Angela Duckworth

Introduction

Angela Lee Duckworth (born 1970) is an American psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania, where she holds the Rosa Lee and Egbert Chang Professorship and co-directs the Penn-Wharton Behavior Change for Good Initiative. She is the researcher most responsible for putting grit — defined as perseverance and passion for long-term goals — into the vocabulary of education, management and public policy.

Her 2007 paper defining and measuring the construct has been cited thousands of times, her 2013 TED talk is among the most watched ever given, and her 2016 book Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance spent 21 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list. She received a MacArthur Fellowship in 2013. She is also the most metaanalysed figure in contemporary personality psychology: within a decade of the construct's introduction, the field had produced enough studies to test her claims properly, and the verdict was considerably more qualified than the book jacket suggests.

Early Life and Education

Duckworth was born in Philadelphia to Chinese immigrant parents. Her father, Henry Duckworth, was a research chemist, and she has often told the story of his telling her, when she was young, that she was no genius — a remark she credits with directing her attention away from innate ability and toward effort.

She read neurobiology at Harvard College, graduating magna cum laude in 1992, then took an MSc in neuroscience at Oxford in 1996 as a Marshall Scholar. She then worked as a management consultant and taught seventh-grade mathematics in public schools — an experience she repeatedly cites as the origin of her research question, because the students who did best were not consistently the ones who learned fastest.

She returned to academia for a PhD in psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, completed in 2006 with support from a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship. Her doctoral work was done at the point where positive psychology was becoming an organised movement, and the framing of grit — a strength, measurable, trainable, predictive of success — is unmistakably of that period.

Academic and Professional Career

Duckworth has spent her career at Penn. Alongside her professorship she co-founded Character Lab, a nonprofit that funds and disseminates research on character development in children, and later the Behavior Change for Good Initiative, which runs large field experiments on health, saving and education in partnership with Wharton.

Her research programme has followed one design: find a setting where attainment is objectively measurable and the demands are brutal — West Point's summer training, the Scripps National Spelling Bee, teachers in high-poverty schools, sales staff, Chicago charter-school students — measure grit beforehand, and see who is still there afterwards. The settings were chosen well, and the choice is part of why the work got attention.

Outside the university she has advised the World Bank, professional sports teams and corporate leadership, and she co-hosted the No Stupid Questions podcast with Stephen Dubner on the Freakonomics Radio network.

Major Contributions to Psychology

Defining and measuring grit

The founding paper — Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews and Kelly (2007), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101 — defined grit as "trait-level perseverance and passion for long-term goals" and split it into two facets: perseverance of effort and consistency of interests. It reported that grit predicted outcomes in several demanding settings after controlling for cognitive ability, and that grit was distinct from, though related to, self-control and conscientiousness. The Grit Scale (12 items, later shortened to the 8-item Grit-S by Duckworth and Quinn in 2009) became one of the most widely used personality measures of the 2010s.

The construct's appeal was structural as much as empirical. Unlike IQ, grit sounded like something a person could acquire; unlike conscientiousness, it had a name that was not clinical. That combination made it unusually attractive to educators.

Measurement problems in the grit scales

Almost from the start the instrument gave trouble. The original 12-item scale was reduced to the 8-item Grit-S after factor analysis showed the two-facet structure did not hold cleanly, and subsequent work has repeatedly found that the consistency of interests facet behaves badly: several of its items are reverse-coded, which tends to produce a separate method factor rather than a substantive one, and the facet correlates weakly and inconsistently with outcomes. Credé and colleagues' conclusion that the higher-order structure of grit "is not confirmed" is largely a finding about this facet. The practical consequence is that most of what the scale measures, and most of what predicts anything, is perseverance of effort — which is very close to what conscientiousness scales already measured.

Grit in applied settings

The National Spelling Bee study (Duckworth, Kirby, Tsukayama, Berstein and Ericsson, 2011) showed that grittier competitors outperformed equally able peers, partly because they accumulated more deliberate practice. Follow-up work extended the logic to teacher retention, military training and academic attainment, and the programme culminated in Grit (2016), which presented the research to a general audience and argued that effort counts twice — talent times effort equals achievement, effort times effort equals skill.

Character education and public influence

Whatever the empirical verdict on grit, Duckworth's effect on educational practice has been large. Character Lab and its partner networks put grit language and grit measures into schools, and the idea that non-cognitive skills can be deliberately taught now shapes policy discussion in a way that it did not before 2007.

Her more recent work has shifted toward behaviour change for good: very large field experiments, run with Wharton colleagues, on whether specific nudges change behaviour at scale — medication adherence, gym attendance, savings behaviour. The move is telling. It sidesteps the question of whether character can be taught and asks instead what reliably changes what people do, which is a question with a much less ambiguous evidence base.

The megastudy format she helped develop with Katherine Milkman at the Behavior Change for Good Initiative is the methodological expression of that shift. Rather than testing one favoured idea, dozens of interventions proposed by independent teams are run against the same objective outcome in the same population, so that the comparison itself is the finding. A national megastudy reported in 2025 found that email nudges to elementary school teachers raised their students' maths achievement, particularly when the messages were personalised. She is also faculty co-director of Wharton People Analytics, and with Milkman and Jan Voelkel has a synthesis of the behaviour-change literature forthcoming in the Annual Review of Psychology, organised around three phases: building motivation, following through, and forming durable habits.

