Download pdf
Intellectual Humility: What Shapes Its Expression and Interventions for Its Promotion
- 1 New York University
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Intellectual humility is the belief that one can be intellectually limited and fallible. It is widely found that intellectual humility expression can benefit the learning process and improve education outcomes. Under a metacognitive frame, contemporary theories on Field-specific Ability Belief (FAB) argue that what one believes in the necessary "ingredients" for success decidedly affects how the external and internal factors shape the expression of intellectual humility. The versatile nature of FABs has also proven interventions effective in promoting intellectual humility expression. Recent attempts to help students through forestart programs in embracing a growth mindset have concluded successful. Longitudinal data meta-analyses have also offered empirical support addressing the necessity of refining current education for more voluntary intellectual humility expression. The findings in this paper suggest a very promising field for future studies fostering broad education improvements.
Keywords
Intellectual Humility, Metacognition, Field-specific Ability Belief, Growth Mindset
[1]. Porter, T., & Cimpian, A. (2023). A context’s emphasis on intellectual ability discourages the expression of intellectual humility. Motivation Science, 9(2), 120–130.
[2]. Porter, T., Schumann, K., Selmeczy, D., & Trzesniewski, K. (2020). Intellectual humility predicts mastery behaviors when learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 80, 101888.
[3]. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
[4]. Porter, T., Elnakouri, A., Meyers, E. A., Shibayama, T., Jayawickreme, E., & Grossmann, I. (2022). Predictors and consequences of intellectual humility. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(9), 524–536.
[5]. Hannak, A., Joseph, K., Larremore, D. B., & Cimpian, A. (2023). Field-specific ability beliefs as an explanation for gender differences in academics’ career trajectories: Evidence from public profiles on orcid.org. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 125(4), 681–698.
[6]. Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 353–387.
[7]. O’Keefe, P. A., Horberg, E. J., Dweck, C. S., & Walton, G. M. (2023). A growth-theory-of-interest intervention increases interest in math and science coursework among liberal arts undergraduates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(6), 859–876.
[8]. Kross, E., & Grossmann, I. (2012). Boosting wisdom: Distance from the self enhances wise reasoning, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(1), 43–48.
[9]. Banker, C. C. & Leary, M. R. (2020) Hypo-egoic non-entitlement as a feature of humility. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 46, 738–753.
[10]. Ng, V. & Tay, L. (2020). Lost in translation: the construct representation of character virtues. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 15, 309–326.
[11]. Leslie, S. J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347(6219), 262–265.
[12]. Grossmann, I. (2017). Wisdom and How to Cultivate It: Review of Emerging Evidence for a Constructivist Model of Wise Thinking.
[13]. Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302–314.
[14]. Meyer, M., Cimpian, A., & Leslie, S.-J. (2015). Women are underrepresented in fields where success is believed to require brilliance. Frontiers in Psychology, p. 6.
[15]. Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., and Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: a longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Dev. 78
[16]. Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). “it’s OK — not everyone can be good at math”: Instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(3), 731–737.
[17]. Perez-Felkner, L., Nix, S., & Thomas, K. (2017). Gendered pathways: How mathematics ability beliefs shape secondary and postsecondary course and degree field choices. Frontiers in Psychology, 8.
[18]. Deiglmayr, A., Stern, E., & Schubert, R. (2019). Beliefs in “brilliance” and belonging uncertainty in male and female stem students. Frontiers in Psychology, 10.
[19]. Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J., Haggard, M. C., LaBouff, J. P. & Rowatt, W. C. (2020). Links between intellectual humility and acquiring knowledge. J. Posit. Psychol. 15, 155–170.
[20]. Porter, T., Baldwin, C. R., Warren, M. T., Murray, E. D., Cotton Bronk, K., Forgeard, M. J. C., Snow, N. E., & Jayawickreme, E. (2021). Clarifying the content of intellectual humility: A systematic review and Integrative Framework. Journal of Personality Assessment, 104(5), 573–585.
Cite this article
Zhu,H. (2024). Intellectual Humility: What Shapes Its Expression and Interventions for Its Promotion. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,61,90-96.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Social Psychology and Humanity Studies
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).