Aim — does praise type predict later belief
Aim: to investigate whether the type of praise parents give children aged about one to three predicts those children's motivational frameworks about five years later. The key is the type of praise — its content, not its amount; a motivational framework is a child's beliefs about whether ability can change. The design is longitudinal: praise is measured before the belief.
Procedure — two phases, three praise types
Phase 1: parents and young children were video-recorded during ordinary activity in three sessions, at about 14, 26 and 38 months — no task or instruction to praise. Every praise was coded process (effort/strategy), person (a fixed trait) or other (no reason). Phase 2: about five years later, aged 7-8, the same children answered a motivational-framework questionnaire. Sample: ~fifty US families; analysis allowed for total praise.
Findings — results vs conclusions
Findings = results and conclusions. Results: other praise was commonest; a higher proportion of process praise as a toddler went with a stronger later belief that ability can grow; the link held allowing for total talk/praise, so kind mattered, not amount; boys got more process praise. Conclusions: early praise is associated with later beliefs, forming early; nothing was manipulated, so it is a relationship, not a cause.
Drawn from real examiner reports.
Answering on Dweck's theory, not the study
The question names a study; the answer arrives full of theory. Easy here because the study sits beside Dweck's mindset theory (1.1.3). The study is the two-phase design, the three praise categories, the ages (praise at 14/26/38 months, beliefs at 7-8) and the findings. Dweck is the fixed/growth mindset definitions. Give one detail or finding.
Asked to use a named study, candidates answered on the theory instead (June 2022 P2 Q32, Freud's theory not the Little Hans case study; June 2019 P2 Q13).
A result given where a conclusion was asked
Easy marks thrown away every series; examiners call a restated number 'a result, not a conclusion'. Result: children with more process praise as toddlers were likelier to say ability can be improved. Conclusion: early praise appears linked to those beliefs, so they form very early. A conclusion adds a 'so' — so it is a relationship, not a cause.
A restated result where a conclusion was required scored zero (June 2023 P2 Q1f; again June 2024 P1 Q5a and Q11a).
Improvement written as a restated weakness
An improvement is a change you would make if the study ran again — not a weakness said again. 'Small sample' becomes an improvement only when you name the change and its effect: 'recruit families from several countries so the pattern can be checked beyond one US city'. A describe worth 2 marks likewise needs two unique points, not one reworded.
An improvement answered as a weakness is recorded at June 2019 P2 Q3c and June 2024 P1 Q5b and Q18b; a 2-mark describe needs two unique points (June 2023 P2 Q22).
Process vs person praise = WHAT is praised
The categories are separated only by what the praise is about. Process praise = what the child did (effort/strategy): "you kept trying until it fitted". Person praise = what the child is — a fixed trait. Other praise = no reason: "well done". Not about how warm, frequent or deserved. "Good/bad praise" is the finding, not the definition.
Saying parents mostly used person praise
Candidates write that parents "used mostly person praise". The commonest was in fact other praise — approval with no reason — with process and person praise each much smaller. The finding is about the balance between categories, and most everyday praise tells a child nothing about why they were praised. The commonest category wrong is an inaccurate AO1.
Naming a strength but never justifying it
Statement 1.2.2 demands strengths and weaknesses. Scores low: "a strength is that it was longitudinal". Scores well: "longitudinal, because praise was recorded years before the beliefs, so the belief cannot have caused the praise". Shape: point, because, so what — and be specific: not "small sample" but "about fifty families from one US city".
Identification without justification on strength and weakness items (June 2024 P1 Q11b and Q15b); the Paper 2 Summaries say do not only "describe".
The study did not prove praise causes mindset
Saying it did is an inaccurate AO1. Nothing was manipulated — researchers recorded the praise parents chose, then measured the children years later: a relationship between two measures, not a cause. Parents who gave more process praise may differ in ways that produce both the praise and the belief. Only an experiment assigning praise type could show cause.
Never say "well done" / one comment decides
Avoid two exaggerations. "Praise is bad" — praise was never compared with no praise; every category was praise, so the finding is about the balance between them. "One comment shapes a child for life" — it measured the proportion across three sessions, a habit not one sentence. A relationship is a group tendency, not a rule for each child.
Reaching the 7-9 band on the 9-mark Assess
The 9-mark Assess is AO1 3 / AO2 3 / AO3 3; the yearly stall is AO3 and balance. AO1: aim, two phases, three categories, the finding. AO2: classify each remark and give the study's prediction. AO3: a supporting and a limiting point, each with a lens.
Match the answer to the command word
Marks track command word. Describe (2): two unique points, not a repeat. Explain (2): a knowledge point and a scenario link. Strength/weakness (4): two points, justified and applied. Assess (9): knowledge, application, balance, conclusion.
Application means the scenario's own detail
AO2 marks are the parent's actual words; since AO3 needs AO2, an unapplied answer forfeits it. Not application: the name, the stem, or a lifted line. Shape: quote, classify, predict — "you are a natural" = person praise, then a weaker later belief.
Gunderson et al. (2013) is one of the two named studies for Topic 1, and the specification asks for four things about it: the aim, the procedure, the findings (results and conclusions), and its strengths and weaknesses. Learn it in those four blocks.
Process praise — praise for the child's effort or strategy, for something they did. "You worked hard at that."
Person praise — praise for a fixed trait of the child, for something they are. "You are so clever."
Full notes, flashcards, Q&A and the topic quiz for every premium subject.
Premium plans are US$8.99/month or US$49.99/year — first month free.
Studying with a parent's blessing? Show them this.
