See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/326584788

Grit and Self-Discipline as Predictors of Effort and Academic Attainment

Article  in  British Journal of Educational Psychology · July 2018

DOI: 10.1111/bjep.12241

CITATIONS READS

3 764

2 authors:

Martin Hagger Kyra Hamilton

University of California, Merced Griffith University
449 PUBLICATIONS   14,446 CITATIONS    136 PUBLICATIONS   1,411 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Self Regulation research View project

Doping in sport View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Martin Hagger on 20 May 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 1

Grit and Self-Discipline as Predictors of Effort and Academic Attainment

Martin S. Haggera,b,c, Kyra Hamiltona,b

a
Laboratory of Self-Regulation and Health Psychology and Behavioural Medicine Research
Group, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia
email: [Link]@[Link]
b
School of Applied Psychology and Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University,
Brisbane, Australia, [Link]@[Link]
c
Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

Acknowledgements. Martin S. Hagger’s contribution was supported by a Finland Distinguished

Professor (FiDiPro) award (Dnro 1801/31/2105) from Business Finland. We thank Clair
Alston-Knox for her advice on the data analysis.

Correspondence to: Martin S. Hagger, Laboratory of Self-Regulation and Health Psychology

and Behavioural Medicine Research Group, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences,
Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA6845, Australia, tel: +61 8 92662215, fax: +61
8 92662464, email: [Link]@[Link]

Full citation: Hagger, M. S., & Hamilton, K. (2019). Grit and self-discipline as predictors of
effort and academic attainment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 324-342. doi:
10.1111/bjep.12241
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 2

1 Abstract

2 Background. Beyond ability, traits related to perseverance, such as grit and self-discipline, are

3 associated with adaptive educational outcomes. Few studies have examined the independent

4 effects of these traits on outcomes and the mechanisms involved.

5 Aims. The present study estimated parameters of a process model in which grit perseverance of

6 effort (grit-effort) and consistency of interest (grit-interest) dimensions and self-discipline were

7 independent predictors of students’ science grades. The effect of the grit-effort on grades was

8 expected to be mediated by students’ self-reported effort on optional out-of-school science

9 learning activities.

10 Sample. Secondary school students (N=110) aged between 12 and 14 years.

11 Methods. The study adopted a correlational design with measures taken on three occasions.

12 Students completed self-report measures of grit and self-discipline early in the semester and

13 effort on optional out-of-school learning activities five weeks later. Students’ science grades

14 were collected at the end of the semester. Data were analysed using Bayesian path analyses

15 using non-informative and informative priors derived from previous research.

16 Results. Consistent with predictions, we found effects of grit-effort on science grades mediated

17 by effort, and self-discipline on grades. Contrary to predictions, we also found an effect of self-

18 discipline on grades mediated by effort. Zero was a credible value for direct effects of grit-

19 effort on grades, and grit-interest on effort and grades.

20 Conclusions. Results suggest grit-effort and self-discipline relate to effort on educational

21 activities linked to better grades. The direct effect of self-discipline on grades suggests that it

22 may be related to other activities that determine science attainment.

23

24 Key words: perseverance of effort; consistency of interest; self-control; science education; goal

25 conflict; Bayesian path analysis

26
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 3

1 Introduction

2 Researchers examining the antecedents of academic attainment have tended to focus on

3 two sets of factors; those related to ability (e.g., general intelligence, executive functioning)

4 and those related to perseverance (e.g., motivation, personality). The literature on intellectual

5 traits as predictors of attainment is vast (e.g., Kuncel, Hezlett, & Ones, 2004; Rohde &

6 Thompson, 2007), while research on perseverance factors has tended to lag behind by

7 comparison (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005). Nevertheless, a growing literature demonstrates

8 the pervasive effect of factors relating to perseverance on academic attainment (Dumfart &

9 Neubauer, 2016; Richardson, Abraham, & Bond, 2012). Prominent among these factors are

10 traits that determine long term persistence on tasks to attain distal goals, such as self-discipline

11 and grit (Duckworth, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005). Both of these

12 factors have been associated with adaptive outcomes in educational contexts (Duckworth et al.,

13 2007; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 2014). While research has

14 indicated that self-discipline, and allied traits such as self-control and conscientiousness, and

15 grit are strongly correlated (Credé, Tynan, & Harms, 2017; Duckworth et al., 2007; Oriol,

16 Miranda, Oyanedel, & Torres, 2017), there has been a recent focus on their conceptual and

17 empirical distinction, and discussion over the extent to which they may differentially determine

18 outcomes (Duckworth & Gross, 2014). However, to date, few studies have examined the

19 independent effects of these factors on outcomes and none have tested the mechanisms

20 involved. The current research aimed to estimate parameters of a process model in which self-

21 discipline and grit were proposed as independent predictors of science grades in a sample of

22 secondary school students. In addition, the effect of grit on grades was proposed to be mediated

23 by students’ self-reported effort on science learning activities. The research is expected to

24 advance knowledge of the effect of perseverance factors on academic attainment, and role of

25 effort as a key process variable.

26 Self-Discipline and Grit

 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 4

1 Self-discipline and grit are individual difference variables associated with effortful

2 perseverance on goal-directed tasks. Self-discipline has received considerable attention in the

3 scientific literature as a sub-facet of the conscientiousness personality trait (Poropat, 2009).

4 The construct is conceptualised as an individual’s capacity to suppress or inhibit prepotent or

5 dominant responses in favour of an alternative action that is strategic and services a long-term

6 or higher-order goal (Allom, Panetta, Mullan, & Hagger, 2016; Tangney, Baumeister, &

7 Boone, 2004). Self-discipline is closely aligned with similar constructs such as trait self-control

8 (Duckworth & Kern, 2011; Dumfart & Neubauer, 2016; Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 2014). From

9 a mechanistic perspective, individuals with high self-discipline are expected to be able to

10 effectively manage conflicts between momentary impulse-driven goals with small, gratifying

11 short-term gains and long-term goals with larger gains that require greater effort and

12 persistence (Duckworth & Gross, 2014; Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990; Tangney et al., 2004).

13 People with high self-discipline are also able to employ a number of strategies to help them

14 manage situations where they may succumb to impulse-driven responses (Friese, Hofmann, &

15 Wiers, 2011; Quinn, Pascoe, Wood, & Neal, 2010; Trope & Fishbach, 2000). Research has

16 demonstrated that self-discipline is associated with better academic performance even when

17 controlling for measures of ability such as intelligence (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005).

18 Grit is a recently-developed construct defined as “trait-level perseverance and passion

19 for long-term goals” (Duckworth & Quinn, 2009, p. 168). Grit is, therefore, conceptualised in

20 terms of sustained motivation, effort, and interest on tasks to achieve long-term goals. It has

21 been proposed as distinct from self-discipline and other components of conscientiousness

22 through its focus on sustained effort and focus on specific long-term goals, even in the face of

23 failure, and the absence of positive feedback or goal progress (Lucas, Gratch, Cheng, &

24 Marsella, 2015; Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 2014). From a mechanistic perspective, ‘gritty’

25 individuals are likely to invest considerable sustained effort on, and retain interest in, tasks and

26 behaviours required to attain long-term goals (Bowman, Hill, Denson, & Bronkema, 2015;
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 5

1 Duckworth, Kirby, Tsukayama, Berstein, & Ericsson, 2011; Silvia, Eddington, Beaty,

2 Nusbaum, & Kwapil, 2013). For example, studies have demonstrated that individuals with

3 higher scores on grit scales are more likely to engage in deliberate practice on tasks, which

4 mediates the effect of grit on long-term achievement-related outcomes (Duckworth et al.,

5 2011).

