Incremental Theorists Are Less Dependent On Their Math Achievement When Forming Their Competence Self-Concepts

• In Event: Girls’ and Boys’ Attitudes and Beliefs about STEM: Sources, Development, and Relations to Achievement

Abstract

Students tend to choose a field of study in which they believe they possess the most skills (e.g., Simpkins et al., 2006) by comparing their own performance across different domains, such as math and English. These intra-individual comparisons between domains are known as dimensional comparisons (Möller & Marsh, 2013). Students may shape their self-concept in one domain based on their performance in a different domain. For example, students who perform better in English may lower their math competence self-concept, suggesting that they view their English skills as stronger than their math skills. However, there are individual differences in dimensional comparisons such that some students engage in stronger comparisons than others do (Möller et al., 2006), yet few studies have examined the sources of these individual differences. In this study, we tested the novel prediction that students who hold an entity theory of intelligence would engage in more dimensional comparisons and show stronger contrast effects (effects of achievement in one domain on self-concept in a contrasting domain), because they believe pay more attention to ability, and are performance-oriented (Blackwell et al., 2007).

We examined whether theories of intelligence (TOIs) moderated dimensional comparison processes in high-school students (N = 138). Separately for two domains (math vs. reading and writing), 10th and 11th graders completed measures of self-reported grades, TOI (e.g., “Only the smartest students can do well in math in my grade”), and competence self-concepts (e.g., “How well do you think you will do in reading and writing this year?”) in a single session. We calculated mean score of TOI across both domains to represent students’ general theories of intelligence (M = 4.05, SD = .53). Higher TOI score indicated a more incremental theory. We used mean scores of competence self-concept in each domain as our outcomes (math: M = 4.38, SD = 1.18; reading and writing: M = 4.61, SD = .99). We conducted a path analysis to examine the pathways from students’ grades in each domain to within- and across-domain competence self-concepts (Figure 1). TOI and the interactions between TOI and grades were included as predictors to examine whether TOI moderated dimensional comparison processes.

Results showed that the path coefficients from math grades to math and reading self-concepts were significant (Figure 1). The path from reading grades to reading self-concept was significant and the path from reading grades to math self-concept was trending, providing partial support for dimensional comparisons. More importantly, the interaction between math grades and TOI showed a negative path to math self-concept and a positive path to reading self-concept. In other words, the impact of math grades on students’ math and reading self-concepts were moderated by students’ theories of intelligence, such that incremental theorists’ academic self-concepts were less dependent on their math achievement than entity theorists’. This suggests that incremental theories buffer students from believing that their own strength in one academic area implies that they are weaker in other areas, and may encourage students to pursue opportunities across both math and reading domains.

Authors

• Kexin Ren, Temple University
  Presenting Author

• Nicole Sorhagen, Millersville University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Elizabeth A Gunderson, Temple University
  Non-Presenting Author