Abstract

 A correlational study will conducted to study the relationship of growth mindset, self-

esteem and creative thinking. It is hypothesized that there would be a positive

relationship between growth mindset and creative thinking mediated by self-esteem.

Sample comprised of 100 employees from different organizations and industries with

age range of 20- 70 years. The assessment measures, Perceived Organizational Justice

Scale (Ambrose & Schminke, 2009), Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli, 2002)

and Cyberloafing Behavior and Activities (Doorn &  Jong, 2008) were used to assess

organizational justice, work engagement and cyberloafing respectively. Then data was

collected and analyzed through SPSS by descriptives, Pearson product moment

correlation and multiple hiererchical regression. Findings revealed that there was a

significant positive relationship between organizational justice and work engagement.

But organizational justice was not significantly correlated with cyberloafing except with

the cyberloafing’s subscale ie. cyberloafing virtual emotional activities. There was no

significant relationship between work engagement and cyberloafing. But there was a

significant negative relationship between dedication and cyberloafing deviant behavior.

These findings can be helpful in developing organizational culture to ensure employee’s

perception of fairness at organization’s reward system and constructing tools and

techniques to increase work engagement of employees and reducing cyberloafing

behavior. 

 Key words:  Organizational justice, work engagement, cyberloafing, employee

 Introduction

People with a growth mindset believe that intelligence and talent can be developed through

hard work which ultimately results in higher levels of self-esteem which may contribute to their

creative thinking. In a growth mindset, people believe that their most basic abilities can be

developed through dedication and hard work—brains and talent are just the starting point. This
view creates a love of learning and a resilience that is essential for great accomplishment.”

( Dweck, 2015) Growth mindset is defined as a belief that construes intelligence as malleable

and improvable (Dweck, 2012). Students with growth mindset are likely to learn by a mastery

approach, embrace challenges and put in effort to learn. For instance, growth-minded

individuals perceive task setbacks as a necessary part of the learning process and they “bounce

back” by increasing their motivational effort (Schroder, 2014).

1.1 Growth Mindset

 A mindset is a set of assumptions, methods, or notions held by one or more people or

groups of people. A mindset can also be seen as arising out of a person's world view or

philosophy of life (Funk, 2001).

In cognitive psychology, a mindset represents the cognitive processes activated in response

to a given task (French, 2016).

Individuals who believe their talents can be developed (through hard work, good strategies,

and input from others) have a growth mindset. They tend to achieve more than those with a

more fixed mindset (those who believe their talents are innate gifts) (Dweck, 2008)

Elementary students showed that leveraging an online educational game (the Brain POP

website) with in-game rewards can promote a growth mindset by directly incentivizing effort

and encouraging persistence in low performing students (Ballweber, 2014). Learners with

growth mindset tend to embrace lifelong learning and the joy of incremental personal growth.

In addition, they do not see their intelligence or personality as fixed traits. They will mobilize

their learning resources without being defeated by the threat of failure. This paper aims to

provide some insights into the cultivation of resilience and mastery in university students,
 preparing them to overcome challenges in the real working world. Empirical studies have

revealed that growth mindset has positive effects on student motivation and academic

performance (Trzesniewski, 2007).

The mindset is related to student outcomes and behaviors including academic

achievement, engagement, and willingness to attempt new challenges (Weiss D, 2013).

Numerous studies have shown the effects of growth mindset interventions on students’

achievement at all ages. According to Dweck, teaching growth mindset to junior high school

students resulted in increased motivation and better academic achievement. Her findings

revealed that students in the growth mindset intervention group outperformed those in the control

group (who received excellent training in study skills), indicating improved learning and desire

to work hard. The growth mindset intervention teaches students that intelligence is not a fixed

quality (Wieman C, 2014). Intelligence can be nurtured through challenging tasks, as intelligence

grows with hard work on challenging problems. A growth mindset intervention was especially

impactful with student outcomes in particular subjects such as science and mathematics (Hinda,

2018).

1.2. Theoretical Framework

1.2.1. Mindscape theory

Similar to the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), the mindscapes of Maruyama seek

to measure individuals on a scale of characteristics and placed into four categories of

personalities that make up the population of the world (, Magoroh,1988)

 Each contains differing views toward information, perception, logic, and ethics. Hierarchical

Bureaucrats generally view the world as having natural order with competition and consequences
much like natural selection. Independent Princes view the world as random, individualistic, and

chaotic with a natural decay that is inevitable. Social Reformers view the world as a balance that

can be maintained by symbiosis between everything. Generative Revolutionaries view the world

as potential for growth through interaction and symbiosis; change is encouraged.

1.2.2. Mindset Agency Theory

Mindset theory, as based on the cultural values defined by Sagiv and Schwarts explains

the nature, functions, and variables that make up the characteristics of personality (Yolles,

Maurice, Fink & Gerhard, 2013). The mindscape theory and cultural values outlined by Sagive

and Schwarts combine to make a more comprehensive whole of mindset agency theory

1.2.3. Fixed and growth mindset

Individuals can be placed on a continuum according to their implicit views of "where

ability comes from".Dweck states that there are two categories (growth mindset versus fixed

mindset) that can group individuals based on their behaviour, specifically their reaction to

failure. People with a "fixed mindset" believe that abilities are mostly innate and interpret failure

as the lack of necessary basic abilities, while those with a "growth mindset" believe that they can

acquire any given ability provided they invest effort or study. In particular, an individual's

mindset impacts how they face and cope with challenges, such as the transition into junior high

school from elementary school or losing your job (Dweck, 2006).