6 Duckworth and Gross (2014) provide a conceptual basis for grit and self-discipline as

7 distinct constructs. They propose that self-discipline relates to individuals’ capacity to regulate

8 actions and inhibit prepotent responses at a subordinate goal level, such as a generalised

9 capacity to resist the temptation to eat palatable but unhealthy foods when on a diet. Such

10 actions require effortful engagement to resolve conflict between goal-directed behaviours. Grit

11 on the other hand relates to focused engagement in goal-directed action to attain higher-order,

12 long term goals and to structure behavioural efforts toward those goals accordingly. Gritty

13 individuals are therefore apt at engaging in focused recruitment of resources and actions to

14 resolve multiple goal conflicts over extended periods.

15 Two independent dimensions of grit have been identified, perseverance of effort (grit-

16 effort) and consistency of interest (grit-interest). Research has indicated that the grit

17 dimensions achieve discriminant and predictive validity (Bowman et al., 2015; Duckworth &

18 Quinn, 2009). Consistent with the distinction, effort and sustained interest are expected to be

19 candidate mediators of the effects of the grit-effort and grit-interest dimensions, respectively,

20 on long-term outcomes.

21 A recent meta-analysis of research examining effects of grit on key outcomes, including

22 student performance in education contexts, alongside related traits such as conscientiousness

23 and self-control, raised some questions over the two-factor structure of the construct, its

24 predictive validity, and its discriminant validity with conscientiousness (Credé et al., 2017).

25 Credé et al. (2017) demonstrated that combining grit-interest with grit-effort in an overall grit

26 score resulted in substantive loss in predictive validity of the construct, and that the grit-effort
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 6

1 construct had the greatest utility in predicting academic-related outcomes. They also suggested

2 that the overall grit construct may not achieve discriminant validity from conscientiousness,

3 but found that the grit-effort dimension predicted unique variance in academic outcomes

4 independent of conscientiousness. They also revealed large correlations between overall grit

5 and self-control, but did not report separate relations between grit-effort and this construct.

6 Overall, the researchers concluded that the grit-effort component is the most useful component

7 of grit and may have utility in determining academic performance alongside traits related to

8 conscientiousness.

9 A Process Model of Self-Discipline and Grit

10 Duckworth and Gross’ (2014) framework suggests that individuals with high self-

11 discipline will be effective in managing specific instances requiring response inhibition and

12 resolution of goal conflict, and may be useful in day-to-day management of goal conflicts. In

13 contrast, they suggest that attaining long-term adaptive outcomes such as attaining a high grade

14 in an exam, losing weight, or gaining promotion at work requires grit. Accordingly, we

15 propose a set of predictions derived from their framework in a model that outlines the

16 processes by which self-discipline and grit impact long-term outcomes. We propose to test this

17 model in high-school students’ academic attainment in science represented by their aggregate

18 end-of-semester grades. Our model is outlined in Figure 1 and the accompanying set of

19 predicted effects, segregated into direct and indirect effects, are outlined in Table 1. Next we

20 outline each predicted effect and its conceptual basis.

21 Prior research has indicated that ‘gritty’ individuals are more likely to engage in

22 focused practice toward a singular, long-term outcome with a comparatively large ‘payoff’.

23 Consistent with this premise, we predict that the effect of grit on students’ science grades will

24 be mediated by the self-reported effort they invest in activities likely to relate to attaining long-

25 term success in science. In the current study this is manifested in students’ self-reported effort

26 on optional out-of-school science learning activities set by their teacher. Students’ reports of
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 7

1 their engagement in such activities is assumed to reflect the kind of focused practice suggested

2 to attain long-term educational goals (Duckworth et al., 2011). We also make the assumption

3 that self-reports of trying hard on out-of-school learning activities would reflect actual effort on

4 the activities, from which we infer the mediating role that effort plays in the relationship

5 between grit and academic attainment. However, this assumption would need confirmation

6 through measures of actual effort. In addition, research testing the multidimensionality of the

7 grit construct, has shown stronger, more consistent effects of the grit-effort dimension on

8 academic outcomes relative to the grit-interest dimension (Bowman et al., 2015; Credé et al.,

9 2017).

10 Given this previous research, we predict that the grit-effort dimension will have a

11 positive non-zero direct effect on students’ self-reported effort on optional out-of-school

12 science learning activities (represented by path P1, in Table 1 and Figure 1), and effort on the

13 learning activities will be related to students’ science grades (P7). Consistent with the proposed

14 process, we predict that the effect of grit-effort on grades will be mediated by effort (P11). In

15 contrast, we propose that the effect of grit-interest on effort (P2) would be zero, consistent with

16 research demonstrating weak or null effects for this dimension on outcomes (Bowman,

17 Gortmaker, Ebbeling, Pereira, & Ludwig, 2004) and issues surrounding its validity (Credé et

18 al., 2017). We therefore expect the indirect effect of grit-interest on grades through effort to be

19 zero (P12). Consistent with the mediation predictions, we expect the direct effects of grit-effort

20 (P4) and grit-interest (P5) on science grades to be zero. As self-discipline reflects individuals’

21 capacity to manage individual goal conflicts, we predict that it will be implicated in the

22 attainment of long-term goals, but the effects may not be mediated by effort on activities aimed

23 at bringing about the outcome. We therefore propose a direct effect of self-discipline on

24 students’ science grades (P6). Research has also linked self-discipline with effort, so we

25 propose to include this effect in our model (P3), but propose that zero will be a plausible value
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 8

1 for the indirect effect of self-discipline on grades through effort (P13). Finally, we expect the

2 grit-effort, grit-interest, and self-discipline constructs to be positively related (P8-P10).

3 A Bayesian Approach to the Process Model

4 Although there is no research to date that has simultaneously examined relations among

5 grit, self-discipline, self-reported effort, and long-term educational outcomes consistent with

6 our proposed process model, there is research supporting individual relations among the

7 component constructs (e.g., Credé et al., 2017; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Meriac, Slifka,

8 & LaBat, 2015; Richardson et al., 2012). The research provides useful reference data for the

9 proposed effects in the process model against which new observations can be compared. By

10 adopting a Bayesian analytic approach we aim to incorporate this existing knowledge into the

11 test of our process model in the form of informative ‘prior’ values. In doing so, the analysis

12 will provide updated estimates of the proposed relations among model constructs, and,

13 importantly, the distribution of possible values of the effects based on the priors and new

14 observations (van de Schoot et al., 2014; Zyphur & Oswald, 2015).

