CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 142Education, Achievement, and GiftednessSchool Choice and PerformanceEarly Childhood Education and Development

Do Student Mindsets Differ by Socioeconomic Status and Explain Disparities in Academic Achievement in the United States?

Open access
Destin, Mesmin, Hanselman, Paul, Buontempo, Jenny, Tipton, Elizabeth, Yeager, David S.·2019·AERA Open
DOI 10.1177/2332858419857706PMC PMC7156083
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Students from higher–socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds show a persistent advantage in academic outcomes over lower-SES students. It is possible that students’ beliefs about academic ability, or mindsets, play some role in contributing to these disparities. Data from a recent nationally representative sample of ninth-grade students in U.S. public schools provided evidence that higher SES was associated with fewer fixed beliefs about academic ability (a group difference of .22 standard deviations). Also, there was a negative association between a fixed mindset and grades that was similar regardless of a student’s SES. Finally, student mindsets were a significant but small factor in explaining the existing relationship between SES and achievement. Altogether, mindsets appear to be associated with socioeconomic circumstances and academic achievement; however, the vast majority of the existing socioeconomic achievement gap in the U.S. is likely driven by the root causes of inequality.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2332858419857706

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Digital divide and SES studies generally include ethnicity/race and gender, often as controls.

    “Digital divide and SES studies generally include ethnicity/race and gender, often as controls (Destin et al., 2019).”

    From College students’ literacy, ChatGPT activities, educational outcomes, and trust from a digital divide perspective (2026) · cites this paper as Destin et al., 2019

    The Results section says this SES-and-mindset study used gender and race-ethnicity as statistical controls. It does not establish that digital-divide studies, or SES studies generally, include those variables. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Some research concludes that maternal education is favored because participants can provide an accurate assessment and it is consistently related to academic outcomes.

    “Concerning education, maternal and paternal education are also used as indicators of SES (Brooks et al., 2011; Hargittai, 2007) (in some studies the sole measure of SES), and some research concludes that maternal education is favored 'because participants can provide an accurate assessment and it is consistently related to academic outcomes' (Destin et al., 2019; see also Tinajero et al., 2015).”

    From College students’ literacy, ChatGPT activities, educational outcomes, and trust from a digital divide perspective (2026) · cites this paper as Destin et al., 2019