An individual with a growth mindset works hard and improves without an incentive reward in

mind as the outcome. The conceptualization of growth mindset is similar to that of intrinsic

motivation. A learner with a growth mindset tends to self-regulate their own learning and has the
propensity to cope with academic tasks. Hence, encouraging a growth mindset can improve the

academic performance of college students ( Aldhous, P. (2008).and middle school math students.

Most of the abovementioned empirical studies reported the utility of questionnaires or self-report

measures. There is still limited neuroscientific research on the neural mechanism of growth

mindset. It is, therefore, important to examine data from other means such as neuroscientific

information about how the brain changes with experience of learning and how it is associated to

growth mindset. The subsequent sections will discuss the neuroscientific evidence of growth

mindset.

1.2. Self Esteem

The importance of self-esteem gained endorsement from some government and non-

government groups starting around the 1970s, such that one can speak of a self-esteem

movement (James,1998).  This movement can be used as an example of promising evidence that

psychological research can have an effect on forming public policy. The underlying idea of the

movement was that low self-esteem was the root of problems for individuals, making it the root

of societal problems and dysfunctions. A leading figure of the movement, psychologist Nathaniel

Branden, stated: "[I] cannot think of a single psychological problem – from anxiety and

depression, to fear of intimacy or of success, to spouse battery or child molestation – that is not

traced back to the problem of low self-esteem" (Campbell, 2003) elf-esteem was believed to be a

cultural phenomenon of Western individualistic societies since low self-esteem was not found

in collectivist countries such as Japan. Concern about low self-esteem and its many presumed

negative consequences led California assemblyman John Vasconcellos to work to set up and

fund the Task Force on Self-Esteem and Personal and Social Responsibility in California in
1986. Vasconcellos argued that this task force could combat many of the state's problems – from

crime and teen pregnancy to school underachievement and pollution. He compared increasing

self-esteem to giving out a vaccine for a disease: it could help protect people from being

overwhelmed by life's challenges.

The task force set up committees in many California counties and formed a committee of

scholars to review the available literature on self-esteem. This committee found very small

associations between low self-esteem and its assumed consequences, ultimately showing that low

self-esteem is not the root of all societal problems and not as important as the committee had

originally thought. However, the authors of the paper that summarized the review of the

literature still believe that self-esteem is an independent variable that affects major social

problems. The task force disbanded in 1995, and the National Council for Self-Esteem and later

the National Association for Self-Esteem (NASE) was established, taking on the task force's

mission. Vasconcellos and Jack Canfield were members of its advisory board in 2003, and

members of its Masters' Coalition included Anthony Robbins, Bernie Siegel, and Gloria

Steinem) These evidences suggest that the experience of individuals to belief in neuroplacticity

& learning through capacity building increases, the tendency for a person to increase his self-

value increases.

2.1.1. Theories of Self Esteem

Many early theories suggested that self-esteem is a basic human need or motivation.

American psychologist Abraham Maslow included self-esteem in his hierarchy of human needs.

He described two different forms of "esteem": the need for respect from others in the form of

recognition, success, and admiration, and the need for self-respect in the form of self-love, self-
confidence, skill, or aptitude. Respect from others was believed to be more fragile and easily lost

than inner self-esteem. According to Maslow, without the fulfillment of the self-esteem need,

individuals will be driven to seek it and unable to grow and obtain self-actualization. Maslow

also states that the healthiest expression of self-esteem "is the one which manifests in the respect

we deserve for others, more than renown, fame, and flattery". Modern theories of self-esteem

explore the reasons humans are motivated to maintain a high regard for

themselves. Sociometer theory maintains that self-esteem evolved to check one's level of status

and acceptance in ones' social group. According to Terror Management Theory, self-esteem

serves a protective function and reduces anxiety about life and death.

The origin of many people's problems to be that they despise themselves and consider

themselves worthless and incapable of being loved (Carl Rogers, 1967), This is why Rogers

believed in the importance of giving unconditional acceptance to a client and when this was done

it could improve the client's self-esteem.  In his therapy sessions with clients, he offered positive

regard no matter what (Wickman, 2003). Indeed, the concept of self-esteem is approached since

then in humanistic psychology as an inalienable right for every person, summarized in the

following sentence:

Every human being, with no exception, for the mere fact to be it, is worthy of unconditional

respect of everybody else; he deserves to esteem himself and to be esteemed (Bonet, 1997)

1.2.3. Development of Self-esteem

Experiences in a person's life are a major source of how self-esteem develops (Krueger,

2003) In the early years of a child's life, parents have a significant influence on self-esteem and

can be considered the main source of positive and negative experiences a child will have
( Nolan,1999 )Unconditional love from parents helps a child develop a stable sense of being

cared for and respected. These feelings translate into later effects on self-esteem as the child

grows older. Students in elementary school who have high self-esteem tend to have authoritative

parents who are caring, supportive adults who set clear standards for their child and allow them

to voice their opinion in decision making.

