社会阶层成长型心智对大学生学业和职业投入的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.0447

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 社会阶层成长型心智(SES成长型心智)代表了个体对自身阶层能够发生流动的积极信念。基于内隐理论, 采用问卷法(研究1)和实验法(研究2)考察了大学生SES成长型心智对学业和职业投入的影响及其阶层差异。结果发现：(1) SES成长型心智提高了学业投入, 该作用在家庭主观SES较低的群体中较强; (2) SES成长型心智提高了职业投入, 该作用在家庭主观SES较高的群体中较强; (3)家庭主观SES影响了个体在做计划时的时间导向。家庭主观SES较低的个体具有较近的时间导向, 这强化了SES成长型心智与学业投入的关系; 家庭主观SES较高的个体有着相对较远的时间导向, 从而促进了SES成长型心智与职业投入的关系。研究结果有望从主观能动性的角度为个体实现阶层流动提供理论与实践参考。

关键词: 社会阶层, 内隐理论, 成长型心智, 学业与职业投入, 时间导向

Abstract:

The growth mindset of socioeconomic status (SES growth mindset) refers to the belief that social standing is malleable and can be developed through one’s efforts and practices. Individuals with a strong SES growth mindset tend to have a positive cognition of social class mobility, believing that they have the potential to reach a higher status. In line with implicit theory, the SES growth mindset has strong motivational functions, which may encourage individuals to acquire the resources necessary for improving their social standing. Given that higher education is pivotal for upward mobility, and college students are at a crucial stage in building their status, this research focused on how SES growth mindset influences their academic and career engagement. Drawing on resource scarcity theory, this research further incorporated how SES growth mindset interacts with family subjective SES to determine whether its impact varies among individuals with different SES backgrounds.

To address these questions, we conducted two studies. Study 1 used a time-lagged method to investigate the relationships between SES growth mindset and the two types of engagement, as well as the moderating role of family subjective SES. Additionally, Study 1 examined whether time orientation mediated the moderation effect of family subjective SES. Study 2 aimed to test the causal effect of SES growth mindset on academic and career engagement with two scenario-based experiments. In Study 2a, we manipulated the SES growth mindset of participants and then tested their intentions to engage in academic and career tasks. In Study 2b, we further investigated how family subjective SES influences these relationships via time orientation.

The results revealed that SES growth mindset has a positive impact on academic and career engagement. The relationship between SES growth mindset and academic engagement was stronger for individuals with a low family subjective SES, while the relationship between SES growth mindset and career engagement was stronger for individuals with high family subjective SES. Moreover, time orientation mediated the moderated effects of family subjective SES. Family subjective SES was positively associated with time orientation. Individuals with low family subjective SES held a near-future time orientation, which enhanced the effect of SES growth mindset on their academic engagement. By contrast, individuals with high family subjective SES have a far-future time orientation, causing the SES growth mindset to have a larger impact on their career engagement.

In summary, this research highlights the importance of SES growth mindset in driving individuals’ SES−promoted behaviors, which benefit their academic and career development. Such advantages are also influences by the family subjective SES and time orientation of individuals. Overall, the findings validate and expand the implications of implicit theory and resource scarcity theory, contributing to the understanding of class mobility from the perspective of personal initiative.

Key words: socioeconomic status, implicit theory, growth mindset, academic and career engagement, time orientation

中图分类号:

任小云, 段锦云, 张茜. (2025). 社会阶层成长型心智对大学生学业和职业投入的影响. 心理学报, 57(3), 447-462.

REN Xiaoyun, DUAN Jinyun, ZHANG Qian. (2025). The influence of the growth mindset of socioeconomic status on academic and career engagement among college students. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(3), 447-462.

