the desired outcome. To be able to do so, students need to cultivate self-aware-
ness regarding their interests and learning style with the conviction that success will
eventually come to them.

3.3 Discussion

Upon completion of the 6-week intervention, the pre-posttest has indicated that the
intervention has yielded significant positive impacts on the condition group, demon-
strating the potential effects of using infographics as an intervention. By exploring
how the concept of growth mindset is conveyed through the medium of infograph-
ics, the study has illustrated students’ perceptions of these materials and the ways in
which they inspire students to navigate and reframe the somewhat taxing learning
process successfully.
First, the feedback shows that the infographics serve as a provocation that goads
participants into contemplating their current learning styles. The visual materials
are not merely a conduit to introduce the fixed and growth mindset to students but

13
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1357

they elicit and stimulate reflections. First, the infographics successfully provoke stu-
dents to reflect on the typical mindset they used to approach learning and the sub-
sequent consequences. Through reflexivity, students are more self-conscious about
the way they think and begin to reorient their learning style, exploring the useful-
ness of growth mindset. Second, the infographics resonate with students’ experience
and thus make the growth mindset highly relevant to participants. By juxtaposing
the concise and engaging materials in week 2 with their learning experience, stu-
dents reframe learning as a lifelong and resilient process in which individuals will
grow stronger. The relatable infographics enable and remind participants that they,
too, can navigate the frustrating process of learning. Third, the study highlights that
infographics not only deliver information in a creative way but they also motivate
participants to develop growth mindset behaviors. Students like Alex and Samantha
learn to validate and appreciate their own efforts thereby carrying on rather than
wearing themselves out in their learning journey. Focusing on the process in lieu
of the learning outcome, the infographics encourage participants to shift attention
towards the efforts they invested in achieving goals.
In a pragmatic sense, infographics also function as prompts that guide students to
experiment with their learning strategies. Particularly in the week of “Challenges”,
we included tips and reminders in the materials where students could use to tackle
challenges in learning. In this regard, the infographics are clues rather than fixed
instruction. Participants are inspired to think with a growth mindset and test out the
tactics stated in the infographics so that they may treat challenges as practices that
may open up multiple possibilities and chances for self-growth and improvement. As
such, the infographics also serve as a new lens for participants to re-examine com-
mon assumptions about learning. For instance, the study demonstrates that “failure”
is often imbued with negative connotations and thus one should keep them at bay.
However, the narratives evince how participants learn to accept and transform the
experience of failure into practical knowledge that may lead them to success. In such
a case, infographics provide a new framing for participants to understand failures in
a different light, engendering positive behavioral change effectively. Finally, info-
graphics give reassurance to students. As individuals have different learning curves,
the materials emphasize how success may appear in different learning stages, shuf-
fling off students’ burdens to achieve success. In so doing, chasing success becomes
not a competition or burden but an intellectual quest and a journey to understand the
limit and ability of the self.
The effectiveness of the intervention is not merely due to that it is informative
and self-explaining; instead, the narratives further elucidate six different quali-
ties, or traits, that illuminate the ingenuity of infographics. (1) As a provocation,
the materials stimulate reflexivity such that students can ruminate on the poten-
tial of nurturing a growth mindset. (2) Generating resonance, messages in the
infographics are relatable and show that resilience is common in students’ learn-
ing experience. (3) As a reminder, the infographics encourage and promote self-
validation, motivating students to learn and grow. (4) Serving as experimental
prompts, the intervention is effective in helping participants to explore the pos-
sibilities bought by every challenge. (5) Infographics, manifested as a new lens
of inquiry, thus enable the reframing and transforming of the learning process

13
 1358 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

in alignment with the idea of growth mindset. (6) As a form of affective reassur-
ance, the infographics help participants come to make peace with themselves and
cultivate self-understanding about their learning habits.
Although this study has fulfilled the research aims established at the outset
of the study, there are several limitations which need to be addressed. First, pre-
vious studies (Orosz et  al., 2017; Petjärva et  al., 2019) on mindset intervention
have addressed the concern that the effect of mindset intervention by nature is
temporary and participants may change back to pre-intervention state as time
passes. Although this longitudinal study was designed around a 6-week sched-
ule, the lasting effect was still unknown. Further research is needed to determine
the long-term impacts of the intervention in the future. In addition, this prelimi-
nary study only has a small participating population, as it attempts to test whether
infographics serve as an effective light-tough approach to deliver growth mindset
intervention.

