Table 1.

Correlations of Fixed Mindsets with the “Meaning System” in Replication Studies

	Sample
Correlation with Fixed Mindset	NSLM Pilot, N = 3,306	NSLM, N = 14,894	U-say, N = 5,247
Meaning system aggregate index, r =	.43	.40	.41
Individual meaning system items:
Effort Beliefs, r =	.47	.32	.36
Goals
Performance-avoidance, r =	.21	.21	.17
Learning, r =	−.16	−.14	−.21
Response (attributions)
Helplessness, r =	.29	.28	.23
Resilience, r =	−.14	−.15	−.25

Note: Correlations do not adjust for unreliability in the single items, so effect sizes are conservative relative to measures with less measurement error. NSLM = National Study of Learning Mindsets. Data sources: the NSLM (Yeager et al., 2019); the NSLM pilot study (Yeager et al., 2016), and a replication of the NSLM in Norway, the U-say study (Rege et al., in press). Effort beliefs: “When you have to try really hard in a subject in school, it means you can’t be good at that subject;” Performance-avoidance goals: “One of my main goals for the rest of the school year is to avoid looking dumb in my classes;” Learning goals: Student chose between “easy math problems that will not teach you anything new but will give you a high score vs. harder math problems that might give you a lower score but give you more knowledge”; Helpless responses to challenge: Getting a bad grade “means I’m probably not very smart at math;” Resilient responses to challenge: After a bad grade, saying “I can get a higher score next time if I find a better way to study.” All ps < .05.