In psychology, grit is a positive, non-cognitive trait based on a person's perseverance of effort combined with their passion for a particular long-term goal or end state (a powerful motivation to achieve an objective). This perseverance of effort helps people overcome obstacles or challenges to accomplishment and drives people to achieve.
Distinct but commonly associated concepts within the field of psychology include "perseverance", "hardiness", "resilience", "ambition", "need for achievement", and "conscientiousness". These constructs can be conceptualized as individual differences related to the accomplishment of work rather than as talent or ability. This distinction was brought into focus in 1907 when William James challenged psychology to further investigate how certain people can access richer trait reservoirs that enable them to accomplish more than the average person, [1] but the construct[ clarification needed ] dates back at least to Francis Galton, [2] and the ideals of persistence and tenacity have been understood as a virtue at least since Aristotle. [3]
Grit was defined as "perseverance and passion for long-term goals" by psychologist Angela Duckworth and colleagues, who extensively studied grit as a personality trait. [4] They observed that people high in grit were able to maintain their determination and motivation over long periods despite experiences with failure and adversity. [4] They concluded that grit is a better predictor of success than intellectual talent (IQ), based on their evaluation of educational attainment by adults, GPA among Ivy League undergraduates, dropout rate of cadets at West Point US Military Academy, and ranking in the National Spelling Bee. [4]
Earlier studies of achievement often emphasized the notion that high-achieving people typically possess traits above and beyond that of normal ability. [2] [5] Duckworth et al. emphasized that grit is a better predictor of achievement than intellectual talent (IQ), because grit provides the stamina required to "stay the course" amid challenges and setbacks. [4]
Marcus Crede and colleagues later observed that the contribution of grit to the prediction of success mostly stems from the perseverance of effort, and they questioned the inclusion of consistency of interest (passion) as one of the aspects of grit, as defined by Duckworth et al. [6]
Grit ties in with positive psychology and in particular, with its promotion of perseverance: the ability to stick with and pursue a goal over a long period is an aspect of grit. This area of positive psychology considers perseverance as a positive indicator of long term success. [7] One study found that individual differences in grit and its two component facets (perseverance of effort and consistency of interests over time) may derive in part from differences in what makes people happy. [8]
Grit is closely linked to resilience within the field of positive psychology. Individuals with higher levels of grit are able to bounce back from set backs more quickly due to a positive mindset. Grit highlights perseverance in working towards life long goals. These individuals tend to experience more success and demonstrate a more sustained effort over longer periods of time. [9]
One of the best predictors of future achievement has been intelligence. [10] This relationship has been found in scholastic achievement as well as in job performance. [11] As such, one might expect that grit would be strongly correlated with intelligence. This prompted an early question of grit research: "Why do some individuals accomplish more than others of equal intelligence?". [4] Somewhat surprisingly, in four separate samples, grit was found to be either orthogonal to or slightly inversely correlated with intelligence. [12] This means that grit, unlike many traditional measures of performance, is not tied to intelligence. The researchers suggested that this helps explain why some very intelligent people do not consistently perform well over long periods.
The grit measure has been compared to the Big Five personality traits, which are a group of broad personality dimensions consisting of openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. [13] In one study, the Short Grit Scale (Grit–S) and 12-item self-report measure of grit (Grit–O) measuring grit were strongly correlated with conscientiousness (r = 0.77, p < 0.001 and r = 0.73, p < 0.001). A large study of twins measuring both conscientiousness and grit found that they had a genetic correlation of 0.86. [14] A subsequent meta-analysis found that grit was functionally a measure of conscientiousness. [6] Despite these high correlations with conscientiousness, it is suggested that[ clarification needed ] grit is more strongly associated with longer term and multi-year goals such as education. [4] Large studies suggest only weak links of grit to these long term goals, [14] much smaller than links to[ clarification needed ] IQ and to conscientiousness. Grit is also similar to need for achievement, but is suggested[ by whom? ] to relate to extremely long-term goals pursued without positive feedback, while need for achievement is suggested to lack this long-term component. [4]
Grit may be domain-specific rather than a domain-general trait. [15] One prolific area of research looked at L2[ definition needed ] grit and its role in second language learning. [16] Grit is not only domain-specific, but also context-dependent, with its predictors differing in face-to-face vs. online learning contexts. [17]
Traditional constructs in this area include perseverance, hardiness, resilience, ambition, self-control, and need for achievement. Grit has been argued to be distinguishable from each of these in the following ways.