3.4 Conclusion

Embarking on the goal of evaluating the existing growth mindset intervention in

higher education in the last decade, a systematic review was conducted in study 1
to showcase the design, results, challenges and limitations of various intervention
approaches. Aligned with past study (McCabe et  al., 2020), inconsistent results
were found regarding the effectiveness of growth mindset intervention. Spotting
that past studies heavily rely on videos and texts to conduct such interventions,
study 2 has successfully developed a set of infographic materials and justify the
feasibility of conducting a light-touch approach on growth mindset intervention
without the presence of third-parties which may act as an intervening variable.
Through a qualitative analysis of students’ written feedback, the study has dem-
onstrated how infographics stimulate reflexivity, promote resilience in learning,
foster self-validation, cultivate perseverance and possibility thinking in the face
of challenges, instigate new ways to handle failures, and facilitate self-under-
standing among students. Infographics are effective in generating a growth mind-
set since these visual materials are not just instructive but stimulating, affective,
relatable, providing multifarious inspirations and a new framework to understand
the learning process with mindset concepts. The visual-based intervention thus
provides a new and effective alternative to the text-based intervention as dis-
cussed in study 1. Although study 2 is only preliminary by nature, the imple-
mentation of infographics offers unique and important pragmatic value, awaiting
more sophisticated research on the potential of visual intervention in the future.

Funding  The first author is the recipient of the Research Grants Council Postdoctoral Fellowship Scheme
(PDFS2021-8H01) funded by the University Grants Committee.

13
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1359

Declarations 

Conflict of interest  The author(s) declared no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References
Allen, M. (Ed.). (2017). The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. Sage
Publications.
Alyahya, D. M. (2019). Infographics as a learning tool in higher education: The Design process and per-
ception of an instructional designer. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational
Research, 18(1), 1–15.
Asbury, K., Klassen, R., Bowyer-Crane, C., Kyriacou, C., & Nash, P. (2016). National differences in
mindset among students who plan to be teachers. International Journal of School & Educational
Psychology, 4(3), 158–164. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​21683​603.​2015.​10751​64
Bicen, H., & Beheshti, M. (2017). The psychological impact of infographics in education. BRAIN. Broad
Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience, 8(4), 99–108.
Binning, K. R., Wang, M. T., & Amemiya, J. (2019). Persistence mindset among adolescents: Who ben-
efits from the message that academic struggles are normal and temporary? Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 48(2), 269–286. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10964-​018-​0933-3
Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict
achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Devel-
opment, 78(1), 246–263. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1467-​8624.​2007.​00995.x
Bond, M., Pavey, T. G., Welch, K., Cooper, C., Garside, R., Dean, S., & Hyde, C. (2013). Systematic
review of the psychological consequences of false-positive screening mammograms. Health Tech-
nology Assessment, 17(13), 1–167. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3310/​hta17​130
Bostwick, K. C., & Becker-Blease, K. A. (2018). Quick, easy mindset intervention can boost academic
achievement in large introductory psychology classes. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 17(2),
177–193. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​14757​25718​766426
Broda, M., Yun, J., Schneider, B., Yeager, D. S., Walton, G. M., & Diemer, M. (2018). Reducing inequal-
ity in academic success for incoming college students: A randomized trial of growth mindset and
belonging interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 11(3), 317–338. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1080/​19345​747.​2018.​14290​37
Burke, L. A., & Williams, J. M. (2012). The impact of a thinking skills intervention on children’s con-
cepts of intelligence. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7(3), 145–152. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​tsc.​
2012.​01.​001
Buzzetto-Hollywood, N., Mitchell, B. C., & Hill, A. J. (2019). Introducing a mindset intervention to
improve student success. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 15, 135–155.
Chen, Y. L. (2019). A philosophical examination of I. Morris’s happiness curriculum. Jiaoyu Yanjiu
Jikan Bulletin of Educational Research, 65(1), 43–77.
Cheng, M. W. T (2019). Generic competencies development through experiential learning: Investigating
diversity in 1st-year residential experiences. HKU Theses Online (HKUTO).
Cheng, M. W. T., Lee, K. K. W., & Chan, C. K. Y. (2018). Generic skills development in discipline-spe-
cific courses in higher education: A systematic literature review. Curriculum and Teaching, 33(2),
47–65. https://​doi.​org/​10.​7459/​ct/​33.2.​04
Claro, S., Paunesku, D., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Growth mindset tempers the effects of poverty on aca-
demic achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(31), 8664–8668.
Corradi, D., Nicolaï, J., & Levrau, F. (2019). Growth mindset and its predictive validity—Do migration
background and academic validation matter? Higher Education, 77(3), 491–504. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s10734-​018-​0286-6
Cotton, D. R., Nash, T., & Kneale, P. (2017). Supporting the retention of non-traditional students in
higher education using a resilience framework. European Educational Research Journal, 16(1),
62–79. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​14749​04116​652629