图/表 19

参考文献 44

[1]	Adler, N. E., Epel, E. S., Castellazzo, G., & Ickovics, J. R. (2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy white women. Health Psychology, 19(6), 586-592. doi: 10.1037//0278-6133.19.6.586 pmid: 11129362
[2]	Bai, J., Yang, S. L., Xu, B. X., & Guo, Y. Y. (2021). How can successful people share their goodness with the world: The psychological mechanism underlying the upper social classes’ redistributive preferences and the role of humility. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(10), 1161-1172.
	[白洁, 杨沈龙, 徐步霄, 郭永玉. (2021). 达者何以兼济天下: 高阶层再分配偏向的心理机制及谦卑的作用. 心理学报, 53(10), 1161-1172.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.01161
[3]	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. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x pmid: 17328703
[4]	Blustein, D. L., Chaves, A. P., Diemer, M. A., Gallagher, L. A., Marshall, K. G., Sirin, S., & Bhati, K. (2002). Voices of the forgotten half: The role of social class in the school-to- work transition. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49(3), 311-323.
[5]	Browman, A. S., Destin, M., Carswell, K. L., & Svoboda, R. C. (2017). Perceptions of socioeconomic mobility influence academic persistence among low socioeconomic status students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 72(4), 45-52.
[6]	Browman, A. S., Svoboda, R. C., & Destin, M. (2019). A belief in socioeconomic mobility promotes the development of academically motivating identities among low-socioeconomic status youth. Self and Identity, 21(1), 42-60.
[7]	Burnette, J. L., Billingsley, J., Banks, G. C., Knouse, L. E., Hoyt, C. L., Pollack, J. M., & Simon, S. (2023). A systematic review and meta-analysis of growth mindset interventions: For whom, how, and why might such interventions work? Psychological Bulletin, 149(3-4), 174-205.
[8]	Côté, S., Kraus, M. W., Carpenter, N. C., Piff, P. K., Beermann, U., & Keltner, D. (2017). Social affiliation in same-class and cross-class interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(2), 269-285.
[9]	Day, M. V., & Fiske, S. T. (2017). Movin on up? How perceptions of social mobility affect our willingness to defend the system. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(3), 267-274.
[10]	Ding, Y. Q., & Ye, X. Y. (2015). Expanding Chinese higher education: Quality and social stratification. Chinese Journal of Sociology, 35(3), 193-220.
	[丁延庆, 叶晓阳. (2015). 扩张的中国高等教育: 教育质量与社会分层. 社会, 35(3), 193-220.]
[11]	Du, T. Y., Hu, X. Y., Yang, J., Li, L. Y., & Wang, T. T. (2022). Low socioeconomic status and intertemporal choice: The mechanism of “psychological-shift” from the perspective of threat. Advances in Psychological Science, 30(8), 1894-1904.
	[杜棠艳, 胡小勇, 杨静, 李兰玉, 王甜甜. (2022). 低社会经济地位与跨期决策: 威胁视角下的心理转变机制. 心理科学进展, 30(8), 1894-1904.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.01894
[12]	Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House Z.
[13]	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.
[14]	Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2019). Mindsets: A view from two eras. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(3), 481-496. doi: 10.1177/1745691618804166 pmid: 30707853
[15]	Fendinger, N. J., Dietze, P., & Knowles, E. D. (2023). Beyond cognitive deficits: How social class shapes social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 27(6), 528-528. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2023.03.004 pmid: 37031013
[16]	Han, S. J., & Stieha, V. (2020). Growth mindset for human resource development: A scoping review of the literature with recommended interventions. Human Resource Development Review, 19(3), 309-331.
[17]	Hirschi, A., & Freund, P. A. (2014). Career engagement: Investigating intraindividual predictors of weekly fluctuations in proactive career behaviors. The Career Development Quarterly, 62(1), 5-20.
[18]	Hoyt, C. L., Billingsley, J., Burnette, J. L., Becker, W., & Babij, A. D. (2023). The implications of mindsets of poverty for stigma against those in poverty. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 53(5), 385-407.
[19]	Hu, X. Y., Guo, Y. Y., Li, J., & Yang, S. L. (2016). Perceived societal fairness and goal attainment: The different effects of social class and their mechanism. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48(3), 271-289.
	[胡小勇, 郭永玉, 李静, 杨沈龙. (2016). 社会公平感对不同阶层目标达成的影响及其过程. 心理学报, 48(3), 271-289.]
[20]	Ji, Y. X., Liu, C., Zhao, Y., Wang, D. X., & Hu, X. Y. (2024). The heterogeneity and boundary conditions of growth mindset effect. Advances in Psychological Science, 32(3), 514-526. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2024.00514
	[冀月欣, 刘畅, 赵越, 王笛新, 胡小勇. (2024). 成长心态效应的异质性及边界条件. 心理科学进展, 32(3), 514-526.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2024.00514
[21]	Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., Mendoza-Denton, R., Rheinschmidt, M. L., & Keltner, D. (2012). Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor. Psychological Review, 119(3), 546-572. doi: 10.1037/a0028756 pmid: 22775498
[22]	Kuwabara, K., Cao, J., Cho, S., & Ingram, P. (2023). Lay theories of instrumental relations: Explaining individual differences in dispositional similarity attraction. Academy of Management Journal, 66(2), 667-687.