The primary scientific findings on grit come from Duckworth and colleagues' 2007 examination of grit as an individual difference trait capable of predicting long-term success. [4] A subsequent meta-analysis of the structure and correlates of grit questioned Duckworth's construct of grit (that included both the perseverance of effort facet and the consistency of interest facet), concluding that the primary utility of the grit construct may stem from the perseverance of effort. [6]
Duckworth initially proposed that people with a drive to tirelessly work through challenges, failures, and adversity to achieve set goals are better positioned to reach higher achievements than people who lack similar stamina. [4] In a series of six studies Duckworth et al. proposed, developed, and tested a two-factor grit scale. In addition to validating their grit scale, the authors also found
This series of studies provides empirical evidence that an individual difference conceptualized as grit can account for significant variance in performance across a variety of settings.
Although Duckworth argued that grit predicted academic performance better than the Big Five personality traits, that claim was later called into question by Kaili Rimfeld and colleagues, who argued that Big Five personality factors have equal predictive ability, [14] and by Crede, who concluded that grit is very strongly correlated with conscientiousness, and that after controlling for conscientiousness, only one component of grit (perseverance of effort) explains variance in academic performance. [6]
The largest study of grit in the United Kingdom, based on academic achievement of 2,321 twin pairs (U.K.-representative sample and genetically sensitive design), compared the predictive ability of grit as a trait (measured by the Grit-S) to the predictions based on Big Five personality traits. It found that while personality is a significant predictor of academic achievement, grit as a separate construct added little to the prediction of academic achievement derived from Big Five personality factors, such as conscientiousness. [14]
A meta-analytic synthesis of empirical research on grit summarized data from 88 independent samples and over 66,000 people, and found that grit is only moderately correlated with performance, and that only one component of grit (perseverance of effort) explains variance in academic performance. The study consequently suggested to separate consistency of interest (passion) from perseverance (effort), since the contribution of grit to the prediction of success mostly stems from the perseverance facet. [6]
Psychologist K. Anders Ericsson, in his book Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertise , criticized the tendency to credit persistent practice to traits such as grit or willpower. He wrote: "It may seem natural to assume that these people who maintain intense practice schedules for years have some rare gift of willpower or 'grit' or 'stick-to-itiveness' that the rest of us just lack, but that would be a mistake for two very compelling reasons." [29] The first reason is that motivation is a situation-specific attribute: People generally find it easier to practice in some areas[ ambiguous ] than in others. [29] The second reason is that grit and willpower are traits that are assigned to someone after the fact—for example: John practiced persistently for years, so he must have incredible grit. [29] But, Ericsson explained: "This sort of circular thinking—'The fact that I couldn't keep practicing indicates that I don't have enough willpower, which explains why I couldn't keep practicing'—is worse than useless; it is damaging in that it can convince people that they might as well not even try." [29] Instead of attributing success to grit or willpower, Ericsson recommended analyzing the various factors that shape a person's motivation in a given situation.
Since 2014 [update] , grit has been the subject of critical commentary and debate in Education Week , with contributors discussing the strengths and weaknesses of how the idea of grit has been used by educators. [30] Some contributors called "the grit narrative" a kind of victim blaming when educators who emphasize grit downplay the obstacles that some students face such as conditions of poverty, racism, and ineffective teaching. [30]
The idea that grit can be enhanced was also criticized.[ further explanation needed ] [31]
A meta-analysis found that overall grit/2 facets[ clarification needed ] is cross-culturally related[ clarification needed ] to academic achievement. [32] However, the level of persistency and grit may vary among people of different cultures. [33]
A study completed by Müge Akbağ and Durmuş Ümmet [34] examined the role of gender in terms of grit as well as the satisfaction of psychological needs and subjective well-being. Akbağ and Ümmet found that female psychological need satisfaction was on average higher than those of males. The predictive role of grit was found to be linked to that of psychological need satisfaction in that when there was a higher level of satisfaction there was an increased level of personal grit as well. With this being said, there may be levels of variance depending on social and cultural situations as well.
Emotional intelligence (EI) is defined as the ability to perceive, use, understand, manage, and handle emotions. People with high emotional intelligence can recognize their own emotions and those of others, use emotional information to guide thinking and behavior, discern between different feelings and label them appropriately, and adjust emotions to adapt to environments.
Conscientiousness is the personality trait of being careful or diligent. Conscientiousness implies a desire to do a task well, and to take obligations to others seriously. Conscientious people tend to be efficient and organized as opposed to easy-going and disorderly. They tend to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement; they display planned rather than spontaneous behavior; and they are generally dependable. Conscientiousness manifests in characteristic behaviors such as being neat, systematic, careful, thorough, and deliberate.
