{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020311442112389978, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002708192281651997, 'mean_word_length': 5.938967136150235, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Theories of ability and the pursuit of challenge among adolescents with mild mental retardation.

Dweck (1991) distinguishes two different ways children can view their abilities. Children who have an 'incremental theory' of their ability believe that it is a changeable, increasable and controllable quantity. Those who have an 'entity theory' believe their ability represents a fixed, unchangeable trait. Children with an 'incremental theory' tend to display adaptive achievement behaviours such as pursuing challenging activities, whereas children with an 'entity theory' tend to avoid challenges. The present study examined the usefulness of this distinction in understanding the behaviour and affect of children with mental retardation in an achievement situation. Results from an attributional questionnaire showed that children with mental retardation were significantly less likely to possess an incremental theory of their abilities than children without retardation. However, experimental results showed that when the context highlighted an incremental theory of ability, children with mental retardation showed the same positive motivational response as children without retardation (i.e. they chose high levels of challenge and reported greater interest-enjoyment). One unexpected finding emerged: children with mental retardation showed a tendency to choose lower challenge levels after receiving verbally administered success feedback relative to neutral feedback.