Cited by 6,971Education, Achievement, and GiftednessInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsPsychology of Development and Education

Motivational processes affecting learning.

Dweck, Carol S.·1986·American Psychologist

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0003-066x.41.10.1040

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dweck, C. S.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Corresponding author
Dweck, Carol S.
Venue
American Psychologist
Published
1986-10
Volume
41
Issue
10
Pages
1040-1048
ISSN
  • 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-990X
OpenAlex
W1996652948
Cited by
6,971
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 191 · 2025: 239 · 2024: 272 · 2023: 281 · 2022: 264 · 2021: 292 · 2020: 321 · 2019: 336 · 2018: 280 · 2017: 284 · 2016: 315 · 2015: 307 · 2014: 296 · 2013: 283 · 2012: 280
FWCI
58.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Psychologist (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Psychology of Development and Education
Keywords
motivation, learning, motivational processes, student motivation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review