13
 1360 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

de Araujo, Z., Roberts, S. A., Willey, C., & Zahner, W. (2018). English learners in K–12 mathematics
education: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 88(6), 879–919. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​3102/​00346​54318​798093
DeBacker, T. K., Heddy, B. C., Kershen, J. L., Crowson, H. M., Looney, K., & Goldman, J. A. (2018).
Effects of a one-shot growth mindset intervention on beliefs about intelligence and achievement
goals. Educational Psychology, 38(6), 711–733. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​01443​410.​2018.​14268​33
DeIuliis, E. D., & Saylor, E. (2021). Bridging the gap: Three strategies to optimize professional relation-
ships with generation Y and Z. The Open Journal of Occupational Therapy, 9(1), 1–13.
Dweck, C. (2015). Carol Dweck revisits the growth mindset. Education Week, 35(5), 20–24.
Dweck, C. (2016). What having a “growth mindset” actually means. Harvard Business Review, 13,
213–226.
Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Psychology
Press.
Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psy-
chological Review, 95(2), 256–273. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​0033-​295X.​95.2.​256
Fink, A., Cahill, M. J., McDaniel, M. A., Hoffman, A., & Frey, R. F. (2018). Improving general chemistry
performance through a growth mindset intervention: Selective effects on underrepresented minori-
ties. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 783–806. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1039/​C7RP0​
0244K
Gheith, E., & Aljaberi, N. M. (2017). The Effectiveness of an interactive training program in develop-
ing a set of non-cognitive skills in students at University of Petra. International Education Studies,
10(6), 60–71. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5539/​ies.​v10n6​p60
Glerum, J., Loyens, S. M., & Rikers, R. M. (2020). Is an online mindset intervention effective in voca-
tional education? Interactive Learning Environments, 28(7), 821–830. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​
10494​820.​2018.​15528​77
Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & Harmon, R. J. (2003). Pretest-posttest comparison group designs: Analy-
sis and interpretation. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(4),
500–503.
Han, S. J., Stieha, V., Poitevin, E., & Starnes, T. L. (2018). Growth mindset in adult learning: System-
atic literature review. In Adult education research conference. https://​newpr​airie​press.​org/​aerc/​2018/​
papers/3
Haynes, C., Thompson, J., Licklider, B., Hendrich, S., Thompson, K., & Wiersema, J. (2016). Mindset
about intelligence and connections to student effort: Opportunities for learning and action. Natural
Sciences Education, 45(1), 1–10. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4195/​nse20​16.​0004
Hymer, B., & Gershon, M. (2014). Growth mindset pocketbook. Management pocketbooks.
Judd, F. (2017, May). Growth mindset and adult learners in higher education. In Global conference on
education and research (GLOCER 2017) (pp. 1–13).
Kraft, M. A. (2020). Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions. Educational Researcher, 49(4),
241–253. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3102/​00131​89X20​912798
Lindsay, K., Kirby, D., Dluzewska, T., & Campbell, S. (2015). “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!”: Newcas-
tle Law School’s Partnership Interventions for Well-Being in 1st Year Law. Journal of Learning
Design, 8(2), 11–21.
Lum, V. (2018). Developing positive attitudes toward reading in kindergarten students through growth
mindset activities [Master dissertation, Goucher College]. https://​doi.​org/​10.​13016/​M20K2​6F50
Masters, G. N. (2014). Towards a growth mindset in assessment. Practically Primary, 19(2), 4–7.
McCabe, J. A., Kane-Gerard, S., & Friedman-Wheeler, D. G. (2020). Examining the utility of growth-
mindset interventions in undergraduates: A longitudinal study of retention and academic success in
a 1st-year cohort. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 6(2), 132–146. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1037/​tps00​00228
McPartlan, P., Solanki, S., Xu, D., & Sato, B. (2020). Testing basic assumptions reveals when (not) to
expect mindset and belonging interventions to succeed. AERA Open. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​23328​
58420​966994
Ng, B. (2018). The neuroscience of growth mindset and intrinsic motivation. Brain Sciences, 8(2), 20.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​brain​sci80​20020
Orosz, G., Péter-Szarka, S., Bőthe, B., Tóth-Király, I., & Berger, R. (2017). How not to do a mindset
intervention: Learning from a mindset intervention among students with good grades. Frontiers in
Psychology. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fpsyg.​2017.​00311