The Big Five personality traits, sometimes known as "the five-factor model of personality" or "OCEAN model", is a grouping of five unique characteristics used to study personality. It has been developed from the 1980s onward in psychological trait theory.
Psychological resilience is the ability to cope mentally and emotionally with a crisis, or to return to pre-crisis status quickly.
General knowledge is information that has been accumulated over time through various media and sources. It excludes specialized learning that can only be obtained with extensive training and information confined to a single medium. General knowledge is an essential component of crystallized intelligence. It is strongly associated with general intelligence and with openness to experience.
In the study of psychology, neuroticism has been considered a fundamental personality trait. In the Big Five approach to personality trait theory, individuals with high scores for neuroticism are more likely than average to be moody and to experience such feelings as anxiety, worry, fear, anger, frustration, envy, jealousy, pessimism, guilt, depressed mood, and loneliness. Such people are thought to respond worse to stressors and are more likely to interpret ordinary situations, such as minor frustrations, as appearing hopelessly difficult. The responses can include maladaptive behaviors, such as dissociation, procrastination, substance use, etc., which aids in relieving the negative emotions and generating positive ones.
Openness to experience is one of the domains which are used to describe human personality in the Five Factor Model. Openness involves six facets, or dimensions: active imagination (fantasy), aesthetic sensitivity, attentiveness to inner feelings, preference for variety (adventurousness), intellectual curiosity, and challenging authority. A great deal of psychometric research has demonstrated that these facets or qualities are significantly correlated. Thus, openness can be viewed as a global personality trait consisting of a set of specific traits, habits, and tendencies that cluster together.
Affective events theory (AET) is an industrial and organizational psychology model developed by organizational psychologists Howard M. Weiss and Russell Cropanzano to explain how emotions and moods influence job performance and job satisfaction. The model explains the linkages between employees' internal influences and their reactions to incidents that occur in their work environment that affect their performance, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. The theory proposes that affective work behaviors are explained by employee mood and emotions, while cognitive-based behaviors are the best predictors of job satisfaction. The theory proposes that positive-inducing as well as negative-inducing emotional incidents at work are distinguishable and have a significant psychological impact upon workers' job satisfaction. This results in lasting internal and external affective reactions exhibited through job performance, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment.
Determination is a positive emotional feeling that promotes persevering towards a difficult goal in spite of obstacles. Determination occurs prior to goal attainment and serves to motivate behavior that will help achieve one's goal.
Job performance assesses whether a person performs a job well. Job performance, studied academically as part of industrial and organizational psychology, also forms a part of human resources management. Performance is an important criterion for organizational outcomes and success. John P. Campbell describes job performance as an individual-level variable, or something a single person does. This differentiates it from more encompassing constructs such as organizational performance or national performance, which are higher-level variables.
In psychology, posttraumatic growth (PTG) is positive psychological change experienced as a result of struggling with highly challenging, highly stressful life circumstances. These circumstances represent significant challenges to the adaptive resources of the individual, and pose significant challenges to the individual's way of understanding the world and their place in it. Posttraumatic growth involves "life-changing" psychological shifts in thinking and relating to the world and the self, that contribute to a personal process of change, that is deeply meaningful.
Goal orientation, or achievement orientation, is an "individual disposition towards developing or validating one's ability in achievement settings". In general, an individual can be said to be mastery or performance oriented, based on whether one's goal is to develop one's ability or to demonstrate one's ability, respectively. A mastery orientation is also sometimes referred to as a learning orientation.
Mental toughness is a measure of individual resilience and confidence that may predict success in sport, education, and the workplace. The concept emerged in the context of sports training, as one of a set of attributes that allow a person to become a better athlete and able to cope with difficult training and difficult competitive situations and emerge without losing confidence. The term has been used by coaches, sport psychologists, sports commentators, and business leaders.
Psychological hardiness, alternatively referred to as personality hardiness or cognitive hardiness in the literature, is a personality style first introduced by Suzanne C. Kobasa in 1979. Kobasa described a pattern of personality characteristics that distinguished managers and executives who remained healthy under life stress, as compared to those who developed health problems. In the following years, the concept of hardiness was further elaborated in a book and a series of research reports by Salvatore Maddi, Kobasa and their graduate students at the University of Chicago.
Academic achievement or academic performance is the extent to which a student, teacher or institution has attained their short or long-term educational goals. Completion of educational benchmarks such as secondary school diplomas and bachelor's degrees represent academic achievement.