Although studies thus far have reported only a correlation of warm, supportive parenting

styles (mainly authoritative and permissive) with children having high self-esteem, these

parenting styles could easily be thought of as having some causal effect in self-esteem

development. Childhood experiences that contribute to healthy self-esteem include being listened

to, being spoken to respectfully, receiving appropriate attention and affection and having

accomplishments recognized and mistakes or failures acknowledged and accepted. Experiences

that contribute to low self-esteem include being harshly criticized, being physically, sexually or

emotionally abused, being ignored, ridiculed or teased or being expected to be "perfect" all the

time (Crocker, 2004).

During school-aged years, academic achievement is a significant contributor to self-

esteem development. Consistently achieving success or consistently failing will have a strong

effect on students' individual self-esteem. However, students can also experience low self-

esteem while in school. For example, they may not have academic achievements, or they live in

a troubled environment outside of school. Issues like the ones previously stated, can cause

adolescents to doubt themselves. Social experiences are another important contributor to self-

esteem. As children go through school, they begin to understand and recognize differences

between themselves and their classmates. Using social comparisons, children assess whether

they did better or worse than classmates in different activities. These comparisons play an
important role in shaping the child's self-esteem and influence the positive or negative feelings

they have about themselves (Ruble, 1995) As children go through adolescence, peer influence

becomes much more important. Adolescents make appraisals of themselves based on their

relationships with close friends.]Successful relationships among friends are very important to the

development of high self-esteem for children. Social acceptance brings about confidence and

produces high self-esteem, whereas rejection from peers and loneliness brings about self-doubts

and produces low self-esteem (Baumeister, 2000). When an individual is able to realize his level

of competence, his abilities to focus on divergent thinking increases

1.3 Creative Thinking

Creative thinking is the ability to consider something in a new way. It might be a new

approach to a problem, a resolution to a conflict between employees, or a new result from a

data set (Bob, 1991)

Creative thinking (a companion to critical thinking) is an invaluable skill for college students.

It's important because it helps you look at problems and situations from a fresh perspective.

Creating thinking is a way to develop novel or unorthodox solutions that do not depend

wholly on past or current solutions.(Linda, 2000)

ritical and creative thinking involves students thinking broadly and deeply using skills,

behaviours and dispositions such as reason, logic, resourcefulness, imagination and

innovation in all learning areas at school and in their lives beyond school (Schraudinger et.

al, 1989).

1.3.1. Theories of Creative Thinking

1.3.1.1. Vygotsky's theory of creativity

Vygotsky believed that creativity arises from any human activity that produces something

new. Creative acts could produce anything from physical objects to a music score to a new

mental construct. Creativity is therefore present when major artistic, scientific and technical

discoveries are made

1.3.1.2.Convergent and divergent thinking

J. P. Guilford drew a distinction between convergent and divergent production

(commonly renamed convergent and divergent thinking). Convergent thinking involves aiming

for a single, correct solution to a problem, whereas divergent thinking involves creative

generation of multiple answers to a set problem. Divergent thinking is sometimes used as a

synonym for creativity in psychology literature. Other researchers have occasionally used the

terms flexible thinking or fluid intelligence, which are roughly similar to (but not synonymous

with) creativity (Guilford, 1967).

1.3.1.3.Creative cognition approach

Researchers proposed the "Geneplore" model, in which creativity takes place in two

phases: a generative phase, where an individual constructs mental representations called

preinventive structures, and an exploratory phase where those structures are used to come up

with creative ideas. Some evidence shows that when people use their imagination to develop new

ideas, those ideas are heavily structured in predictable ways by the properties of existing

categories and concepts. (Finke et al. , 1992) By contrast, that creativity only involves ordinary

cognitive processes yielding extraordinary results (Weisberg, 1999).

1.3.1.4. The Explicit–Implicit Interaction (EII) theory

Understanding creativity in problem solving, namely the Explicit–Implicit Interaction (EII)

theory of creativity. This new theory constitutes an attempt at providing a more unified

explanation of relevant phenomena (in part by reinterpreting/integrating various fragmentary

existing theories of incubation and insight) ( Helie and Sun, 2010).

When individuals are provided an environment where they continuously learn & develop

their capacity their beliefs begin to shape up as growth mindset instead of fixed mindset. The

individuals with fixed mindset fail to explore their competence or capabilities resulting in lower

levels of self-esteem. The overall self-worth of a person gets lower because of the lack of

cognitive activities & the self-image of a person serves as a risk. The person cannot appraise

his/her own   appearance, beliefs, emotions, and behaviors. Growth mindset appreciates

exploring new things & interpreting the new results. While fixed mindset believes in preserving

the already stored knowledge without focusing on its refinement & development. Higher levels

of self esteem helps individual in ideas generation which contribute to the divergent thinking.

These thought patterns enable an individual to think creatively.

Chapter II

Literature Review

To briefly sum up the findings: Individuals who believe their talents can be developed

