Introduction

Perseverance refers to the ability that individuals show in the process of overcoming failure repeatedly and achieving success (Du, 2021). Undergraduates with a high level of perseverance have higher confidence in their success, recover from negative emotions more quickly and are more likely to engage in persistent behavior even though they are faced with failure, while undergraduates with a low level of perseverance are not confident they will succeed, are immersed in negative emotions, and give up easily when they experience failure (Bai et al., 2020). Improving confidence in success, emotional experience and persistent behavior of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance can help them overcome failure and achieve success.

Mindset is an individual’s belief that either intelligence cannot be changed—a fixed mindset—or that intelligence can be developed—a growth mindset (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Individuals who hold fixed mindsets believe that success depends on talent; they are destined to fail and give up easily in the face of failure or difficulties (Blackwell et al., 2007; Dweck & Yeager, 2019; Smiley et al., 2016), and they have stronger negative emotions (Burnette et al., 2020; King & dela Rosa, 2019). In contrast, individuals who hold growth mindsets believe that success depends on effort and that they can overcome failure and be successful; thus, they display more persistent behavior after experiencing failure or difficulties (Blackwell et al., 2007; Law et al., 2021; Seager et al., 2022; Zhao et al., 2021), and they have more positive emotions (Frondozo et al., 2020; Zarrinabadi et al., 2022). This may suggest that increasing the growth mindsets of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance is beneficial for improving their confidence in success, emotional experience and persistent behavior in the face of failure.

Stories about role models’ achievements, anecdotes, self-reflections and insights can convey specific views or attitudes to readers and thus can change readers’ emotions, beliefs and behavior (Hong et al., 2015; Kaufman & Libby, 2012; McKinney & Michalovic, 2004). Struggle stories of role models emphasize that role models, similar to the readers themselves, needed to overcome various failures, setbacks or difficulties before they could succeed. Reading struggle stories of role models can increase the similarity between role models and readers, making readers more likely to be influenced by role models (Ahn et al., 2016; Hu et al., 2020). Moreover, struggle stories of role models describe role models as persistent individuals who overcame failure through effort rather than as gifted individuals born with a special talent; such stories convey information that intelligence can be developed through effort, which can shape readers’ growth mindsets (Hong & Lin-Siegler, 2012). Based on these perspectives, reading struggle stories of role models can improve the confidence in success, the emotional experience and the persistent behavior of undergraduates who have a low level of perseverance after they experience failure.

Previous related studies have successfully used a single-session intervention (including reading struggle stories of role models, reading materials about the ability of the brain to grow, and so on) to increase the growth mindsets (Lewis et al., 2020; Yeager et al., 2019), positive emotions (Schleider et al., 2019, 2020, 2022), and academic performance (Rege et al., 2021; Yeager et al., 2022) of participants. However, the positive effects of reading struggle stories of role models are confused with the effects of other materials. It is unclear whether only reading struggle stories of role models can increase the confidence in success, emotional experience, and persistent behavior of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance after experiencing failure.

Other studies have investigated the effects of only reading struggle stories of role models on growth mindsets, persistent behavior and academic performance. For instance, undergraduates who read 6 struggle stories of role models in a single-session intervention had stronger growth mindsets and better academic performance than those who did not read the stories (Shin et al., 2016). Female undergraduates who read 1 struggle story of a role model displayed more persistent behavior and had better academic performance than those who did not read the story (Herrmann et al., 2016). McIntyre et al. (2011) found that female adults who read 3 struggle stories of role models in a single-session intervention had better academic performance than those who did not read the stories. McIntyre et al. (2003) found that undergraduates who read 4 struggle stories of role models in a single-session intervention had better academic performance than those who did not read the stories. These results reveal the positive effects of reading struggle stories of role models. However, participants in the abovementioned previous studies did not experience failure before reading the struggle stories. Moreover, a consistent conclusion about the effect of the number of struggle stories about role models read has not been reached. Thus, it is not clear how many struggle stories of role models undergraduates with a low level of perseverance need to read to improve their confidence in success, emotional experience and persistent behavior after experiencing failure.

To our knowledge, only two studies have systematically and directly examined the effect of reading different numbers of struggle stories about role models on participants’ beliefs and academic performance. In McIntyre et al. (2005), female undergraduates were exposed to stereotype threats (i.e., received information that women are not good at math) and were asked to read 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 struggle stories of female role models. After experiencing setbacks, female undergraduates were more confident that women could do well in math after reading 1 struggle story of a role model than those who had read 0 stories. In addition, after experiencing setbacks, female undergraduates who read 3 struggle stories of role models had a better academic performance than those who had read 0 stories. However, McIntyre et al. (2005) focused only on the effect of reading struggle stories of female role models on female undergraduates. Whether their conclusions hold in regard to male participants is not clear. Moreover, McIntyre et al. (2005) did not focus on individual differences (e.g., perseverance) and the effect of reading struggle stories of role models on emotional experience.