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Browman AS, Destin M, Carswell KL, & Svoboda RC (2017). Perceptions of socioeconomic mobility influence academic persistence among low socioeconomic status students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 72, 45– 52. 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.03.006 · DOI
  2. Croizet J-C, & Claire T (1998). Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: The intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(6), 588– 594. 10.1177/0146167298246003 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Destin M (2017). An open path to the future: Perceived financial resources and school motivation. Journal of Early Adolescence, 37(7), 1004– 1031. 10.1177/0272431616636480 · DOI
  4. Destin M, & Oyserman D (2009). From assets to school outcomes: How finances shape children’s perceived possibilities and intentions. Psychological Science, 20(4), 414– 418. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02309.x 19298260 · DOI
  5. Destin M, & Oyserman D (2010). Incentivizing education: Seeing schoolwork as an investment, not a chore. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(5), 846– 849. 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.04.004 20824201 PMC2930839 · DOI
  6. Destin M, Rheinschmidt-Same ML, & Richeson JA (2017). Status-based identity: A conceptual framework integrating the social psychological study of socioeconomic status and identity. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(2), 270– 289. 10.1177/1745691616664424 28346114 · DOI
  7. Diemer MA, Mistry RS, Wadsworth ME, López I, & Reimers F (2013). Best practices in conceptualizing and measuring social class in psychological research: Social class measurement. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 77– 113.
  8. Domina T, Pharris-Ciurej N, Penner AM, Penner EK, Brummet Q, Porter SR, & Sanabria T (2018). Is free and reduced-price lunch a valid measure of educational disadvantage? Educational Researcher, 47(9), 539– 555. 10.3102/0013189X18797609 · DOI
  9. Entwisle DR, & Astone NM (1994). Some practical guidelines for measuring youth’s race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Child Development, 65(6), 1521– 1540. 10.1111/1467-8624.ep9501252881 · DOI
  10. Fisher O, & Oyserman D (2017). Assessing interpretations of experienced ease and difficulty as motivational constructs. Motivation Science, 3(2), 133– 163. 10.1037/mot0000055 · DOI
  11. Gopalan M, & Tipton E (2018). Is the National Study of Learning Mindsets nationally-representative? PsyArXiv Preprints. 10.31234/osf.io/dvmr7 · DOI
  12. Kraus MW, & Stephens NM (2012). A road map for an emerging psychology of social class. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(9), 642– 656.
  13. Lee CD (2009). Historical evolution of risk and equity: Interdisciplinary issues and critiques. Review of Research in Education, 33(1), 63– 100.
  14. Lee CD (2017). Integrating research on how people learn and learning across settings as a window of opportunity to address inequality in educational processes and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 41(1), 88– 111.
  15. O’Rourke E, Haimovitz K, Ballweber C, Dweck C, & Popović Z (2014). Brain points: A growth mindset incentive structure boosts persistence in an educational game In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3339– 3348). New York, NY: ACM.
  16. Oyserman D, & Lewis NA (2017). Seeing the destination and the path: Using identity-based motivation to understand and reduce racial disparities in academic achievement. Social Issues and Policy Review, 11(1), 159– 194. 10.1111/sipr.12030 · DOI
  17. Paunesku D, Walton GM, Romero C, Smith EN, Yeager DS, & Dweck CS (2015). Mind-set interventions are a scalable treatment for academic underachievement. Psychological Science, 26(6), 784– 793. 10.1177/0956797615571017 25862544 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Reardon SF (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations In Duncan GJ, & Murnane RJ (Eds.), Whither opportunity? Rising inequality, schools, and children’s life chances (pp. 91– 116). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
  19. Reardon SF (2013). The widening income achievement gap. Educational Leadership, 70(8), 10– 16.
  20. Sisk VF, Burgoyne AP, Sun J, Butler JL, & Macnamara BN (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. 10.1177/0956797617739704 29505339 · DOI
  21. Spencer MB, Harpalani V, Cassidy E, Jacobs CY, Donde S, Goss TN, … Wilson S (2015). Understanding vulnerability and resilience from a normative developmental perspective: Implications for racially and ethnically diverse youth In Cicchetti D, & Cohen DJ (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology (pp. 627– 672). 10.1002/9780470939383.ch16 · DOI
  22. Spillane JP (1996). School districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Educational Policy, 10(1), 63– 87.
  23. Spillane JP (1999). State and local government relations in the era of standards-based reform: Standards, state policy instruments, and local instructional policy making. Educational Policy, 13(4), 546– 572.
  24. Stephens NM, Markus HR, & Phillips LT (2014). Social class culture cycles: How three gateway contexts shape selves and fuel inequality. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 611– 634. 24079532
  25. Yeager DS, & Dweck CS (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302– 314. 10.1080/00461520.2012.722805 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Destin, M., Hanselman, P., Buontempo, J., Tipton, E., & Yeager, D. S.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
ORCID
Venue
AERA Open
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2019-07
Volume
5
Issue
3
ISSN
2332-8584 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1177/2332858419857706
PMC
PMC7156083
OpenAlex
W2954419802
Cited by
142
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1
FWCI
15.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • AERA Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • VTechWorks (Virginia Tech) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • Mindset Scholars Network
  • Raikes Foundation
  • eunice kennedy shriver national institute of child health and human development ((P2CHD042849; R01 HD084772))
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
Keywords
growth mindset, fixed mindset, socioeconomic status, achievement gap, ninth grade students, public schools, educational inequality

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