(through hard work, good strategies, and input from others) have a growth mindset. They tend to

achieve more than those with a more fixed mindset (those who believe their talents are innate
gifts). This is because they worry less about looking smart and they put more energy into

learning. When entire companies embrace a growth mindset, their employees report feeling far

more empowered and committed; they also receive far greater organizational support for

collaboration and innovation. In contrast, people at primarily fixed-mindset companies report

more of only one thing: cheating and deception among employees, presumably to gain an

advantage in the talent race. In the wake of these findings, “growth mindset” has become a

buzzword in many major companies, even working its way into their mission statements. But

when I probe, I often discover that people’s understanding of the idea is limited. Let’s take a

look at three common misconceptions. I already have it, and I always have. People often confuse

a growth mindset with being flexible or open-minded or with having a positive outlook —

qualities they believe they’ve simply always had. My colleagues and I call this a false growth

mindset. Everyone is actually a mixture of fixed and growth mindsets, and that mixture

continually evolves with experience. A “pure” growth mindset doesn’t exist, which we have to

acknowledge in order to attain the benefits we seek. A growth mindset is just about praising and

rewarding effort. This isn’t true for students in schools, and it’s not true for employees in

organizations. In both settings, outcomes matter. Unproductive effort is never a good thing. It’s

critical to reward not just effort but learning and progress, and to emphasize the processes that

yield these things, such as seeking help from others, trying new strategies, and capitalizing on

setbacks to move forward effectively. In all of our research, the outcome — the bottom line —

follows from deeply engaging in these processes. Just espouse a growth mindset, and good things

will happen. Mission statements are wonderful things. You can’t argue with lofty values like

growth, empowerment, or innovation. But what do they mean to employees if the company

doesn’t implement policies that make them real and attainable? They just amount to lip service.
Organizations that embody a growth mindset encourage appropriate risk-taking, knowing that

some risks won’t work out. They reward employees for important and useful lessons learned,

even if a project does not meet its original goals. They support collaboration across

organizational boundaries rather than competition among employees or units. They are

committed to the growth of every member, not just in words but in deeds, such as broadly

available development and advancement opportunities. And they continually reinforce growth

mindset values with concrete policies.

2.1. International Researches

The Report of the Review Committee on the Curriculum for the Ten Year School (1977,

PP 22, cited in Singha, B.S., 1991) suggested that teachers should be made aware of the areas of

experimentation which require their creative effort, with help through guidebooks, frequent

seminars and conferences. This is essential to foster new ideas and to sustain interest. If teaching

conditions are made reasonably congenial, creative and experimental work will develop and

thrive. The committee made further recommendations. (i) Teachers should encourage children's

own initiatives, independent inquiry, thoughts and ideas by respecting their humble expression.

Also children should be exposed to a variety of situations and materials for keener observation

and close analysis. (ii) Books on art, copying from others' art work, colouring books or how-to-

do series on art should not be recommended, as they adversely affect the imaginative and

creative growth of children by promoting uniformity. Researchers often propose that seeking

critical, constructive feedback is due to a growth mindset. However, there is no evidence that

mindset is related to feedback-seeking behaviour. This study examines for the first time the

relation between mindset and feedback-seeking behaviour; moreover, it is the first time when

this topic is examined in a sample of pre-service teachers. A number of n = 68 pre-service

teachers at a North American university designed posters in an online game that assessed their

learning choices (willingness to seek critical feedback and to revise posters) and poster

performance. Then, they completed an online mindset survey regarding their ability to design

posters. Results show that growth mindset does not correlate with feedback-seeking choices,

revising choices, and poster performance. However, growth mindset moderates the relation

between performance and learning choices (critical feedback and revising): individuals endorsing

higher levels of growth mindset designed significantly better posters only when choosing higher

levels of critical feedback or revision. Spontaneous role-playing provides a common experience

for all members of the group and the raw materials for creative production. Torrance (1965)

explained that both commercial and home-made recordings can be used for this purpose.

Pictures, films, a radio broadcast, a TV programme or similar media are also useful. Foster

(1971) pointed out that the use of educational games which call for imaginative and individual

solutions has great potential for creative development. Poole (1979) suggested that the teacher

should encourage children to play with picture cards, film strips and posters, word play, and

imaginative verbal games that stir their imagination

Mindset refers to the implicit assumptions about the malleability of attributes such as

intelligence, behavior, and personality. Previous research has shown that people endorsing a

growth mindset show better academic and mental health outcomes than those with a fixed

mindset. However, little is known about the mindset of youth with intellectual disabilities (ID)

and its association with mental health.

Adolescents with (n = 247) and without (n = 96) mild to borderline ID completed

questionnaires about mindset and perseverance, empowerment, mental health problems, and self-

esteem. Adolescents with ID endorse a more fixed mindset of emotion and behavior than
adolescents without ID. No significant differences were found for mindset of intelligence and

perseverance. In addition, within the group of youth with ID some differences in mindset and

perseverance were found based on level of intellectual disability, gender, and comorbidities, but

not for age. Finally, a growth mindset of emotion and behavior and perseverance, but not

mindset of intelligence, were negatively related to mental health problems in youth with

ID.Overall, findings indicate that teaching youth with ID a growth mindset of emotion and

behavior and perseverance may be a potentially successful endeavour to improve mental health

in adolescents with ID.

In two studies, we examined the influence of a growth and a fixed creative mindset on

task-approach, other-approach and other-avoidance achievement goals, creative self-efficacy,

enjoyment, and perceived performance and effort exerted among college business students from

Mexico. We conducted both studies in a business educational setting where the development of

creative skills is highly valued. Results from study 1 showed a positive influence of a growth

creative mindset on task-approach achievement goals and creative self-efficacy. Results from

study 2 showed a positive influence of a growth creative mindset on task-approach achievement

goals. Similarly, a fixed creative mindset had a positive influence on other-approach

achievement goals. Last, a growth mindset had a direct, positive influence on creative self-

efficacy and perceived performance/effort exerted and an indirect influence on enjoyment. From

our results, we can conclude that holding a growth creative mindset was related to adaptive

motivational and performance outcomes. The theoretical and applied implications of our results

were discussed.