13
A review of growth mindset intervention in higher education:… 1361

Paunesku, D., Walton, G. M., Romero, C., Smith, E. N., Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2015). Mind-
set interventions are a scalable treatment for academic underachievement. Psychological Science,
26(6), 784–793. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​09567​97615​571017
Petjärva, B., Ausb, K., & Arrob, G. (2019). More efficient engineering education through supporting
implicit ability beliefs. Estonian Journal of Education/Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 7(2), 96–99.
Pueschel, A., & Tucker, M. L. (2018). Achieving grit through the growth mindset. Journal of Instruc-
tional Pedagogies, 20, 1–10.
Rhew, E., Piro, J. S., Goolkasian, P., & Cosentino, P. (2018). The effects of a growth mindset on self-
efficacy and motivation. Cogent Education. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​23311​86X.​2018.​14923​37
Sahagun, M. A., Moser, R., Shomaker, J., & Fortier, J. (2021). Developing a growth-mindset pedagogy
for higher education and testing its efficacy. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 4(1), 100168.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ssaho.​2021.​100168
Saraff, S., & Tiwari, A. (2020). Effect of mindfulness on self-concept. self-esteem and growth mindset:
Evidence from undergraduate students. Journal of Psychosocial Research, 15(1), 329–340.
Savvides, H., & Bond, C. (2021). How does growth mindset inform interventions in primary schools? A
systematic literature review. Educational Psychology in Practice, 37(2), 134–149. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1080/​02667​363.​2021.​18790​25
Šimenc, M., & Štraus, M. (2020). Ima miselnost o nespremenljivosti inteligentnosti učinek v neustrezni
bralni samopodobi? Solsko Polje, 31(1/2), 57–24.
Singer-Freeman, K., & Bastone, L. (2017). Changing their mindsets: EPortfolios encourage application
of concepts to the self. International Journal of ePortfolio, 7(2), 151–160.
Sisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Sun, J., Butler, J. L., & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what extent and under
which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two meta-analyses.
Psychological Science, 29(4), 549–571. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​09567​97617​739704
Smith, T., Brumskill, R., Johnson, A., & Zimmer, T. (2018). The impact of teacher language on students’
mindsets and statistics performance. Social Psychology of Education, 21(4), 775–786. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1007/​s11218-​018-​9444-z
Vongkulluksn, V. W., Matewos, A. M., & Sinatra, G. M. (2021). Growth mindset development in design-
based makerspace: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Educational Research, 114(2), 139–154.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​00220​671.​2021.​18724​73
Woods, D. M. (2020). Using goal setting assignments to promote a growth mindset in IT students. Infor-
mation Systems Education Journal, 18(4), 4–11.
Yamauchi, T. (2018). Modeling mindsets with Kalman filter. Mathematics, 6(10), 205. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
3390/​math6​100205
Yeager, D. S., Romero, C., Paunesku, D., Hulleman, C. S., Schneider, B., Hinojosa, C., Lee, H. Y.,
O’Brien, J., Flint, K., Roberts, A., Trott, J., Greene, D., Walton, G. M., & Dweck, C. S. (2016).
Using design thinking to improve psychological interventions: The case of the growth mindset dur-
ing the transition to high school. Journal of educational psychology, 108(3), 374–391. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1037/​edu00​00098
Yeager, D. S., & Walton, G. M. (2011). Social-psychological interventions in education: They’re not
magic. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 267–301. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3102/​00346​54311​
405999
Yeager, D. S., Walton, G. M., Brady, S. T., Akcinar, E. N., Paunesku, D., Keane, L., Kamentz, D., Rit-
ter, G., Duckworth, A. L., Urstein, R., Gomez, E. M., Markus, H. R., Cohen, G. L., & Dweck, C. S.
(2016). Teaching a lay theory before college narrows achievement gaps at scale. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 113(24), E3341–E3348. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1073/​pnas.​15243​60113

Publisher’s Note  Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.

Cheng Wing Tung  is a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Graduate School at the Education University of Hong
Kong, Hong Kong. Her research interests include growth mindset, residential education, student wellbe-
ing and motivation.

13
 1362 M. W. T. Cheng et al.

Man Lai Leung  is a former Master graduate of the University of Sussex (UK). Currently, he is an inde-
pendent researcher who is interested in researching topics in the fields of Pedagogical Philosophy and
Psychoanalysis.

Justin Chun‑him Lau  is a PhD candidate in Anthropology in the School of Culture, History and Lan-
guage at The Australian National University. His research interests include social theory, Asian societies,
and medical anthropology,

13