[23]	Landau, M. J., Oyserman, D., Keefer, L. A., & Smith, G. C. (2014). The college journey and academic engagement: How metaphor use enhances identity-based motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(5), 679-698. doi: 10.1037/a0036414 pmid: 24749818
[24]	Lei, L., Wang, J. Y., & Liu, W. M. (2020). The effect of scarcity on individuals’ psychology and behavior: An explanation from a more integrated perspective. Advances in Psychological Science, 28(5), 833-843. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2020.00833
	[雷亮, 王菁煜, 柳武妹. (2020). 稀缺对个体心理和行为的影响: 基于一个更加整合视角下的阐释. 心理科学进展, 28(5), 833-843.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2020.00833
[25]	Li, L. L., Shi, L., & Zhu, B. (2018). Solid or fluid? Social class structure transition trends in contemporary China during the past 40 years. Sociological Studies, 33(6), 1-34.
	[李路路, 石磊, 朱斌. (2018). 固化还是流动?——当代中国阶层结构变迁四十年. 社会学研究, 33(6), 1-34.]
[26]	Li, Z. L. (2016). Family background, academic performance and admission to postgraduate study in China. Chinese Journal of Sociology, 36(3), 86-109.
	[李忠路. (2016). 家庭背景, 学业表现与研究生教育机会获得. 社会, 36(3), 86-109.]
[27]	Loignon, A. C., & Woehr, D. J. (2018). Social class in the organizational sciences: A conceptual integration and meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 44(1), 61-88.
[28]	Muenks, K., Canning, E. A., LaCosse, J., Green, D. J., Zirkel, S., Garcia, J. A., & Murphy, M. C. (2020). Does my professor think my ability can change? Students’ perceptions of their STEM professors’ mindset beliefs predict their psychological vulnerability, engagement, and performance in class. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(11), 2119-2144.
[29]	Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2013). Scarcity: Why having too little means so much. New York, NY, US: Times Books/Henry Holt and Co.
[30]	Prenda, K. M., & Lachman, M. E. (2001). Planning for the future: A life management strategy for increasing control and life satisfaction in adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 16(2), 206-216. pmid: 11405309
[31]	Rigolizzo, M., & Zhu, Z. (2021). The ebb and flow of learning motivation: The differentiated impact of the implicit theory of intelligence on learning behaviors. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 32(3), 273-299.
[32]	Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464-481.
[33]	Shah, A. K., Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2012). Some consequences of having too little. Science, 338(6107), 682-685. doi: 10.1126/science.1222426 pmid: 23118192
[34]	Shah, A. K., Zhao, J., Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2018). Money in the mental lives of the poor. Social Cognition, 36(1), 4-19.
[35]	Shane, J., & Heckhausen, J. (2016). For better or worse: Young adults’ opportunity beliefs and motivational self- regulation during career entry. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40(2), 107-116.
[36]	Wang, N., Li, Y., Zhang, Q., & Yu, L. L. (2023). “Deeper or broader”? Mechanism research on the effect of growth mindset on employees’ dual innovation behavior. Science and Technology Process and Policy, 40(15), 138-149.
	[王宁, 李怡, 张谦, 于玲玲. (2023). “求深”还是“求宽”?成长型思维模式对员工双元创新行为的影响. 科技进步与对策, 40(15), 138-149.]
[37]	Wang, Y., & Ford, M. (2020). Financial inadequacy and the disadvantageous changes in time perspective and goal striving strategies throughout life. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41(9), 895-914.
[38]	Wang, Y., Wen, Z. L., Wang, H. H., & Guan, F. (2022). The second type of mediated moderation. Advances in Psychological Science, 30(9), 2131-2142. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.02131
	[王阳, 温忠麟, 王惠惠, 管芳. (2022). 第二类有中介的调节模型. 心理科学进展, 30(9), 2131-2142.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.02131
[39]	Yang, S. L., Rao, T. T., Yu, F., & Guo, Y. Y. (2022). Subjective class research in psychology of social class: Its contributions and deficiencies. Advances in Psychological Science, 30(8), 1883-1893. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.01883
	[杨沈龙, 饶婷婷, 喻丰, 郭永玉. (2022). 主观阶层研究取向的贡献与弊端. 心理科学进展, 30(8), 1883-1893.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.01883
[40]	Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2020). What can be learned from growth mindset controversies? American Psychologist, 75(9), 1269-1284. doi: 10.1037/amp0000794 pmid: 33382294
[41]	Zhang, Y., Guo, Y. Y., Ding, Y., & Li, K. (2019). The “double- edged sword” effect of class mobility and its psychological mechanism. Journal of Psychological Science, 42(5), 1230-1235.
	[张跃, 郭永玉, 丁毅, 李凯. (2019). 阶层流动的“双刃剑”效应及其心理机制. 心理科学, 42(5), 1230-1235.]
[42]	Zhao, H. X., & Wang, L. M. (2020). Promotion or repression: The impact of higher education on class mobility. Higher Education Exploration, 209(9), 5-11.
	[赵红霞, 王乐美. (2020). 促进还是抑制: 高等教育对社会阶层流动的影响——基于CGSS混合截面数据的实证分析. 高教探索, 209(9), 5-11.]
[43]	Zhao, S., Chen, L., King, R. B., Nie, Y., & Chi, P. (2021). When adolescents believe that SES can be changed, they achieve more: The role of growth mindset of SES. Personality and Individual Differences, 183(2), 111104.
[44]	Zhao, S., Du, H., Li, Q., Wu, Q., & Chi, P. (2021). Growth mindset of socioeconomic status boosts subjective well-being: A longitudinal study. Personality and Individual Differences, 168(7), 110301.