The present study was conducted to investigate the impact of growth mindset and

resilience on school engagement among adolescents. The main objective of the current study was
to find out the relationship between growth mindset and resilience. It also aimed at finding out

the effect of growth mindset on school engagement and the mediating role of resilience among

the study variables. The study was conducted with the sample of 300 adolescent students

(male=150) (females=150) on the basis of age, gender, education, and family income. The results

of the study were that growth mindset predicted school engagement. The mediating role of

resilience was investigated through process Macro of Hayes (2013). The path analysis of

mediator on the study variable was consistent with the hypothesis. The results showed that

resilience acted as a significant mediator between growth mindset and school engagement among

adolescents. Gender difference was also studied on school engagement of adolescents. The

results showed a significant difference among male and female adolescents on school

engagement. Females showed greater school engagement than males. This study suggests that

there is a greater need of students to adequately understand their mindsets and gain the idea that

their educational and social setbacks have the potential to get better. Once they have this

recognition than they can help students to change their mindsets which in turn enhance their

level of resilience. Further, resilience can enhance higher level of engagement in schools when

they successfully face challenges. Arora, Gupta and Madhulika (1982) reported that the

academic situation IS characterized by the predominance of examinations, with test results as the

main objective in schools. "The basic orientation ofteachers' teaching is to prepare students for

the annual examination. The results also confirm that the amount of homework assigned by the

teachers far exceeds the limit of the optimum desirable time for homework. In fact, with so much

strain on the child, there is hardly any scope left for him to develop creative capacities. The

curriculum smothers creativity rather than developing it".

2.2. Indigenous Researches

 This study adds important contributions to the research literature on organizational

citizenship behavior by providing empirical evidence of the leader’s influence as a factor in the

development of OCB at the organizational level in government schools (n=34) in Pakistan.

Research has shown that where OCB is present, both teachers and leaders increase work

diffusion and move toward increasing productivity in their schools. This study meets the current

need for reliable measures that operationalize constructs, such as OCB, by testing the validity

and reliability of a new measurement scale for school level OCB; using SEM methods and

survey responses from secondary school teachers (n= 408). Results revealed the survey reliably

operationalizes school level OCB using three-factors named shared leadership, civic virtue, and

collaborative problem solving. These factors compared favorably to the construct of a school

growth mindset. Implications for schools include directing resources at professional development

to increase the school leader’s capacity to promote OCB in their schools.

The overall evaluation of one's own self is referred to self-esteem. It is the affective

dimension of self-concept. Both self-esteem and self-concept are closely connected, used

interchangeably and are linked with sense of identity. Self-esteem of secondary school students

in Pakistan was measured through Rosenberg self-esteem scale. The Rosenberg Self-Esteem

Scale (RSES) was translated into Urdu and administrated in secondary school students across

selected districts of Punjab in Pakistan. The sample comprised of 396 students. A neutral opinion

i.e. unsure was added to convert the scale into 5-point Likert-type scale. The reliability

calculated of translated version was 0.684. Gender difference was found in self-esteem of

students. Urban students showed higher self-esteem than rural students. Science group students

had greater self-esteem than arts group students. Factor analysis of RSES extracted two factors
i.e. self-worth & self-competence. The achieved results were compared to the administration of

RSES in other countries across the world.

The purpose of present study is to compare the level of self-esteem in female students

between private and public educational institutions of Lahore. All research variables and

indicators were extracted from rigorous theoretical framework and extensive review of relevant

literature on related issues. Quantitative survey design was used to get information through

selfadministrated questionnaire. It was a structured questionnaire that consisted on four parts

including structured questions with probable key options given below. The participants of

present study were female students of age ranged between 13 to 16 years from different public

and private educational institutions of Lahore city, who were attending 7th, 8 th and 9th classes

respectively. The sample was consisting of 864 female students, in which 511 students were

from public and 353 from private educational institutions. Convenient sampling technique was

used due to unequal distribution of population in the public and private sectors. Data was

analyzed statistically, Chi-square test was applied to analyze and compare the data between

private and public educational institutions. Results showed significant difference between female

students of private and public educational institutions. High socio-economic status contributes to

higher levels of self-confidence, and thus private sector students exhibit substantial self-

worthiness about themselves.

The major purpose of the present study was to explore the relationship between Creative

Thinking and Academic Achievements of Secondary School Students. The study was conducted

using survey design method. A total number of 256 students participated in the study.

Participants were selected using random table. Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking [TTCT] was

used to measure creative potential of participants on four elements. Pearson Correlation and one-
way ANOVA were used to verify hypothesis. Results revealed a statistically significant

relationship between i) creative thinking and students’ academic achievements on different

aspects of test of creative thinking, ii) creative thinking and academic achievements. However,

the relationship could be altered when different level of academic achievement is examined and

when creative thinking measure employed. The study has considerable implications for

education as a whole.

The study presented in this book provides a baseline analysis of the extent to which the

primary education system in Pakistan is capable of enhancing or inhibiting children's creativity.