15 The Bayesian analytic approach is important because it enables us to evaluate our

16 proposed model against prior tests of model effects, even though the parameters of the model

17 have not been previously estimated. We will derive informative priors from previous research

18 testing the component effects of the model independently and evaluate them against our

19 observations in the Bayesian analysis. If our priors are a good representation of the true model

20 effects and their distributions, then the posterior distributions of the model parameter estimates

21 from the Bayesian analysis will be reduced and the estimates more precise. If the priors are a

22 poor representation, the analysis will yield less precise, highly variable posterior distributions

23 for the model parameters. The posterior distribution of the model estimates will be represented

24 by 95% credible intervals about the parameter estimates. Consistent with the parameter

25 estimation approach in Bayesian analysis (Rouder, Haaf, & Vandekerckhove, 2018), we aim to
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 9

1 provide the most precise estimates possible of the effects among constructs in our proposed

2 model given a set of empirically-informed prior values and our data.

3 The Current Study

4 The purpose of this study was to estimate the effects of grit dimensions, self-discipline,

5 and self-reported effort on optional out-of-school science activities and science grades, as

6 proposed in our process model in a sample of high school students. The study is expected to

7 provide evidence of the processes by which grit, particularly grit-effort, and self-discipline

8 relate to science attainment based on Duckworth and Gross’ (2014) goal framework. We focus

9 on teacher-set out-of-school learning activities because engagement in these activities is likely

10 to broaden and deepen students’ understanding and contribute to academic attainment. We

11 focus on science attainment due to the documented shortfall in students selecting science and

12 maths in high school and tertiary education (NCES, 2012; Thomson, Wernert, O’Grady, &

13 Rodrigues, 2016). Science education has been identified as an important driver of economic

14 growth in many nations, so knowledge of the correlates science engagement may inform

15 science education policy and interventions. Consistent with the parameter estimation approach

16 from Bayesian analyses (Rouder et al., 2018), we aim to provide the most precise estimates

17 possible of model effects and their distribution from the current data by incorporating

18 observations from previous research on relations among individual model effects as

19 informative priors (Bowman et al., 2015; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Meriac et al., 2015;

20 Richardson et al., 2012; Wolters & Hussain, 2015). We will use the credible intervals based on

21 the posterior distribution about the parameter estimates to evaluate whether or not zero is a

22 credible value for each model effect.

23 Methods

24 Participants

25 School students (N = 117; girls n = 59; boys, n = 58) were recruited from a coeducational

26 government secondary school in metropolitan Brisbane, Australia. Students were aged between
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 10

1 12 and 14 years and in school grades 7, 8, and 9. General demographic characteristics of the

2 school catchment area and student population were obtained from the school’s annual report

3 and the My School website ([Link] The majority of students were born

4 in Australia, with most of the students’ parents reported employment in technical and trade

5 occupations, with a few employed in administrative and professional jobs. The index of

6 community socio-educational advantage (ICSEA), a scale of socioeducational advantage that is

7 computed for each school across Australia, for the school was just below the national average

8 (ACARA, 2016).

9 Research design

10 The University ethics committee and local educational authority approved the study prior

11 to data collection. The study adopted a correlational three-wave design as part of a larger study

12 on individual differences and educational attainment. Participants completed a survey mid-

13 semester comprising self-report measures of grit, self-discipline, and demographic variables.

14 Five-weeks later they self-reported their effort on optional out-of-school science learning

15 activities set by their science teacher. Students’ final end-of-semester science grades

16 comprising their averaged mark across all in-class science assignments for the semester were

17 collected from their teacher.

18 Measures

19 Grit. Students completed the eight-item short grit scale (Duckworth & Quinn, 2009).

20 The scale comprises two subscales, perseverance of effort (grit-effort; e.g., “I finish whatever I

21 begin”) and consistency of interest (grit-interest; e.g., “I often set a goal but later choose to

22 pursue a different one”). Responses were provided on 5-point scales (1 = not like me at all and

23 4 = very much like me).

24 Self-discipline. Students completed the self-discipline scale derived from the

25 International Personality Item Pool HEXACO scales (Ashton, Lee, & Goldberg, 2007). The
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 11

1 scale comprises ten items (e.g., “I have difficulty starting tasks”) of which five are reverse

2 scored. Reponses were provided on 5-point scales (1 = not at all and 5 = very much).

3 Effort. Students’ self-reported effort on optional out-of-school science learning

4 activities set by their science teacher was measured on five items (e.g., “During the last 5

5 weeks, how hard did you try to do your science activities at home?”) with responses made on

6 7-point scales (1 = did not try at all and 7 = tried extremely hard). Prior to completing these

7 items, students were reminded that “science learning activities” referred to the “assignments

8 you are given by your teacher in science lessons for you to do outside of school such as solving

9 science problems, writing up science experiments, science activities on the internet, and

10 studying for science exams”1. We focused on effort toward out-of-school science learning

11 activities set by the teacher because such activities are aimed at supporting the school

12 curriculum and students engaging these activities are likely to report better retention of

13 knowledge and skills learned in class (Trautwein, Ludtke, Kastens, & Koller, 2006;

14 Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 2005).

15 Academic attainment. Students’ averaged final semester science grade, calculated as

16 the mean average of grades on in-school science assignments, was collected at the end of the

17 semester from their science teacher. The grade represented the average grade across all

18 coursework, two class tests, and final examination for the semester expressed as a percentage.

19 Full details of measures used in the current study are provided in the Supporting

20 Information (Appendix A).

21 Data Analysis

22 Data were analyzed using Bayesian path analysis using the Mplus 7.31 statistical

23 software (Muthén & Muthén, 2015). Psychological constructs were manifest variables

1
It is important to note that the out-of-school learning activities in the current study should not be considered
formal assessed homework. Students did not receive formal assessed homework for science. Instead, they were
provided with regular learning activities by their science teacher to complete in their spare time outside of school.
Engagement in the activities was not compulsory. Teachers would refer to these activities in subsequent lessons,
but not evaluate whether or not students had performed the activities.
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 12

1 computed from the mean of the scale items pertaining to each construct. Proposed direct and

2 indirect effects among the grit, self-discipline, self-reported effort, and grades variables in the

3 proposed model summarised in Table 1 and Figure 1 were set as free parameters in the model.

4 We controlled for effects of age and gender by setting them to predict all other variables in the

5 model. Bayesian path analyses were estimated using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)

6 simulation process using Gibbs’ algorithms (Muthén & Asparouhov, 2012). We specified

7 100,000 iterations of which the first half were used as a ‘burnin’ phase and the remaining

8 posterior draws used to estimate model inferences. We adopted the Gelman and Rubin’s (1992)

9 criterion to determine the convergence of the Bayesian estimates with a strict potential scale

10 reduction (PSR) value of 1.01. Two models were estimated. The first was estimated using non-

11 informative prior values for model parameters using the standard default values offered in the

12 Mplus software for regression analysis: each parameter estimate is assigned a prior that

13 specifies a normal distribution with mean = 0 and variance = infinity2. Estimating the Bayesian

14 model using these default priors will return estimates close to an analysis using a frequentist

15 analytic method such as maximum likelihood.