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1 性别	−	−
2 年龄(岁)	20.33	1.30	−0.03
3 学校	0.71	0.45	0.08	0.07
4 年级	2.20	0.59	−0.04	0.74^***	0.06
5 专业	0.68	0.47	0.26^***	−0.06	−0.01	−0.04
6 智力成长型心智	4.41	1.03	−0.03	−0.05	−0.08	−0.03	0.08
7 家庭主观SES	4.17	1.53	−0.05	0.07	0.03	0.09	−0.06	−0.01
8 时间导向	3.19	0.81	−0.02	−0.02	0.09	0.01	0.02	0.06	0.42^***
9 SES成长型心智	5.27	1.12	−0.02	0.04	0.07	0.03	−0.001	0.25^***	0.01	0.15^**
10 学业投入	5.07	1.04	0.09	0.01	0.07	−0.01	0.06	0.17^**	−0.09	0.05	0.44^***
11 职业投入	4.14	0.75	−0.10	0.02	0.06	0.07	−0.07	0.04	0.32^***	0.37^***	0.35^***	0.04

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1 性别	−	−
2 年龄(岁)	20.33	1.30	−0.03
3 学校	0.71	0.45	0.08	0.07
4 年级	2.20	0.59	−0.04	0.74^***	0.06
5 专业	0.68	0.47	0.26^***	−0.06	−0.01	−0.04
6 智力成长型心智	4.41	1.03	−0.03	−0.05	−0.08	−0.03	0.08
7 家庭主观SES	4.17	1.53	−0.05	0.07	0.03	0.09	−0.06	−0.01
8 时间导向	3.19	0.81	−0.02	−0.02	0.09	0.01	0.02	0.06	0.42^***
9 SES成长型心智	5.27	1.12	−0.02	0.04	0.07	0.03	−0.001	0.25^***	0.01	0.15^**
10 学业投入	5.07	1.04	0.09	0.01	0.07	−0.01	0.06	0.17^**	−0.09	0.05	0.44^***
11 职业投入	4.14	0.75	−0.10	0.02	0.06	0.07	−0.07	0.04	0.32^***	0.37^***	0.35^***	0.04