It involved 1008 primary schools who participated in a survey, 154 children who took the

Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, and classroom observation in 16 schools as well as

documentary an analysis of the education policy documents, curriculum and the official science

textbook. The research presents the findings related to the definition of "creativity," and the

means used to identify, assess and enhance it as well as the importance and the obstacles faced in

doing so. The study finds that while policy documents mention the introduction of creativity in

education, and the curriculum lays emphasis on the concept in a comprehensive manner, the

designated textbooks and teaching practices do little more than encourage rote memorization and

regurgitation of information. The measurement of children's creativity in this study has shown

that children have the ability to produce ideas which are at times also original. But they appear to

be weaker in other areas such as being able to produce abstract titles, and remaining open to

going beyond the "ordinary" in their thinking. This is due to the fact that much of the teaching is

only geared towards knowledge acquisition. This research has reinforced the need for a systems

view of creativity, in order to provide a more holistic and less distorted view of the phenomenon.

Appended are: (1) Questionnaire (Urdu and English versions); (2) Training material for the
survey; (3) Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (English and Urdu versions); and (4) Classroom

Creativity Observation Schedule. 

2.3. Summary

These researches provide a comprehensive evidence that a growth mindset intervention

having significant effect on the vast majority of students and a minuscule positive effect (0.1

grade points) on a group of low-achieving students. Individuals  who understand that

the brain can get smarter who have a growth mindset, do better in school because they have an

empowering perspective on learning. They focus on improvement and see effort as a way to

build their abilities. They see failure as a natural part of the learning process. Individuals

with high self-esteem get better grades, are less depressed, feel less stress, and may even live

longer than those who view themselves more negatively. The researchers also found that high

self-esteem is correlated with greater initiative and activity; people with high self-esteem just do

more things. Higher self esteem increases the efficiency of decision making of individuals.  Up

to 30% of the variance in creative performance was explained by “domain‐relevant” self‐esteem

facets, and a moderate contribution of creative self‐esteem across creativity domains. Results are

discussed in light of several important methodological directions for this line of work, as well as

its implications for creativity‐based interventions designed to support positive self‐esteem

development in adolescence.

2.4. Rationale

Having a growth mindset helps students excel in school, which in turn can help them

move out of poverty (Card, 2001). Compared to students with fixed mindsets, for instance,

students with growth mindsets in school for example, take on more challenging tasks, learn
more, and earn better grades (Aronson, Fried, & Good, 2002; Blackwell, Trzesniewski, &

Dweck, 2007; Romero et al., 2014).

Unfortunately, children in families living in under-developed circumstances are less likely to

have a growth mindset than are children in families living on a higher income status (Claro,

Paunesku, & Dweck, 2016). Yet parents and teachers can change children’s mindsets. For

example, praising children for their effort (“You worked so hard to learn this!”) causes them to

have growth mindsets, while praising them for their intelligence (“You’re so smart!”) causes

them to have fixed mindsets (Mueller & Dweck, 1998). Similarly, parents who see failure as

helpful tend to have children with growth mindsets, whereas parents who see failure as harmful

tend to have children with fixed mindsets (Haimovitz & Dweck, 2016). In particularly, Pakistani

societal system, students having fixed mindset gets acceptance and social appraisal so easily

which strengthen their belief in relying on the pre-defined fine lines and they fail to nourish their

intellectual abilities to develop a positive change in their lives. This fixed mindset causes them to

block their abilities and hamper their success and development in their mental skills.

After a period of schooling, when they reach to a point in their professional colleges to

incorporate their novel ideas into the already available knowledge, present and comprehend

creatively they fail to do so. Because schools never allowed them to recognize and refine their

abilities which ultimately results in lower levels of self-competence. The students can’t

contribute to invent and theorize because they don’t believe in the worth of their ideas. Peer

pressure and societal preferences to follow the defined patterns hinders the individual’s problem

solving abilities.The results gain through this research help us provide such progressive

environments to the adolescents in which they could shape out efficient structure & traits that
helps them carry out extensive decisions in their life. Observing the mediating effects of self

esteem can help psychologists focus on such kind of curriculum design incorporating the idea of

blended learning system into their educational activities. This system developed will help us

develop successful executives & professional, developing a whole infrastructure of growth and

development. Focusing creative thinking will help us figure out the better problem solvers who

can take up challenging tasks very effectively.

2.5 Objectives

• To determine the level of growth mindset, self-esteem and creative thinking in school

students.

• To identify the relationship of demographic variables with growth mindset, self-esteem &

creative thinking.

• To determine the relationship between growth mindset & self-esteem.

• To determine the relationship between growth mindset & creative thinking.

• To find out the prediction of self-esteem and growth mindset for creative thinking in

School students.

2.6 Hypothesis

 There would be a positive relationship between growth mindset and self-esteem.

 There would be a mediating relationship between self esteem &creative thinking.

  There would be a significant positive relationship between growth mindset and

creative thinking.

 The variance in creative thinking could be predicted by the variance in growth

mindset and self-esteem.

2.7. Hypothesized Model

IV

Growth Mindset

DV

Creative Thinking
Mediator

Self esteem

Covariates (Age, Gender, Family

income, Parents Age, No. of
Friends)
 Method

An overview of the detailed structure and design of this research, description of

the population and sampling techniques for the collection of data and the answers to the

research questions were included in this section.

3.1 Research design

Correlational research design was used to explore the relationship between growth mindset, self-

esteem and creative thinking.

3.2 Sample

Sample consisted of school going 223 school students. Data will be collected from individuals

of 10-19 years from different institutes of Pakistan. Convenient sampling strategy will be used.

3.3 Inclusion criteria

 School students of age 10-19 will be included.

 Only the students enrolled in schools will be included.

 Data will be collected from both private and government schools.