In another study, Du et al., (2021b) focused on how many struggle stories undergraduates with low and high levels of perseverance need to read to improve their growth mindsets. They found that the growth mindsets of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance increased after reading 2 struggle stories of role models and increased further after reading 5 struggle stories of role models. More importantly, the level of growth mindset of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance was equal to that of undergraduates with a high level of perseverance after reading 5 struggle stories of role models (Du et al., 2021b). However, the participants in Du et al., (2021b) did not experience failure before reading the stories. Moreover, the authors did not focus on the effect of reading different numbers of struggle stories on the confidence in success, emotional experience and persistent behavior of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate how many struggle stories of role models undergraduates with a low level of perseverance need to read to improve their confidence in success, emotional experience and persistent behavior after experiencing failure.

Numerous studies have found that a single-session intervention (5–90 min) is effective in improving students’ growth mindsets (Burnette et al., 2017; Du et al., 2021b; Ng et al., 2020; Yeager et al., 2019) and academic performance (Herrmann et al., 2016; Lewis et al., 2020) and in increasing their positive emotions (Schleider & Weisz, 2018; Schleider et al., 2019). Therefore, a 25-min single-session intervention was used in the current study. Moreover, based on previous studies (Du et al., 2021b; Herrmann et al., 2016; McIntyre et al., 2003), reading 5 struggle stories of role models is enough to change individuals’ beliefs and behavior. Thus, the single-session intervention contained 5 stories in the current study. Taken together, undergraduates with high and low levels of perseverance were asked to complete a cognitive task and were given negative feedback (i.e., experienced failure); they then were asked to read 5 achievement stories or 5 struggle stories of role models. Their confidence in success, emotional experience and persistent behavior were measured after reading each story.

McIntyre et al. (2005) found that female undergraduates’ belief that women can do well in math increased after reading 1 struggle story of a role model, and their academic performance increased after reading 3 struggle stories of role models. These findings suggest that reading a few struggle stories of role models can increase one’s confidence in success and that reading more struggle stories of role models can increase the persistent behavior of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance after experiencing failure. Moreover, Caspy et al. (1988) found that listening to a piece of sedative music helped undergraduates recover from negative emotions quickly when they experienced failure. This finding suggests that negative emotions after experiencing failure are subject to change and that reading a few struggle stories of role models can increase the positive emotions of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance after experiencing failure. Taken together, it was hypothesized that the improvements in confidence in success and positive emotions would be more rapid than the improvement in persistent behavior in undergraduates with a low level of perseverance after experiencing failure.

Methods

Participants

The undergraduate perseverance scale (Bai et al., 2020) was administered to 518 undergraduates to select high- and low-perseverance groups. According to previous studies (Du et al., 2021a), undergraduates who scored 1 standard deviation (SD) above the mean on the undergraduate perseverance scale (i.e., high-perseverance group) and those who scored 1 SD below the mean on the undergraduate perseverance scale (i.e., low-perseverance group) were selected to participate in the experiment. The final sample consisted of 94 participants. Forty-eight participants in the high-perseverance group were randomly assigned to either the achievement story group (12 males, 12 females, Mage = 19.88, SD = 1.01) or the struggle story group (13 males, 11 females, Mage = 19.90, SD = 0.79). Forty-six participants in the low-perseverance group were randomly assigned to either the achievement story group (11 males, 12 females, Mage = 19.46, SD = 0.69) or the struggle story group (10 males, 13 females, Mage = 19.71, SD = 1.08). Informed written parental consent was obtained prior to testing. The study was approved by the research ethics board of our university.

Materials

Stories of role models

LAW et al. (2021) maintained that the gender of the role models would enhance participants’ gender stereotypes, that is, believing that one gender is smarter than the other in some areas, which would decreasing growth mindsets. Thus, the role models selected in the current study included male and female scientists. In addition, Hu et al. (2020) proposed that the similarity between role models and readers affects role models’ effectiveness. Given that the participants in current study were Chinese undergraduates, the role models selected in current study were famous Chinese scientists. Moreover, the current study did not explore specific methods to improve growth mindsets in specific fields (i.e., using stories of mathematicians to improve undergraduates’ growth mindset of their mathematical ability); rather, the current study explored the general methods by which to improve undergraduates’ growth mindsets in different fields. Therefore, scientists in different fields (such as mathematicians, medical scientists, and physicists) were selected for use in the current study by way of fictionalized stories. Based on the above considerations, stories of famous Chinese scientists (Du et al., 2021b) were used in the present study. The brief introductions of the five scientists are as follows:

  • Deng Jiaxian successfully designed the atomic bomb and hydrogen bomb of China.