变量	学业投入				职业投入
变量	模型1	模型2	模型3	模型4	模型5	模型6	模型7	模型8
控制变量
性别	0.18(0.12)	0.19(0.11)	0.16(0.10)	0.15(0.10)	−0.14(0.09)	−0.11(0.08)	−0.10(0.07)	−0.09(0.07)
年龄	0.03(0.06)	0.01(0.06)	0.04(0.05)	0.03(0.05)	−0.04(0.05)	−0.04(0.04)	−0.05(0.04)	−0.05(0.04)
年级	−0.06(0.14)	−0.04(0.12)	−0.08(0.12)	−0.06(0.12)	0.14(0.10)	0.10(0.09)	0.12(0.08)	0.11(0.08)
学校	0.17(0.12)	0.08(0.11)	0.10(0.11)	0.08(0.11)	0.12(0.09)	0.02(0.08)	0.01(0.08)	0.03(0.08)
专业	0.07(0.12)	0.07(0.11)	0.08(0.10)	0.06(0.10)	−0.08(0.09)	−0.07(0.08)	−0.07(0.08)	−0.06(0.07)
智力成长型心智	0.18(0.05)^**	0.07(0.05)	0.04(0.05)	0.03(0.05)	0.04(0.04)	−0.04(0.04)	−0.02(0.03)	−0.02(0.03)
预测变量
SES成长型心智		0.39(0.05)^***	0.40(0.04)^***	0.37(0.05)^***		0.22(0.03)^***	0.21(0.03)^***	0.23(0.03)^***
家庭主观SES		−0.07(0.04)	−0.12(0.04)^**	−0.10(0.04)^*		0.10(0.03)^***	0.13(0.03)^***	0.11(0.03)^***
时间导向		0.04(0.07)	0.14(0.07)	0.13(0.07)		0.21(0.05)^***	0.18(0.05)^***	0.19(0.05)^***
交互项
SES成长型心智×家庭主观SES			−0.25(0.04)^***	−0.22(0.04)^***			0.10(0.03)^***	0.08(0.03)^**
SES成长型心智×时间导向				−0.11(0.05)^*				0.08(0.03)^*
R²	0.04^**	0.22^***	0.29^***	0.31^***	0.03	0.28^***	0.30^***	0.32^***

变量	学业投入				职业投入
变量	模型1	模型2	模型3	模型4	模型5	模型6	模型7	模型8
控制变量
性别	0.18(0.12)	0.19(0.11)	0.16(0.10)	0.15(0.10)	−0.14(0.09)	−0.11(0.08)	−0.10(0.07)	−0.09(0.07)
年龄	0.03(0.06)	0.01(0.06)	0.04(0.05)	0.03(0.05)	−0.04(0.05)	−0.04(0.04)	−0.05(0.04)	−0.05(0.04)
年级	−0.06(0.14)	−0.04(0.12)	−0.08(0.12)	−0.06(0.12)	0.14(0.10)	0.10(0.09)	0.12(0.08)	0.11(0.08)
学校	0.17(0.12)	0.08(0.11)	0.10(0.11)	0.08(0.11)	0.12(0.09)	0.02(0.08)	0.01(0.08)	0.03(0.08)
专业	0.07(0.12)	0.07(0.11)	0.08(0.10)	0.06(0.10)	−0.08(0.09)	−0.07(0.08)	−0.07(0.08)	−0.06(0.07)
智力成长型心智	0.18(0.05)^**	0.07(0.05)	0.04(0.05)	0.03(0.05)	0.04(0.04)	−0.04(0.04)	−0.02(0.03)	−0.02(0.03)
预测变量
SES成长型心智		0.39(0.05)^***	0.40(0.04)^***	0.37(0.05)^***		0.22(0.03)^***	0.21(0.03)^***	0.23(0.03)^***
家庭主观SES		−0.07(0.04)	−0.12(0.04)^**	−0.10(0.04)^*		0.10(0.03)^***	0.13(0.03)^***	0.11(0.03)^***
时间导向		0.04(0.07)	0.14(0.07)	0.13(0.07)		0.21(0.05)^***	0.18(0.05)^***	0.19(0.05)^***
交互项
SES成长型心智×家庭主观SES			−0.25(0.04)^***	−0.22(0.04)^***			0.10(0.03)^***	0.08(0.03)^**
SES成长型心智×时间导向				−0.11(0.05)^*				0.08(0.03)^*
R²	0.04^**	0.22^***	0.29^***	0.31^***	0.03	0.28^***	0.30^***	0.32^***

	学业投入	职业投入
SES成长型心智×时间导向(B_XM→Y)	−0.11^(0.12^)	0.08^(0.09^*)
家庭主观SES→时间导向(B_W→M)	0.23^*(0.22^*)	0.23^*(0.22^*)
时间导向的间接调节系数(B_W→MB_XM→Y)	−0.03^(−0.03^)	0.02^(0.02^)
95% CI	[−0.06, −0.003] ([−0.06, −0.004])	[0.01, 0.04] ([0.01, 0.04])