16 The second adopted informative prior values for key parameters in the model derived

17 from previous research. While our process model has not been tested previously, its component

18 effects have been estimated in separate research studies. Priors were identified from a search of

19 previous studies testing relations between grit, self-discipline, self-reported effort, and

20 academic attainment. Our informative priors were derived from meta-analytic and primary

21 research testing relations among constructs in our proposed model in samples with a close

22 match to the current sample and context (secondary school pupils). Prior values expressed as

23 correlation coefficients, associated variance estimates expressed as standard deviations, and

24 source data for the values are summarised in Table 1. In cases where the standard deviations of

2
In this case the variance is set at a number sufficiently large to approximate infinity. According to Muthén &
Muthén (2012), “for the normal distribution default, infinity is ten to the power of ten” (p. 698).
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 13

1 the correlations were unspecified, non-restrictive weakly-informative prior variance estimates

2 were specified (SD = 0.10) to account for possible heterogeneity between current data and the

3 studies used as sources for the priors (Yuan & MacKinnon, 2009). We could not identify

4 studies reporting relations between self-discipline and the separate perseverance of effort and

5 consistency of interest grit dimensions. However, there were several tests of the total grit scale

6 and self-discipline (Credé et al., 2017; Dumfart & Neubauer, 2016; Oriol et al., 2017), so we

7 used the median value from these studies as prior values for relations between grit-effort and

8 grit-perseverance with self-discipline.

9 Fit of the Bayesian models was assessed using posterior predictive checking using two

10 recommended criteria based on the usual goodness-of-fit chi-square comparing the proposed

11 model with the observed data across the replications in the Bayesian simulation (Gelman et al.,

12 2013): (a) the 95% confidence intervals (CI95) of the chi-square value, which should include

13 zero and have a large negative lower bound, and (b) the posterior predictive p-value (PPP),

14 which should exceed .05 and preferably approach .50 for a well-fitting model. For each free

15 parameter in the Bayesian model, a credible interval (CrI) is computed which should exclude

16 the value of zero to indicate a true effect. We also generated estimates of indirect effects in the

17 Bayesian models using Yuan and MacKinnon’s (2009) method. If, as expected, the prior

18 distributions of model parameters were closely representative of population effects, we

19 anticipated that the path model adopting informative priors would exhibit increased precision

20 in model parameter estimates, as indicated by narrowed credible intervals about each

21 parameter. The effect of specifying empirically-determined informative priors on the

22 variability of model parameter estimates was evaluated by examining the extent to which the

23 width of the credible intervals for each parameter decreased across the models with informative

24 and non-informative priors3.

25 Results

3
Mplus analysis scripts and output are available from [Link]
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 14

1 Participants

2 There was minimal attrition across the two data collection occasions (n = 7) resulting in a

3 final sample size of 110 (girls = 55, boys = 55; M age = 12.80, SD = 0.72). Descriptive

4 statistics, omega reliability coefficients (McNeish, 2017), and intercorrelations for study

5 variables are presented in Table 2.

6 Bayesian Path Analyses

7 The Bayesian path analyses with non-informative (PPP = .464, 95% CrI [-21.56,

8 24.20]) and informative priors (PPP = .370, 95% CrI [-18.31, 26.99]) exhibited satisfactory

9 goodness-of-fit with the data according to the posterior predictive checking criteria. Parameter

10 estimates for the analyses with non-informative priors and informative priors are provided in

11 Table 3, and illustrated in Figures 1a and 1b. The path model adopting informative priors

12 resulted in a narrowing of the credible intervals about all model parameter estimates, as

13 indicated by the percentage change in the intervals across the models (Yuan & MacKinnon,

14 2009). This suggests that the data and the prior distribution were closely matched. We therefore

15 report the effects for the model with informative priors. Credible intervals associated with

16 parameter estimates reflect the posterior distribution of probable values for the parameter and

17 whether zero is a credible value based on the prior and sampling distributions.

18 Focusing on model direct effects, we found positive, non-zero direct effects of grit-

19 effort (P1; β = 0.214, 95% CrI [0.045; 0.380]) and self-discipline (P3; β = 0.297, 95% CrI

20 0.126; 0.459]) on self-reported effort, consistent with model predictions. In addition, self-

21 discipline (P6; β = .090, 95% CrI [0.022; 0.162]) and effort (P7; β = .369, 95% CrI [0.187;

22 0.524]) were directly related to grades, as predicted. Credible intervals indicated that zero was

23 a credible value for the effect of grit-interest on effort (P2; β = 0.051, 95% CrI [-0.100; 0.199]),

24 and the effects of grit-effort (P4; β = .044, 95% CrI [-0.010; 0.100]) and grit-interest (P5; β =

25 0.018, 95% CrI [-0.024; 0.061]) on grades, consistent with model predictions.
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 15

1 Focusing on model indirect effects, grit-effort was a positive, non-zero predictor of

2 grades through self-reported effort (P11; Β = 0.749, 95% CrI [0.140; 1.608]). However, zero

3 was a credible value for indirect effect of grit-interest on grades through effort (P12; Β = 0.193,

4 96% CrI [-0.405; 0.912]). We also found a positive, non-zero indirect effect of self-discipline

5 on grades through effort (P13; Β = 0.910, 95% CrI [0.303; 1.762]), a finding which was

6 contrary to predictions4.

7 We also found some differences when comparing model posterior distributions of the

8 models using non-informative priors and informative priors. Specifically, the credible intervals

9 for the direct effects of self-discipline on effort (P3) and grades (P6), and the indirect effect of

10 self-discipline on grades through effort (P13) included zero as a probable value in the model

11 using non-informative priors, while the intervals for these parameters did not include zero in

12 the model using informative priors. These variations can be attributed to the increased

13 precision of the estimates in the model using informative priors through the narrowing of the

14 credible intervals about the estimates. This illustrates an advantage of adopting a Bayesian

15 approach as the increased accuracy of the estimates using informative priors meant that some

16 important effects would have been missed if conclusions were based on the model adopting

17 uninformative priors. The width of the credible intervals for the two parameters that differed

18 across the models was narrowed by the most substantial margin (Yuan & MacKinnon, 2009).

19 Discussion

20 We tested a process model based on Duckworth and Gross’ (2014) goal framework in

21 which factors relating to perseverance, grit and self-discipline, predicted high-school students’
4
We noted the large correlation between the self-discipline and grit-effort constructs (r = .643 in the model with
non-informative priors). The large correlation may have been due to overlap and redundancy in the measures of
these constructs. Based on the advice of an anonymous reviewer, we re-estimated our models using a revised self-
discipline measure that omitted items that overlapped with the grit-effort measure (“I am always prepared”, “I
often waste my time”, “I tend to carry out plans”). Differences in the correlations between the self-discipline and
grit-effort constructs across models with the original and revised self-discipline measure were modest (r = .643 vs.
r = .604 for the model with non-informative priors) with overlapping CrI. Model fit and patterns of effects in the
process model were also near identical. These analyses suggest that the large correlation between these constructs
cannot be attributed to particular items, but rather a more fundamental overlap in the measures, and, by inference,
the conceptualization of the constructs. Mplus analysis scripts and output for these ancillary analyses are available
from [Link]
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 16

1 self-reported effort and attainment in science using Bayesian path-analytic models with non-

2 informative and informative priors. Consistent with our model, we found positive, non-zero

3 direct effects of grit-effort on effort, and effort and self-discipline on science grades. In

4 addition, the effect of grit-effort on grades was mediated by effort consistent with model

5 predictions. Contrary to predictions, we found a positive, non-zero indirect effect of self-

6 discipline on grades mediated by effort. Including informative priors in the analysis had the

7 effect of narrowing of credible intervals of all model parameter estimates.