  • Qian Xuesen was the world’s leading scientist in aerodynamics, and known as “the father of China’s space”.

  • Tu Youyou discovered artemisinin and received the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.

  • Zhong Nanshan was awarded the Medal of the Republic for his contributions toward fighting against COVID-19.

  • Yuan Longping was an agronomist known for developing the first hybrid rice.

A struggle story and an achievement story were compiled for each scientist (Du et al., 2021b). Struggle stories described the scientists as persistent individuals who overcame failure through effort and ultimately achieve success, while achievement stories emphasized the scientists’ achievements without describing any failures. All stories were of similar length, format, and structure. Each story was approximately 500 words in length. The story types were reflected in the titles and contents of the stories (see Table 1).

Table 1 Description of Story title and Content
Full size table

The participants in the struggle story group read struggle stories of role models, and the participants in the achievement story group read achievement stories of role models. Given that the aim of current study was to explore the cumulative effect of the number of stories on improving perseverance, rather than to verify the unique and significant effect of specific story, the order of the presentation of stories was counterbalanced. The participants reported their confidence in success, emotional experience, and persistent intentions after reading each story.

Measures

Perseverance measures

The undergraduate perseverance scale (Bai et al., 2020) was used as a screening instrument. The scale contains 20 items, which are organized into 4 components: (1) conviction (e.g., “I believe I will be able to overcome the setback and succeed eventually”); (2) optimism (e.g., “Setbacks make me distressed and dispirited”); (3) controllability (e.g., “Setbacks are often caused by external reasons, which I cannot control”); and (4) enlightenment (e.g., “As long as I make great efforts, I am able to overcome setbacks”). Responses are expressed on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha for the total scale is 0.89 (Bai et al., 2020). In the present study, the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.87 (n = 518).

Competitiveness measures

The competitive orientation subscale of the Chinese cooperative and competitive orientation scales (Chen et al., 2011) was used to evaluate participants’ competitiveness (e.g., “I feel somewhat disappointed when others perform better than me”). Participants are asked to respond to 6 items on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha for this subscale is 0.71 (Chen et al., 2011). In the present study, the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.76 (n = 94). The competitiveness of the groups was compared. No main effects or interaction effects were found (ps > 0.05).

Failure setting

In the pilot experiment, a cognitive task (Du et al., 2021a; Li & Bates, 2019) was adapted to create a failure situation. The task consisted of 10 Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices questions with difficulty levels of D and E (Raven et al., 2000).

Twenty-three undergraduates (9 males, 14 females, Mage = 22.09, SD = 2.40) who did not participate in the formal experiment were asked to complete the cognitive task (no time limit). The experimenter recorded the time that the participants took to respond to each question (M = 32 s, SD = 9.61 s). Following Sjåstad et al. (2020), participants in the formal experiment were told that they had to respond to each question within 20 s. This setting can increase participants’ error rates and enhance the perceived authenticity of the failure situation.

In the formal experiment, the participants were asked to participate in a test about “logical reasoning ability”, and the experimenter introduced the test by saying that logical reasoning ability is “an important part of intelligence and has proven to be strongly related to positive outcomes in work and learning”. The participants were told that there were 10 questions in the task and that the average correct rate in undergraduates was 8 questions. They were then asked to predict their own correct rates in the task (0 ~ 10 questions).

After completing the task, the participants received feedback that they answered fewer than 3 questions correctly, and they were asked to report their confidence in success (i.e., “What’s the probability that you can answer the next question correctly?”, ranging from 1 = very low to 10 = very high), emotional experience (i.e., “How happy did you feel?” ranging from 1 = very unhappy to 10 = very happy), and persistent intentions (i.e., “How would you rate your intentions to continue the task?” ranging from 1 = very unwilling to 10 = very willing).

Finally, the participants rated the task difficulty (ranging from 1 = very easy to 7 = very difficult) and task interest (ranging from 1 = very boring to 7 = very interesting).

The cognitive task was programmed using E-Prime 2.0 and presented on a HP laptop (Pavilion 14-e048TX).

