Group items tagged

Moser experiment is premised on the fact that there are two distinct reactions to mistake

The first reaction is called error-related negativity (ERN). It appears about 50 milliseconds after a screw-up and is believed to originate in the anterior cingulate cortex, a chunk of tissue that helps monitor behavior, anticipate rewards and regulate attention

second signal, which is known as error positivity (Pe), arrives anywhere between 100-500 milliseconds after the mistake and is associated with awareness.

subjects learn more effectively when their brains demonstrate two properties: 1) a larger ERN signal, suggesting a bigger initial response to the mistake and 2) a more consistent Pe signal, which means that they are probably paying attention to the error, and thus trying to learn from it.

new paper, Moser et al. extends this research by looking at how beliefs about learning shape these mostly involuntary error-related signals in the brain,

scientists applied a dichotomy first proposed by Carol Dweck

Dweck distinguishes between people with a fixed mindset

and those with a growth mindset,

subjects with a growth mindset were significantly better at learning from their mistakes

those with a growth mindset generated a much larger Pe signal, indicating increased attention to their mistakes.

increased Pe signal was nicely correlated with improvement after error, implying that the extra awareness was paying dividends in performance.

When kids were praised for their effort, nearly 90 percent chose the harder set of puzzles.

when kids were praised for their intelligence, most of them went for the easier test.

According to Dweck, praising kids for intelligence encourages them to “look” smart, which means that they shouldn’t risk making a mistake.

Students praised for their intelligence almost always chose to bolster their self-esteem by comparing themselves with students who had performed worse on the test. In contrast, kids praised for their hard work were more interested in the higher-scoring exams. They wanted to understand their mistakes, to learn from their errors, to figure out how to do better.

The experience of failure had been so discouraging for the “smart” kids that they actually regressed.

The problem with praising kids for their innate intelligence — the “smart” compliment — is that it misrepresents the psychological reality of education