8 Current findings have important theoretical and practical implications for the effects of

9 grit and self-discipline on long-term outcomes and the processes involved. The indirect effect

10 of grit-effort on academic attainment is consistent with Duckworth and Gross’ (2014) proposal

11 that the process by which gritty individuals pursue long-term goals is through consistent effort

12 on goal directed tasks and behaviours. In particular, we found that high-grit students’ effort on

13 out-of-school learning activities set by science teachers contributes to academic attainment in

14 science in the long-term. This finding indicates that gritty students’ academic success is, in

15 part, attributable to their tendency to invest effort in out-of-school activities intended to support

16 in-class learning. Although engaging in these activities is not the only determinant of long-term

17 academic performance, it likely plays a key role, consistent with the mediated effect.

18 That zero was a probable value for the effect of grit-interest on effort provided further

19 support for the differential predictive validity of grit scale dimensions. Although much of the

20 research on grit has tended to adopt the global scale (e.g., Duckworth et al., 2011; Eskreis-

21 Winkler, Duckworth, Shulman, & Beal, 2014; Lucas et al., 2015), studies that have made

22 distinction between the two dimensions have indicated stronger effects for the grit-effort

23 dimension on outcomes (e.g., Bowman et al., 2015; Silvia et al., 2013; Suzuki, Tamesue,

24 Asahi, & Ishikawa, 2015; Von Culin, Tsukayama, & Duckworth, 2014). Our data corroborate

25 findings of a recent meta-analysis, which identified grit-effort dimension as the most consistent

26 predictor of academic outcomes (Credé et al., 2017). Taken together, this emerging pattern
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 17

1 indicates that the grit-effort dimension, reflecting sustained effort on goal-directed tasks to

2 bring about long-term outcomes, is the component of grit that determines academic success.

3 However, further validation across multiple samples in a wider range of contexts is needed to

4 provide converging evidence for the differential prediction of the grit dimensions.

5 We predicted that self-discipline would be related to self-reported effort and grades,

6 however the effect self-discipline effect would not be mediated by effort. This prediction is

7 based on Duckworth and Gross’ (2014) hypothesis that self-discipline is more related to

8 capacity to resolve immediate conflicts rather than long-term goal pursuit. In contrast with

9 expectations, however, we found positive non-zero values for the direct effect of self-discipline

10 on grades, and the indirect effect mediated by effort. A possible reason for the indirect effect is

11 that individuals’ capacity to manage immediate situations where response inhibition is

12 required, also contributes to long-term goal pursuit. For example, self-discipline may assist

13 individuals in managing short-term obstacles that might derail effort on behaviours that

14 contribute to long-term goal attainment, like participation in out-of-school learning activities.

15 The direct effect of self-discipline on attainment suggests that capacity for response inhibition,

16 as captured by self-discipline, may be important for performing other actions or behaviours,

17 unmeasured in the current study, that determine academic attainment. For example, self-

18 discipline may lead to greater capacity for resisting temptations or managing distractions that

19 might derail in-class studying activities or attention. These interpretations of the effects of self-

20 discipline are speculative – we cannot corroborate these proposals from current data because

21 we did not measure obstacles to out-of-school learning or in-class effort. Current results,

22 therefore, suggest that both grit-effort and self-discipline are implicated in the process that

23 determines long-term academic outcomes.

24 It is important to note the similarities and variations in effects across the model estimates

25 using non-informative and informative priors. The majority of model effects were consistent

26 across the two models. However, the narrowing of credible intervals due to specifying
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 18

1 informative priors meant that the intervals about the direct effects of self-discipline on self-

2 reported effort and grades and, as a consequence, the indirect effect of self-discipline on

3 science grades via effort, no longer included zero as a credible value. This demonstrates the

4 importance of including prior values for these effects. However, an important issue for the

5 priors used for these effects was that we used a weakly informative prior for the variance

6 estimate (SD = 0.10) because no variance estimate was available from the source data

7 (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005). We tested whether this variance estimate had a substantial

8 bearing on differences across models. Re-estimating the model with informative priors and

9 varying the prior estimate for variance for these effects (SD range 0.01 to 1.00) revealed that

10 the credible intervals did not encompass zero in any case, and did not, therefore, affect our

11 conclusions. Taken together, these effects provide additional corroboration for the role of self-

12 discipline in predicting grades directly, and via the mediation of self-reported effort.

13 Current findings have important practical implications for educators and teachers. Given

14 that students’ self-reports of greater effort on optional out-of-class science activities was

15 related to science attainment, it seems that encouraging students to try hard on these activities

16 could be important for success in science. Similarly, current findings also indicate that a reason

17 why ‘gritty’ students, and those with high self-discipline, attain higher grades is partly due to

18 the effort they invest in activities likely to improve their learning. Affecting change in

19 relatively stable, trait-like constructs like grit and self-discipline is difficult. However,

20 implementing means to address some of the specific deficits in motivation and long-term

21 persistence indicated by low grit and self-discipline is a viable option for educational practice.

22 Educators may seek to foster students’ motivation to persist on activities outside of school,

23 such as strategies to support self-determined or continuing motivation (e.g., Maehr, 1976;

24 Reeve, Bolt, & Cai, 1999). Such strategies might include setting autonomous goals, providing

25 choice and experiences of success in tasks, deferring responsibility to students, and giving task-

26 related feedback (McLachlan & Hagger, 2010; Pihu, Hein, Koka, & Hagger, 2008). Such
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 19

1 autonomy-supportive strategies are associated with persistence on in-class learning activities as

2 well as academic attainment (Su & Reeve, 2011), and has also been shown to foster motivation

3 toward educational activities outside of school (Hagger, Sultan, Hardcastle, & Chatzisarantis,

4 2015; Hagger et al., 2016).

5 Strengths, Limitations, and Recommendations for Future Research

6 The present study has a number of strengths including the use of a sound theoretical

7 basis, adoption of an appropriate correlational design with three data collection occasions, use

8 of validated theory-based measures, and collection of students’ grades to provide an objective

9 measure of academic attainment. The use of a Bayesian analytic approach that incorporated

10 prior research findings was a further strength. It is also important to note some pertinent

11 limitations. First, the correlational design precludes inference of causality in model effects;

12 inferences of directionality are inferred from theory not the data. Second, despite the

13 theoretical and conceptual arguments for self-discipline and grit-effort as separate constructs

14 (Duckworth & Gross, 2014), the high correlation between the measures of the constructs in the

15 present study is indicative of considerable overlap in these constructs at the empirical level, a

16 finding noted elsewhere (Credé et al., 2017; Oriol et al., 2017). While each construct accounted

17 for independent variance in grades and effort in our conceptual model, there was considerable

18 redundancy. The limited evidence for an empirical distinction also presents a problem for

19 theory (Credé et al., 2017), and future research is needed to provide measures capable of

20 reliably distinguishing between these constructs at the empirical level, and test their effects

21 within the our model (see Hagger, 2014). Third, we did not measure each construct of our

22 model at each time point, which meant we could not estimate reciprocal or residualized change

23 in model effects over time. Fourth, we did not control for students’ previous academic

24 attainment or measures of ability or intelligence. Although traits related to perseverance predict

25 academic outcomes independent of ability-related constructs (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005), a

26 definitive control for these constructs would provide confirmatory evidence. Fifth, with the
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 20

1 exception of students’ grades, measures of constructs in the present study were based

2 exclusively on self-report. We must, therefore, acknowledge the potential for reporting

3 accuracies in measures of psychological traits and effort to introduce error variance in the

4 relations tested in our model. Sixth, as in other research in education, we assumed that students

5 have long-term goals to succeed in science, or, at least, a generalised goal for learning in

6 school. It would be important to support this point by administering measures of students’

7 educational goals. Finally, the present study was conducted on students from a single school,

8 and replications are needed to corroborate these effects in representative samples in multiple

9 educational contexts.