From character to situation

The most consequential development is that Duckworth has moved some distance toward her critics. Her second book, Situated: Find the People and Places That Bring Out Your Best (Scribner, forthcoming), begins from the acknowledgement that grit, while necessary, is sometimes not sufficient. Its argument is that the objects within arm's reach, the peers and mentors around a person, and even the neighbourhood shape behaviour at least as much as perseverance does, and that it is usually more effective to change the situation than to change oneself inside it. She describes this as situational agency — the control one has over one's situation, and the fact of being blind to it. It is a direct answer to the objection that locating achievement in a child's character ignores what the environment supplies.

The same turn shows up in the measurement work. Her lab's Adolescent Necessities Index (2026) is a brief self-report measure of the material and social conditions necessary for adolescent thriving — an instrument for the situation rather than for the child. She has also launched Phones in Focus, a nonpartisan initiative surveying school staff to inform phone policy. And in 2024 her group published a paper on effect size magnification, arguing that no variable is as important as it appears while it is the one you are thinking about — a caution that applies to grit as readily as to anything else.

Major Publications

  • Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101.
  • Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of the short grit scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(2), 166–174.
  • 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(2), 174–181.
  • Duckworth, A. L., Taxer, J. L., Eskreis-Winkler, L., Galla, B. M., & Gross, J. J. (2019). Self-control and grit: Related but separable determinants of success. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(4), 386–391.
  • Duckworth, A. L. (2016). Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance. Scribner.
  • Duckworth, A. L. (forthcoming). Situated: Find the People and Places That Bring Out Your Best. Scribner.
  • Voelkel, J. G., Milkman, K. L., & Duckworth, A. L. (forthcoming). Behavior change. Annual Review of Psychology.

Impact and Legacy

Duckworth moved the study of non-cognitive predictors of achievement from the margin to the centre of educational psychology, and she did it by choosing vivid settings and by writing for the public as well as for her peers. The measurement work is careful, the data are public, and the field is better for having had to take the question seriously.

The criticism is now substantial, and it comes from meta-analysis rather than from opinion.

Grit is very hard to distinguish from conscientiousness. The decisive paper is Credé, Tynan and Harms (2017), "Much Ado About Grit," in JPSP, which aggregated 584 effect sizes from 88 independent samples covering 66,807 people. Its findings: the higher-order structure of grit is not confirmed; grit is only moderately correlated with performance and retention; grit correlates with conscientiousness at ρ ≈ .84, high enough that the two may be the same construct under different names; and the perseverance facet carries almost all of the predictive weight while consistency of interests contributes little. The authors invoke the jangle fallacy — the belief that two things are different because they have different names.

Factor-analytic work at the item level sharpened the point. Schmidt and colleagues (2018), factor-analysing grit items alongside the NEO-PI-R conscientiousness scales, concluded that the perseverance facet of grit "cannot be separated from the common factors underlying the NEO PI-R conscientiousness scales." Rimfeld and colleagues (2016) reached a compatible conclusion from behavioural genetics: the association between grit and academic achievement is largely genetic in origin and largely shared with established personality traits.

The settings were chosen to favour the hypothesis. This is a methodological objection that deserves to be stated separately from the construct question. Duckworth's signature studies all use outcomes defined by voluntary persistence in the face of attrition — who survives Beast Barracks, who stays in teaching, who keeps competing in the spelling bee. Grit is, in substance, a disposition to keep going; measured against an outcome that is persistence, it will predict. The question the meta-analyses ask, and answer less favourably, is whether grit predicts performance among people who persist, and there the association is considerably weaker.

The intervention evidence is thin. Credé and colleagues concluded that interventions designed to enhance grit are likely to have only weak effects on performance and success, and there is still no reliable, scalable method for raising grit — or conscientiousness — in the way the popular account implies. Brent Roberts's work on personality change suggests conscientiousness does shift, but slowly, across adult life, and not in response to school programmes.

The framing has been criticised on political as well as psychometric grounds. Critics argue that locating achievement in a child's character directs attention away from the resources, teaching and neighbourhoods that predict outcomes far better, and that telling a struggling student to be grittier can read as blame. The objection has bite precisely because the settings are so well chosen: a study of teachers in high-poverty schools that concludes the teachers matter most is very easy to use as an argument against improving the schools.

The dissemination structure is worth naming. Duckworth created the construct, holds the instrument, writes the trade books, and co-founded the nonprofit that disseminates both into schools. That is not a conflict in the sense of concealment — she is explicit about all of it — but it is a concentration of interests that makes the field's self-correction unusually dependent on outside meta-analysts. It was Credé, Schmidt and Rimfeld, working independently, who established the boundary conditions, not the research group that introduced the construct.

Her own response should be stated. Duckworth has said she does not object to thinking of grit as a member of the conscientiousness family; she maintains it has independent predictive value, and she is right that the meta-analysis supports a narrow version of that claim — Credé and colleagues found that perseverance of effort explains variance in academic performance even after controlling for conscientiousness. She has also conceded that traits do not change overnight and that early claims about grit mattering more than IQ were overstated. The defensible version of grit is narrower than the book, and she has moved toward it — including by shifting her own research programme from character to behaviour change, where the interventions have effects that can actually be measured.

The most recent move goes further, and it should be recorded as a concession rather than a defence. Situated grants that grit alone does not explain who succeeds, and that the situation a person is in — the people, the objects, the neighbourhood — does a great deal of the work. In substance that is the objection her critics on the political side had been making for a decade: that the character framing directed attention away from circumstances. It is worth noting what kind of publication makes the concession. The argument appears in a trade book from the same author, promoted through the same nonprofit, rather than in the psychometric literature where the boundary conditions were established — so the structural criticism above applies to the retraction as much as to the original claim.

Learn More

References

  • Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087-1101.
  • Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(2), 166-174.

Last updated: 2026-10-20

Menu
Loading