Growth mindset is not associated with scholastic aptitude in a large sample of university applicants

5,653 university applicants

Czech Republic; applicants sitting a high-stakes scholastic aptitude test.

Observational, so it cannot speak to causation - but it is the largest single test of the CORRELATIONAL leg of mindset theory against an outcome that is neither a teacher's grade nor a self-report. Mindset was measured with the standard theories-of-intelligence scale; outcomes were the aptitude test score, the number of test administrations the applicant signed up for (a behavioural persistence proxy), and within-person change across repeated administrations (the direct test of the malleability prediction).

Mindset correlated with test score at r = -0.03, that is, growth mindset was associated with marginally WORSE performance. Mindset showed no relationship with the number of test administrations an applicant signed up for. And mindset did not predict change in test results across administrations - the specific prediction the theory makes.

High for any causal reading, which is why this is used only as a bound on the correlation. As a bound it is informative precisely because a confounded design still finds nothing.

Converges with Li and Bates 2019 (null mindset-to-grades association) and with the r = .09 ceiling in Sisk et al. This is the strongest single-sample evidence that the correlational leg is near zero once the outcome is an independent standardised test.