10 While current data provide an initial test of our process model, a number of avenues for

11 future research are important to further corroborate the proposed effects. For example, model

12 predictions should be estimated in diverse samples of students, from multiple schools, and in

13 different educational contexts. Adoption of a Bayesian analytic approach is also recommended

14 so that current data could be used as priors in keeping with the advocated imperative for using

15 cumulative data to arrive at greater precision in model effects. It would also be important to

16 adopt longitudinal panel designs measuring self-discipline, grit, effort, and grades at multiple

17 time points. Such a design would permit better evaluation of the pattern of effects, including

18 directional and reciprocal effects, and the modelling of change in these constructs over time. In

19 addition, it would be important to include variables relating to ability and actual effort. Ability

20 measures might include general intelligence, executive functioning, cognitive ability, and

21 specific abilities relevant to science such as mathematics and problem solving proficiency, and

22 could be included as covariates in the process model. Including such measures would be

23 expected to explain additional variance in grades, but, consistent with theory on perseverance

24 traits (Duckworth et al., 2007; Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 2014) and the predictions of our

25 process model, we would expect effects of ability and traits on academic attainment to be

26 independent. Finally, in our model, the role of effort as a mediator between grit and self-control
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 21

1 traits and grades was inferred from self-reported effort. However, this would need

2 corroboration using actual measures of effort. Measures of effort might include actual time

3 spent on out-of-school learning activities, perhaps through parental report or time spent on

4 specific internet activities. We envisage ‘actual effort’ serving as a mediator of the relationship

5 between self-reported effort and grades in a sequential mediation model.

6 Conclusion

7 Current findings provide preliminary evidence for the processes by which grit and self-

8 discipline predict long-term educational outcomes. We found that high-school students’ self-

9 reported effort on optional out-of-school science activities set by teachers mediated the effects

10 of the perseverance of effort dimension of grit and self-discipline on science grades. Consistent

11 with theory, our model suggests that traits related to perseverance, particularly to the resolution

12 of goal conflicts and suppression of impulse-related dominant responses, are related to

13 sustained effort on activities likely to bring about long-term success in science. Adoption of a

14 Bayesian analytic approach demonstrates the value of including prior knowledge in the testing

15 and development of process-related models in educational contexts.

RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 22

References

ACARA. (2016). Guide to understanding ICSEA (Index of Community Socioeducational

Advantage) values. Retrieved September 1, 2016, from
[Link]
Allom, V., Panetta, G., Mullan, B., & Hagger, M. S. (2016). Self-report and behavioural
approaches to the measurement of self-control: Are we assessing the same construct?
Personality and Individual Differences, 90, 137–142. doi: 10.1016/[Link].2015.10.051
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The IPIP-HEXACO scales: An alternative,
public-domain measure of the personality constructs in the HEXACO model.
Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1515-1526.
Bowman, N. A., Hill, P. L., Denson, N., & Bronkema, R. (2015). Keep on truckin’ or stay the
course? Exploring grit dimensions as differential predictors of educational achievement,
satisfaction, and intentions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 639-645.
doi: 10.1177/1948550615574300
Bowman, S. A., Gortmaker, S. L., Ebbeling, C. B., Pereira, M. A., & Ludwig, D. S. (2004).
Effects of Fast-Food Consumption on Energy Intake and Diet Quality Among Children
in a National Household Survey. Pediatrics, 113, 112-118.
Credé, M., Tynan, M. C., & Harms, P. D. (2017). Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic
synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 492-
511. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000102
Duckworth, A. L., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Self-control and grit: Related but separable
determinants of success. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 319-325.
doi: 10.1177/0963721414541462
Duckworth, A. L., & Kern, M. L. (2011). A meta-analysis of the convergent validity of self-
control measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 259-268. doi:
10.1016/[Link].2011.02.004
Duckworth, A. L., Kirby, T. A., Tsukayama, E., Berstein, H., & Ericsson, K. A. (2011).
Deliberate practice spells success: Why grittier competitors triumph at the national
spelling bee. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 174-181. doi:
10.1177/1948550610385872
Duckworth, A. L., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for
long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1087-1101. doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087
Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale
(Grit–S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166-174. doi:
10.1080/00223890802634290
Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting
academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16, 939-944. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01641.x
Dumfart, B., & Neubauer, A. C. (2016). Conscientiousness is the most powerful noncognitive
predictor of school achievement in adolescents. Journal of Individual Differences, 37,
8-15. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000182
Eskreis-Winkler, L., Duckworth, A. L., Shulman, E. P., & Beal, S. (2014). The grit effect:
predicting retention in the military, the workplace, school and marriage. Frontiers in
Psychology, 5. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00036
Friese, M., Hofmann, W., & Wiers, R. W. (2011). On taming horses and strengthening riders:
Recent developments in research on interventions to improve self-control in health
behaviors. Self and Identity, 10, 336-351. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2010.536417
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. B. (2013).
Bayesian data analysis (3rd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 23

Gelman, A., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Inference from iterative simulation using multiple
sequences. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 7, 457-511. doi: 10.1214/ss/1177011136
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Hagger, M. S. (2014). Avoiding the ‘déjà-variable’ phenomenon: Social psychology needs
more guides to constructs. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 52. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00052
Hagger, M. S., Sultan, S., Hardcastle, S. J., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2015). Perceived
autonomy support and autonomous motivation toward mathematics activities in
educational and out-of-school contexts is related to mathematics homework behavior
and attainment. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, 111–123. doi:
10.1016/[Link].2014.12.002
Hagger, M. S., Sultan, S., Hardcastle, S. J., Reeve, J., Patall, E. A., Fraser, B. J., . . .
Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2016). Applying the trans-contextual model to mathematics
activities in the classroom and homework behaviour and attainment. Learning and
Individual Differences, 45, 166-175. doi: 10.1016/[Link].2015.11.017
Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential,
creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 148-161. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.148
Lucas, G. M., Gratch, J., Cheng, L., & Marsella, S. (2015). When the going gets tough: Grit
predicts costly perseverance. Journal of Research in Personality, 59, 15-22. doi:
10.1016/[Link].2015.08.004
Maehr, M. L. (1976). Continuing motivation: An analysis of a seldom considered educational
outcome. Review of Educational Research, 46, 443-462. doi:
10.3102/00346543046003443
McLachlan, S., & Hagger, M. S. (2010). Effects of an autonomy-supportive intervention on
tutor behaviors in a higher education context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26,
1205-1211. doi: 10.1016/[Link].2010.01.006
McNeish, D. (2017). Thanks coefficient alpha, we'll take it from here. Psychological Methods.
doi: 10.1037/met0000144
Meriac, J. P., Slifka, J. S., & LaBat, L. R. (2015). Work ethic and grit: An examination of
empirical redundancy. Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 401-405. doi:
10.1016/[Link].2015.07.009
Muthén, B. O., & Asparouhov, T. (2012). Bayesian structural equation modeling: A more
flexible representation of substantive theory. Psychological Methods, 17, 313-335. doi:
10.1037/a0026802
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). MPlus statistical analysis with latent variables:
User's guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2015). Mplus Statistical Software version 7.31. Los Angeles,
CA: Muthén & Muthén.
NCES. (2012). Highlights from TIMSS 2011: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S.
fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context. Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences (IES).
Oriol, X., Miranda, R., Oyanedel, J. C., & Torres, J. (2017). The role of self-control and grit in
domains of school success in students of primary and secondary school. Frontiers in
Psychology, 8, 1716. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01716
Pihu, M., Hein, V., Koka, A., & Hagger, M. S. (2008). How students’ perceptions of teacher’s
autonomy-supportive behaviours affect physical activity behaviour: An application of
trans-contextual model. European Journal of Sport Science, 8, 193-204. doi:
10.1080/17461390802067679
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 24