The confidence in success, emotional experience, persistent intentions, task difficulty, task interest, and accuracy expectation of the groups were compared. A 2 (perseverance group: high, low) × 2 (story type: achievement story, struggle story) ANOVA was conducted. Only the main effects of perseverance group on confidence in success (F(1, 90) = 7.60, p = 0.007, ƞ2 = 0.078), emotional experience (F(1, 90) = 7.82, p = 0.006, ƞ2 = 0.080), and persistent intentions (F(1, 90) = 10.28, p = 0.002, ƞ2 = 0.103) were found. The participants with a high level of perseverance had higher confidence in success, more positive emotions, and stronger persistent intentions than the participants with a low level of perseverance, which indicates that the participant group setting was effective. Confidence in success, emotional experience, and persistent intentions after experiencing failure served as the baseline level (i.e., reading 0 stories).

Procedure

Undergraduates with high and low levels of perseverance who had been screened by the undergraduate perseverance scale were invited to participate in the formal experiment within one week after the screening. They were tested individually in a quiet room.

The experiment was made up of 4 parts. First, the participants were presented with a cognitive task, which made them experience failure. Then, they were asked to report their confidence in success, emotional experience, and persistent intentions (5 ~ 6 min). Second, 5 specific stories of role models were presented to the different groups. The participants were asked to report their confidence in success, emotional experience, and persistent intentions after reading each story (15 ~ 20 min). Third, the participants were asked to complete the competitive orientation subscale (1 ~ 2 min). Fourth, the purpose of the experiment was explained to the participants. The participants were asked to watch funny videos to relieve their negative emotions (9 ~ 18 min).

Experimental design

A 2 (perseverance group: high, low) × 2 (story type: achievement story, struggle story) × 6 (number of stories: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) mixed experimental design was conducted. The perseverance group and the story type were between-subject variables, while the number of stories was a within-subject variable. The dependent variables included confidence in success, emotional experience, and persistent intentions.

Results

The confidence in success

A main effect of the number of stories was found, F(5, 450) = 13.83, p < 0.001, ƞ2 = 0.133. The participants’ scores of confidence in success after reading 0 stories (M = 4.06, SD = 1.53) were significantly lower than those after reading 1 (M = 4.50, SD = 1.54), 2 (M = 4.64, SD = 1.62), 3 (M = 4.63, SD = 1.66), 4 (M = 4.66, SD = 1.73), and 5 (M = 4.71, SD = 1.82) stories (ps < 0.05).

The interaction between the story type and the number of stories was significant, F(5, 450) = 5.24, p < 0.001, ƞ2 = 0.055 (see Fig. 1). Simple effect analysis found that the main effect of the number of stories was not found in the achievement story group, F(5, 86) = 1.93, p = 0.098. The main effect of the number of stories was found in the struggle story group, F(5, 86) = 6.44, p < 0.001, ƞ2 = 0.272. The participants’ scores of confidence in success after reading 0 stories were significantly lower than those after reading 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 struggle stories (ps < 0.05). The participants’ scores of confidence in success after reading 1, 2, and 3 stories were significantly lower than those after reading 5 stories (ps < 0.05). The results reveal that the undergraduates’ confidence in success after experiencing setbacks was significantly improved after reading 1 struggle story and improved further after reading 5 struggle stories.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Confidence in success after reading 0 ~ 5 achievement stories or struggle stories. Note. Error bars represent standard errors. Number of stories: the number of stories the participants read

Full size image

Other effects on confidence in success were not found (ps > 0.05).

The emotional experience

A main effect was found for the perseverance group, F(1, 90) = 24.66, p < 0.001, ƞ2 = 0.215. The emotional experience scores of the participants with low perseverance (M = 5.39, SD = 1.14) were significantly lower than those of the participants with high perseverance (M = 6.58, SD = 1.20).

A main effect of the number of stories was found, F(5, 450) = 67.17, p < 0.001, ƞ2 = 0.427. The participants’ scores of emotional experience after reading 0 stories (M = 4.34, SD = 1.75) were significantly lower than those after reading 1 (M = 5.94, SD = 1.45), 2 (M = 6.23, SD = 1.48), 3 (M = 6.37, SD = 1.57), 4 (M = 6.54, SD = 1.62), and 5 (M = 6.57, SD = 1.68) stories (ps < 0.001). The participants’ scores of emotional experience after reading 1 story were significantly lower than those after reading 2, 3, 4 and 5 stories (ps < 0.05). The participants’ scores of emotional experience after reading 2 stories were significantly lower than those after reading 4 and 5 stories (ps < 0.05). The results reveal that the participants’ positive emotions after experiencing setbacks were significantly improved when they read 1 story, and the effect began to level off after reading 4 stories.