 Individual capable of comprehending English language will be considered eligible.

3.4 Exclusion Criteria

 Expatriate students just returned back to Pakistan will be excluded.

 Students with any serious psychological or learning disability will be excluded.

3.3 Operational Definitions

3.3.1. Growth mindset

Individual’s tendency to believe in the development of their basic abilities through dedication

and efforts resulting in resilience and lifelong learning to accomplish challenges (Dweck, 2015).

3.3.2. Self Esteem

Self-esteem can be operationally defined as an emotional state which results according to

the interpretation of individual’s belief system developing over a period of time about his

efficiency or effectiveness in terms of appearance, beliefs, emotions and behaviors (Rosenberg,

1960).

3.3.3. Creative Thinking

Creative thinking can be operationalized as the cognitive processes leading to a new

invention, solution, or synthesis in any area. A creative solution may use preexisting elements

(e.g., objects, ideas) but creates a new relationship between them. Creative Thinking reflects

through analysis, communication, organizing abilities, analyzing & problem solving (APA

Dictionary of Psychology).

3.4 Assessment Measures

3.4.0. Personal Information Sheet

 The personal information sheet consists of the demographic variables that can impact our

dependent variable. It contains the items of age, gender economic status, parent’s age and other

variables to control the covariates.

3.4.1. Growth Mindset Scale

Carol Dweck (1999, 2006) created the 3-item Growth Mindset Scale to measure how much

people believe that they can get smarter if they work at it. Using a 6-point scale (1 = strongly

agree; 6 = strongly disagree), respondents show how much they agree with three statements

about whether their efforts can change their intelligence. 1 = strongly agree; 2 = agree; 3 =

mostly agree; 4 = mostly disagree; 5 = disagree; 6 = strongly disagree. It shows an alpha of 0.7

reliability indices.

3.4.2. Self-Liking/Self-Competence Scale-Revised (SLCS-R)

This scale developed by the Tafarodi & Swann (2001) consists of 2 subscales; self-liking

& self-competence. These subscales show an alpha level of 0.92 & 0.75 reliability. A 16-item

scale uses a 5-point likert-type response scale ranging from (1) Strongly disagree to (5) Strongly

agree Scoring: C = self-competence; L = self-liking; - = negatively-keyed item; + = positively-

keyed item.

3.4.3. Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS; Kaufman, 2012)

The KDOCS is a 50-item self-report measure designed to assess participants’ self-

perceptions of creative behaviors across various domains compared to others of a similar age and
life experience. Participants rated themselves on a scale of 1-Much less creative to 5-Much more

creative in response to statements such as “Mediating a dispute between two friends” or

“Learning how to play a musical instrument.” The K-DOCS assesses selfperceptions of creative

behaviors in five behavior domains: Self/Everyday, Scholarly, Mechanical/Scientific, Artistic,

and Performance creativity (Kaufman, 2012). In the present study, both a global score (total

average) and individual domain (average) scores on the K-DOCS were used. Good internal

consistency was demonstrated for the five domains, with each factor’s coefficient alpha

reliability above .80. Scoring: all items should be randomized. Items 1–11 comprise 1 Items 12–

22 comprise 2 Items 23–32 comprise 3 Items 33– 41 comprise 4 Items 42–50 comprise 5

3.5. Procedure

First of all, synopsis will be approved from DDPC at Institute of Applied

Psychology, University of the Punjab, Lahore. To employ psychometric tests for this

study, the formal permissions will be taken from the authors after the approval of synopsis.

The concerned authorities of Institute of Applied Psychology will be requested to generate

a permission letter for the collection of data. Later on, adolescents will be approached and

permission from their institutes will be taken to collect data. Then consent of the

participants will be taken and data will be collected from participants through

questionnaires. Researcher will assure them about the privacy and confidentiality of the
information given by them. Researcher will explain the questionnaire to the participants. In

the end, results were analyzed and reported.

3.4. Ethical Considerations

Following ethical considerations will be taken care of

● The relevant scales will be used after the permission of the authors through email.

● Written consent will be taken from the participants and the researcher will brief them

about certain features of the research.

● The data will be kept confidential and restricted for the purpose of this study only.

● Participant’s information will not be discussed with anyone except the concerned

Supervisor.

References
Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on

African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 113–125.

Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence

predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an

intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246-263.

Card, D. (2001). Estimating the return to schooling: Progress on some persistent econometric

problems. Econometrica, 69(5), 1127-1160.

Claro, S., Paunesku, D., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Growth mindset tempers the effects of poverty

on academic achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(31),

8664-8668.

Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and

development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.

Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C. Y., & Hong, Y. Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgments

and reactions: A world from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6(4), 267-285.

Haimovitz, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Parents’ views of failure predict children’s fixed and

growth intelligence mind-sets. Psychological Science, 27(6), 859-869.

Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s

motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 33-52.

Romero, C., Master, A., Paunesku, D., Dweck, C. S., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Academic and

emotional functioning in middle school: The role of implicit theories. Emotion, 14(2),

227-234.

Thompson, T. W., Waskom, M. L., Garel, K. L. A., Cardenas-Iniguez, C., Reynolds, G. O.,

Winter, R., … & Gabrieli, J. D. (2013). Failure of working memory training to enhance

cognition or intelligence. PloS one, 8(5), e63614.