Poropat, A. E. (2009). A Meta-Analysis of the Five-Factor Model of Personality and Academic

Performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322-338. doi: 10.1037/a0014996
Quinn, J. M., Pascoe, A. T., Wood, W., & Neal, D. T. (2010). Can't control yourself? Monitor
those bad habits. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 499-511. doi:
10.1177/0146167209360665
Reeve, J., Bolt, E., & Cai, Y. (1999). Autonomy-supportive teachers: How they teach and
motivate students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 537-548. doi: 10.1037/0022-
0663.91.3.537
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university
students' academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological
Bulletin, 138, 353-387. doi: 10.1037/a0026838
Rohde, T. E., & Thompson, L. A. (2007). Predicting academic achievement with cognitive
ability. Intelligence, 35, 83-92. doi: 10.1016/[Link].2006.05.004
Rouder, J. N., Haaf, J. M., & Vandekerckhove, J. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology,
part IV: Parameter estimation and Bayes factors. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25,
102-113. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1420-7
Silvia, P. J., Eddington, K. M., Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., & Kwapil, T. R. (2013). Gritty
people try harder: Grit and effort-related cardiac autonomic activity during an active
coping challenge. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 88, 200-205. doi:
10.1016/[Link].2013.04.007
Su, Y. L., & Reeve, J. (2011). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intervention programs
designed to support autonomy. Educational Psychology Review, 23, 159-188. doi:
10.1007/s10648-010-9142-7
Suzuki, Y., Tamesue, D., Asahi, K., & Ishikawa, Y. (2015). Grit and work engagement: A
cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE, 10, 11. doi: 10.1371/[Link].0137501
Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. (2004). High self-control predicts good
adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of
Personality, 72, 271-324. doi: 10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x
Thomson, S., Wernert, N., O’Grady, E., & Rodrigues, S. (2016). TIMSS 2015: A first look at
Australia’s results. Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., Kastens, C., & Koller, O. (2006). Effort on homework in grades 5-
9: Development, motivational antecedents, and the association with effort on classwork.
Child Development, 77, 1094-1111. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00921.x
Trope, Y., & Fishbach, A. (2000). Counteractive self-control in overcoming temptation.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 493-506.
van de Schoot, R., Kaplan, D., Denissen, J., Asendorpf, J. B., Neyer, F. J., & van Aken, M. A.
G. (2014). A gentle introduction to Bayesian analysis: Applications to developmental
research. Child Development, 85, 842-860. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12169
Von Culin, K. R., Tsukayama, E., & Duckworth, A. L. (2014). Unpacking grit: Motivational
correlates of perseverance and passion for long-term goals. The Journal of Positive
Psychology, 9, 306-312. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.898320
Wolters, C. A., & Hussain, M. (2015). Investigating grit and its relations with college students’
self-regulated learning and academic achievement. Metacognition and Learning, 10,
293-311. doi: 10.1007/s11409-014-9128-9
Yuan, Y., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2009). Bayesian mediation analysis. Psychological Methods,
14, 301-322. doi: 10.1037/a0016972
Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (2005). Homework practices and academic achievement:
The mediating role of self-efficacy and perceived responsibility beliefs. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 30, 397-417. doi: 10.1016/[Link].2005.05.003
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 25

Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (2014). Comparing students’ self-discipline and self-
regulation measures and their prediction of academic achievement. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 39, 145-155. doi: 10.1016/[Link].2014.03.004
Zyphur, M. J., & Oswald, F. L. (2015). Bayesian estimation and inference: A user’s guide.
Journal of Management, 41, 390-420. doi: 10.1177/0149206313501200
 RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 26

Table 1
Summary of Predicted Direct and Indirect Effects in the Process Model of Grit Subscales, Self-
Discipline, Effort, and Academic Attainment and Proposed Informative Prior Estimates for
Bayesian Path Analysis

Effect Prediction Informative priors

r SD Source
Direct effects

P1 Grit–Effort→Effort† + Effect .370 0.10 Meriac et al. (2015)

P2 Grit–Interest→Effort† No effect .150 0.10 Meriac et al. (2015)
P3 Self-discipline→Effort† + Effect .670 0.10 Duckworth & Seligman (2005)
P4 Grit–Effort→Science Grades No effect .290 0.08 Credé et al. (2017)
P5 Grit–Interest→Science Grades No effect .130 0.06 Credé et al. (2017)
P6 Self-discipline→Science Grades† + Effect .630 0.10 Duckworth & Seligman (2005)
P7 Effort→Science Grades + Effect .320 1.44 Richardson et al. (2012)

Correlations

P8 Grit–Effort↔Grit–Interest + Effect .600 0.21 Credé et al. (2017)

P9 Grit–Effort↔SD + Effect .590 0.05 Credé et al. (2017)
P10 Grit–Interest↔SD + Effect .590 0.05 Credé et al. (2017)

Indirect effects

P11 Grit–Effort→Effort→Science Grades + Effect ‒ ‒ ‒

P12 Grit–Interest→Effort→Science Grades No effect ‒ ‒ ‒
P13 Self-discipline→Effort→Science Grades No effect ‒ ‒ ‒
Note. r = Informative prior estimate (correlation coefficient); SD = Standard deviation of prior;
Grit–Effort = Grit – Perseverance of Effort; Grit–Interest = Grit – Consistency of Interest; + Effect
= Parameter expected to be positive and non-zero; No effect = Parameter expected to be trivial in
size or have zero as a probable value; †Variance estimates for these parameters not based on
empirical evidence.
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 27

Table 2
Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations for Grit Subscales, Self-Discipline, Effort, Science
Grades, and Demographic Variables

Variable ω M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Grit–Effort .72 2.882 0.642 1.000

2. Grit–Interest .50 2.468 0.578 .422*** 1.000
3. Self-discipline .81 3.364 0.737 .640*** .379*** 1.000
4. Effort .96 4.396 1.585 .495*** .200* .424*** 1.000
5. Science grades .89 31.618 6.805 .432*** .251** .379*** .431*** 1.000
a