In psychology, persistence (PS) is a personality trait. It is measured with the Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) and is considered one of the four temperament traits. Persistence refers to perseverance in spite of fatigue or frustration.
Core self-evaluations (CSE) represent a stable personality trait which encompasses an individual's subconscious, fundamental evaluations about themselves, their own abilities and their own control. People who have high core self-evaluations will think positively of themselves and be confident in their own abilities. Conversely, people with low core self-evaluations will have a negative appraisal of themselves and will lack confidence. The concept of core self-evaluations was first examined by Judge, Locke, and Durham (1997) and involves four personality dimensions: locus of control, neuroticism, generalized self-efficacy, and self-esteem. The trait developed as a dispositional predictor of job satisfaction, but has expanded to predict a variety of other outcomes. Core self-evaluations are particularly important because they represent a personality trait which will remain consistent over time. Furthermore, the way in which people appraise themselves using core self-evaluations has the ability to predict positive work outcomes, specifically, job satisfaction and job performance. These relationships have inspired increasing amounts of research on core self-evaluations and suggest valuable implications about the importance this trait may have for organizations.
Angela Lee Duckworth is an American academic, psychologist, and popular science author. She is the Rosa Lee and Egbert Chang Professor of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, where she studies grit and self-control. She is also the Founder and former CEO of Character Lab, a not-for-profit whose mission is to advance the science and practice of character development.
Intelligence and personality have traditionally been studied as separate entities in psychology, but more recent work has increasingly challenged this view. An increasing number of studies have recently explored the relationship between intelligence and personality, in particular the Big Five personality traits.
Academic buoyancy is a type of resilience relating specifically to academic attainment. It is defined as 'the ability of students to successfully deal with academic setbacks and challenges that are ‘typical of the ordinary course of school life '. It is, therefore, related to traditional definitions of resilience but allows a narrower focus in order to target interventions more precisely. The academic buoyancy model was first proposed by psychologists Andrew Martin and Herbert W. Marsh, following the identification of significant differences between classic resilience and the day-to-day setbacks experienced by students.
There's been a great deal of buzz lately on the topic of grit. As educators we're all for persistence, resilience, stick-to-it-ive-ness—the stuff of grit, right? But it turns out that there's grit, and then there's the way some people are talking about grit.
I was unsurprised to find that the areas of focus were 'grit' and 'self control'—now popular concepts celebrated in mass-market texts like Paul Tough's How Children Succeed and Jay Mathews's Work Hard, Play Nice, and an appealing policy target for those who believe that if we could just cultivate the 'right' qualities among the 'low-achieving' then they would be able to transcend conditions of poverty and other obstacles in their way.
The more effort we devote to getting students to pay 'attention to a teacher rather than daydreaming' and persist 'on long-term assignments despite boredom and frustration' (in the words of 'grit' proponent Angela Duckworth), the less likely we are to ask whether those assignments are actually worth doing, or to rethink an arrangement where teachers mostly talk and students mostly listen.
Increasingly, though, critics are offering a different take, arguing that grit is a racist construct and has harmed low-income students by crowding out a focus on providing children with the supports they deserve and the more-flexible educational approach enjoyed by many of their more affluent counterparts.
Believe it or not, some folks think fostering grit is lowering expectations for students or failing to appreciate the obstacles they face. While there are some who may misunderstand or misapply the teaching of grit, it's wrong to assume that these misapplications are representative of grit's true purpose: to help all students learn to succeed in the real world.
As with any concept that gains popularity, there have been detractors. The most prominent critique is that an emphasis on grit is a way of 'blaming the victim'—rather than take up larger questions of social, economic, and racial justice, if only the most disadvantaged kids were a little 'grittier' they could make it in life.
Measurements of so-called noncognitive student traits like self-control, 'grit,' and gratitude should not be used for school accountability or teacher-evaluation purposes, two pioneers in the field warned last week.
At the same time, however, I am wary of pushing the 'grit narrative' too far, as some have done already by proclaiming what I call The Let Them Eat Character strategy. It is in the self-interest of many in our society to use the 'all it takes is hard work' mantra as a public excuse for perpetuating political and economic policies that thwart the dreams of many because of their race or economic class.
There's no doubt that the concept helps explain why some students achieve in the face of daunting odds ('Don't Grade Schools on Grit,' The New York Times, Mar. 26). But I think it is a gross oversimplification.
Grit is one of those ideas that, as we say, has legs. That's clear enough. But is it good for us?
The notion of grit has certainly spurred important discussions about the nonacademic experiences and skills we want our students to have, but it has often obscured the very conditions that created educational inequities in the first place.