Alencar, E. M. L. S. d. (2002). Mastering creativity for education in the 21st century. In

Proceedings of the 13th biennial world conference of the world council for gifted and

talented children. Istanbul, Turkey.

Aljughaiman, A, & Mowrer-Reynolds, E. (2005). Teachers' conceptions of creativity and

creative students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 17-34.

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: a componential conceptualization.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357-376.

Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B.M. Staw &

L.L. Cummings (Eds). Research in Organizational Behavior. (pp. 123-167) Greenwich,

CT: JAI Press.

Amabile, T. M. (1990). Within you, without you. The social psychology of creativity and

beyond. In M.A. Runco & R.S.

Albert (Eds). Theories of creativity (pp. 61-91). Newbury Park, CA. Sage. Amabile, T.M., &

Hennessey, B.A. (1992). The motivation for creativity in children. In T. Pittman & A.
 Boggiano (Eds.), Achievement and motivation: A social developmental perspective (pp.

54-74). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Barron, F. (1955). The disposition toward originality. Journal of Abnormal and Social

Psychology, 51, 478- 485.

Baumeister, R.F., & Bushman, B.J. (2010).Social Psychology and Human Nature. New York,

NY: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Does creativity have a place in classroom discussions? Prospective

teachers’ response preferences. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2(1), 1–9.

Beghetto, R. A. (2007). Ideational code-switching: Walking the talk about supporting student

creativity in the classroom. Roeper Review, 29, 265 – 270.

Berk, R.A. (1998). Professors are from mars, students are from snickers. Madison, WI: Mendota

Press Bowers, K.S.,

Farvolden, P., & Mermigis, L. (1995). Intuitive antecedents of insight. In S.M. Smith, T.M.

Ward, & R.A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 27-52). Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press.

Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic Motivation. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Deci, E. L. (1981). The

psychology of self-determination. Lexington, MA: Heaths.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human

behavior. New York, NY

Plenum. Fasko, D. (2001). Education and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 317–327.

Gabora, L., & Ranjan, A. (in press.) How insight emerges in distributed, content-

addressable memory. In A. Bristol, O. Vartanian, & J. Kaufman (Eds.) The Neuroscience

of Creativity. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Tafarodi, R. W., & Swann, W. B. Jr., (2001). Two-dimensional self-esteem: Theory and

measurement. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 653–673. (1) (PDF) Measures of

Self-Esteem. Available from: https://www.researchgate.

Westby, E. L., & Dawson, V. L. (1995). Creativity: Asset of burden in the classroom? Creativity

Research Journal, 8(1), 1–11.

Williams, L. E., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Experiencing physical warmth promotes interpersonal

warmth. Science, 322, 606-607.

 Appendices

Implicit Theories of Intelligence Scale for Children – Self Form (For children age 10 and older)

Read each sentence below and then circle the one number that shows how much you

agree with it. There are no right or wrong answers.

You have a certain amount of

intelligence, and you really can’t do

much to change it.

Your intelligence is something about

you that you can’t change very much.

You can learn new things, but you

can’t really change your basic

intelligence.
1. Finding something fun to do when I have no money _____

2. Helping other people cope with a difficult situation _____

3. Teaching someone how to do something _____

4. Maintaining a good balance between my work and my personal life _____

5. Understanding how to make myself happy _____

6. Being able to work through my personal problems in a healthy way _____

7. Thinking of new ways to help people _____

8. Choosing the best solution to a problem _____

9. Planning a trip or event with friends that meets everyone’s needs _____

10. Mediating a dispute or argument between two friends _____

11. Getting people to feel relaxed and at ease _____

12. Writing a nonfiction article for a newspaper, newsletter, or magazine _____

13. Writing a letter to the editor _____

14. Researching a topic using many different types of sources that may not be readily apparent

_____

15. Debating a controversial topic from my own perspective _____

16. Responding to an issue in a context-appropriate way _____

17. Gathering the best possible assortment of articles or papers to support a specific point of

view _____

18. Arguing a side in a debate that I do not personally agree with _____

19. Analyzing the themes in a good book _____

20. Figuring out how to integrate critiques and suggestions while revising a work _____
21. Being able to offer constructive feedback based on my own reading of a paper _____

22. Coming up with a new way to think about an old debate _____

23. Writing a poem _____

24. Making up lyrics to a funny song _____

25. Making up rhymes _____

26. Composing an original song _____

27. Learning how to play a musical instrument _____

28. Shooting a fun video to air on YouTube _____

29. Singing in harmony _____

30. Spontaneously creating lyrics to a rap song _____

31. Playing music in public _____

32. Acting in a play _____

33. Carving something out of wood or similar material _____

34. Figuring out how to fix a frozen or buggy computer _____

35. Writing a computer program _____

36. Solving math puzzles_____

37. Taking apart machines and figuring out how they work _____

38. Building something mechanical (like a robot) _____

39. Helping to carry out or design a scientific experiment_____

40. Solving an algebraic or geometric proof _____

41. Constructing something out of metal, stone, or similar material _____

42. Drawing a picture of something I’ve never actually seen (like an alien) _____

43. Sketching a person or object _____

44. Doodling/drawing random or geometric designs _____

45. Making a scrapbook page out of my photographs _____

46. Taking a well-composed photograph using an interesting angle or approach _____

47. Making a sculpture or piece of pottery ____

48. Appreciating a beautiful painting _____

49. Coming up with my own interpretation of a classic work of art _____

50. Enjoying an art museum _____