6. Age – 12.800 0.711 .161 .123 .056 .166 .128 1.000

7. Genderb – – – .014 -.039 .059 -.125 .063 .026 1.000
Note. ω = Omega reliability coefficient (McNeish, 2017); M = Mean; SD = Standard
deviation; Grit–Effort = Grit – Perseverance of Effort; Grit–Interest = Grit – Consistency of
Interest. aSpearman-Brown correlation between two science grade scores; bGender variable
coded as 1 = female, 2 = male.
***
p < .001 **p < .01 *p < .05.
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 28

Table 3
Parameter Estimates with 95% Credible Intervals for Hypothesised Effects from the Bayesian Path Analyses of the Grit Subscales, Self-
Discipline, Effort, and Science Attainment Process Model

Effect Model with Non-Informative Model with Informative %diff

Prior Prior
Estimate 95% CrI Estimate 95% CrI
LL UL LL UL
Direct effectsa

P1 Grit–Effort→Effort 0.366*** 0.133 0.576 0.214** 0.045 0.380 -10.80

P2 Grit–Interest→Effort -0.053 -0.250 0.146 0.051 -0.100 0.199 -9.70
P3 Self-discipline→Effort 0.210 -0.014 0.423 0.297*** 0.126 0.459 -10.40
P4 Grit–Effort→Science Grades 0.184 -0.057 0.415 0.044 -0.010 0.100 -36.20
P5 Grit–Interest→Science Grades 0.075 -0.113 0.258 0.018 -0.024 0.061 -28.60
P6 Self-discipline→Science Grades 0.103 -0.120 0.325 0.090** 0.022 0.162 -30.50
P7 Effort→Science Grades 0.283** 0.065 0.481 0.369*** 0.187 0.524 -7.90

Correlationsa

P8 Grit–Effort↔Grit–Interest 0.412*** 0.239 0.562 0.449*** 0.278 0.594 -0.70

P9 Grit–Effort↔SD 0.643*** 0.514 0.744 0.669*** 0.545 0.763 -1.20
P10 Grit–Interest↔SD 0.380*** 0.203 0.534 0.427*** 0.254 0.576 -0.90

Indirect effectsb

P11 Grit–Effort→Effort→Science Grades 1.036** 0.168 2.392 0.749** 0.140 1.608 -75.60
P12 Grit–Interest→Effort→Science Grades -0.146 -0.980 0.537 0.193 -0.405 0.912 -20.00
P13 Self-discipline→Effort→Science Grades 0.499 -0.043 1.451 0.910** 0.303 1.762 -3.50
Note. H = Hypothesis; 95% CrI = 95% credible interval of parameter estimate; LL = Lower limit of 95% CrI; UL = Upper limit of 95% CrI;
%diff = Percent difference in 95% CrI of parameter estimates using informative priors compared to analysis using non-informative priors
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 29

(negative numbers indicate a narrowing of credible intervals when using informative priors); Grit–Effort = Grit – Perseverance of Effort; Grit–
Interest = Grit – Consistency of Interest. aValues are standardised estimates; bValues are unstandardised estimates.
*
p < .05 **p < .01 ***p < .001
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 30
Figure 1a. The proposed grit, self-discipline, effort, and academic attainment process model. Solid lines
reflect free parameters (P) predicted to have positive and non-zero values and broken lines represent free
parameters expected to have zero as a credible value. Indirect effects expected to have non-zero values not
illustrated in the diagram: Indirect effect of grit-perseverance of effort on science grades via effort (P11).
Indirect effects expected to be trivial or zero not illustrated in the diagram: Indirect effect of grit-consistency
of interest on science grades via effort (P12) and indirect effect of self-discipline on science grades via effort
(P13).

Grit–
Consistency of
Interest

P8 P5
P2
Grit–
Perseverance
of Effort P4
P10
P1
P7 Science
P9 Effort
Grades

P3

P6
Self-
Discipline
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 31
Figure 1b. Process model including parameter estimates and 95% credible intervals from Bayesian path
analysis with non-informative prior values. Parameter estimates for indirect effects not illustrated in the
diagram: Indirect effect of grit-perseverance of effort on science grades via effort, B = 1.036 [0.168, 2.392];
Indirect effect of grit-consistency of interest on science grades via effort, B = -0.146 [-0.980, 0.537]; Indirect
effect of self-discipline on science grades via effort, B = 0.499 [-0.043, 1.451].

Grit–
Consistency of
Interest

.412 [.239, .562] .075 [-.113, .258]

-.053 [-.250, .146]
Grit–
Perseverance
of Effort .184 [-.057, .415]
.380 [.203, .534]

.366 [.133, .576]

.283 [.065, .481] Science
Effort
.643 [.514, .744] Grades

.210 [-.014, .423]

.103 [-.120, .325]

Self-
Discipline
RUNNING HEAD: Grit, Self-Discipline, Academic Attainment 32
Figure 1c. Process model including parameter estimates and 95% credible intervals from Bayesian path
analysis with informative prior values. Parameter estimates for indirect effects not illustrated in the diagram:
Indirect effect of grit-perseverance of effort on science grades via effort, B = 0.749 [0.140, 1.608]; Indirect
effect of grit-consistency of interest on science grades via effort, B = 0.193 [-0.405, 0.912]; Indirect effect of
self-discipline on science grades via effort, B = 0.910 [0.303, 1.762].

Grit–
Consistency of
Interest

.449 [.278, .594] .018 [-.024, .061]

.051 [-.100, .199]
Grit–
Perseverance
of Effort .044 [-.010, .100]
.427 [.254, .576]

.214 [.045, .380]

.369 [.187, .524] Science
Effort
.669 [.545, .763] Grades

.297 [.126, .459]

.090 [.022, .162]

Self-
Discipline
 Supporting Information: Appendix B
Appendix A. Details of Scales Used to Measure Constructs in the Process Model
Measure Subscale (if Items Scale (if
applicable) applicable)
Short Grit Consistency I often set a goal but later choose to pursue a different one.(R) 1 = Not at all like
Scale (Grit-S, of Interest New ideas and projects sometimes distract me from previous ones.(R) me, 4 = Very much
Duckworth & I have been obsessed with a certain idea or project for a short time but later lost like me.
interest.(R)
Quinn, 2009) I have difficulty maintaining my focus on projects that take more than a few
months to complete.(R)
Perseverance I finish whatever I begin. 1 = Not at all like
of Effort Setbacks don’t discourage me. me, 4 = Very much
I am a hard worker. like me.
I am diligent.

Self-discipline I have difficulty starting tasks (R). 1 = Not at all, 5 =

(Ashton et al., I get my chores done right away. Very much
2007) I find it difficult to get down to work (R).
I am always prepared.
I often waste my time (R).
I start tasks right away.
I tend to postpone decisions (R).
I like to get to work at once.
I need a push to get started (R).
I tend to carry out my plans.

Effort During the last 5 weeks, how hard did you try to... [common stem] 1 = Did not try at
…do your science activities at home? all, 7 = Tried
….maintain your willpower to do your science activities at home? extremely hard
….be self-disciplined and do your science activities at home?
…spend time in planning to do your science activities at home?
… expend a lot of mental energy in doing your science activities at home?
Science Students’ final semester science grade calculated as an average of grades on in-
school science assignments over the semester. –
grades
Note. (R) = Item is reverse scored.

View publication stats