Reply to comment

I wonder how the researchers who proposed these theories would respond to an idea like Linkai's, that people telling a kid they are smart gives them a positive prophecy to live up to.  Although sometimes the stress of having to be "the smart kid" might be overwhelming to the point of failure, I do think there's a balance that will help kids try to live up to being the "smart kid."  I also see how this could cause kids who are not often praised for being smart to self-label as the "dumb kid," and how crippling that label can be. 

I think that although these theories may have some flaws in them, the key message is similar to that of stereotype threat - that labeling people can hinder or help them (depending on the label, flexibility of the label, and how much people self-identify as the label).  If people know that a label can change and they are being praised for their work, they will work hard.  If people are praised for the quality and accuracy of their end results, they will work until their end results match their expectations.  It seems to me that the studies were a bit flawed because the children were praised for different things, and so of course they learned to behave in a way that was praised.  I think children need to hear that they are good at something - whether it comes from intense work and dedication or natural talent.  Maybe we could praise the work and the final result?  I'm not sure what a good half-way point between only praising effort and only praising results would be.