Whether or not we are aware of it, our actions as adults impact the children around us. Even the little comments we make, such as those made while praising children, can impact aspects such as their motivation.
Praise: Two common types of praise are person praise and process praise.
Person praise involves praising someone on global aspects. Examples are "You are smart" or "You are good at math." When children hear this sort of praise, whether said to them directly or said to another child, they may begin to believe that intelligence is fixed, or unchangeable. This view of intelligence is associated with avoidance of challenge at school and can be damaging to motivation.
Process praise involves praising someone on effort or enjoyment of a task. Examples include "You worked very hard on that math problem" or "You must really enjoy drawing." Process praise is associated with a malleable view of intelligence and perseverance through challenge.
Implications for Adults: Aim to use process praise with children. If we want our children to believe they can improve on learning tasks, we need to foster a malleable view of intelligence so that students will persevere through challenges should they occur.
The information above is taken from the following article: Pomerantz, E., & Kempner, S. G., (2013). Mothers’ daily person and process praise: Implications for children’s theory of intelligence and motivation. Developmental Psychology, 49(11), 2040-2046.
Additional articles on praise below: Kamins, M. L., & Dweck, C. S. (1999). Person versus process praise and criticism: Implications for contingent self-worth and coping. Developmental Psychology, 35, 835–847. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.35.3.835
Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 33–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.33
Zentall, S. R., & Morris, B. J. (2010). “Good job, you’re so smart”: The effects of inconsistency of praise type on young children’s motivation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 155–163. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2010.04.015