Other effects on emotional experience were not found (ps > 0.05).

The persistent intentions

A main effect of perseverance group was found, F(1, 90) = 12.02, p = 0.001, ƞ2 = 0.118. The persistent intentions of participants with low perseverance (M = 6.07, SD = 1.95) were significantly lower than those of the undergraduates with high perseverance (M = 7.39, SD = 1.79).

The interaction between the story type and the number of stories was significant, F(5, 450) = 7.86, p < 0.001, ƞ2 = 0.080 (see Fig. 2). Simple effect analysis showed that the main effect of the number of stories was not found in the achievement story group, F(5, 86) = 1.46, p = 0.211. The main effect of the number of stories was found in the struggle story group, F(5, 86) = 3.99, p = 0.003, ƞ2 = 0.188. The participants’ persistent intentions after reading 5 struggle stories were higher than those after reading 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 struggle stories (ps < 0.05). The results reveal that the participants’ persistent intentions after experiencing setbacks were significantly improved after reading 5 struggle stories.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Persistent intentions after reading 0 ~ 5 achievement stories or struggle stories. Note. Error bars represent standard errors. Number of stories: the number of stories the participants read

Full size image

Other effects on persistent intentions were not found (ps > 0.05).

Discussion

The current study examined how many struggle stories of role models undergraduates with a low level of perseverance need to read to improve their confidence in success, emotional experience and persistent behavior after experiencing failure. The results showed that the undergraduates’ confidence in success improved after reading 1 struggle story of a role model, and further improved after reading 5 struggle stories of role models. The undergraduates’ emotional experience improved after reading 1 story of a role model, and the effect began to level off after reading 4 stories of role models. The undergraduates’ persistent intentions improved after reading 5 struggle stories of role models.

The current study found that the undergraduates’ confidence in success increased after reading 1 struggle story of a role model. This result is consistent with the previous finding that female undergraduates who were exposed to setbacks (e.g., stereotype threats) were more confident that women can do well in math after reading 1 struggle story of a role model (McIntyre et al., 2005). Struggle stories of role models convey information that the role models may have encountered a series of setbacks, but they overcame the difficulties and eventually succeeded through their efforts. After reading struggle stories, undergraduates may gradually believe that intelligence can be developed through effort; thus, their growth mindsets increase (Du et al., 2021b). Students with growth mindsets believe that failure can help them to improve their competence and intelligence and thus have more self-efficacy (Zander et al., 2018) for successfully completing the subsequent task.

The current study found that the undergraduates’ confidence in success increased further after reading 5 struggle stories of role models. Du et al., (2021b) also found that the growth mindsets of undergraduates with a low level of perseverance increased further after reading 5 struggle stories of role models. As mentioned above, students with growth mindsets have higher levels of self-efficacy (Zander et al., 2018). After reading 5 struggle stories, with the improvement of their growth mindsets, undergraduates increasingly believe that they can succeed through hard work in the same way as role models; thus, they are confident that they will succeed in the subsequent task.

Nevertheless, Lin-Siegler et al. (2016) found that reading 3 struggle stories of role models did not improve students’ growth mindsets, which suggests that students’ beliefs are difficult to change. However, that study measured students’ general beliefs about intelligence rather than their beliefs about intelligence in science. General beliefs about intelligence are distinct from beliefs about intelligence in science (Dweck & Master, 2009). Lin-Siegler et al. (2016) discussed that the measures of general beliefs about intelligence used in their study failed to capture changes in beliefs about intelligence in science. In the current study, the participants experienced failure in the cognitive task and then reported their confidence in whether they would succeed in the same task. Confidence of success in specific cognitive tasks rather than general confidence in success was measured, which helped to better capture the change in confidence of success after reading struggle stories of role models.

The present study found that reading 1 achievement story or 1 struggle story of a role model could increase undergraduates’ positive emotions after experiencing setbacks. Augustine and Hemenover (2009) proposed that engagement (i.e., using reappraisal) and avoidance (i.e., removing oneself from the experience) are two effective strategies for emotion regulation. Struggle stories of role models describe role models as persistent individuals who encounter failure through effort rather than as gifted individuals born with a special talent. After reading such stories, undergraduates rethink the failure they have encountered and engage in positive reappraisals, which further increase their positive emotions. In addition, reading struggle stories of role models can improve growth mindsets (Du et al. 2021b), and thus increase positive emotions (Schleider et al., 2019, 2020, 2022). In contrast, reading achievement stories of role models cannot neither improve undergraduates’ growth mindsets nor induce their positive reappraisal about failure. However, such stories can remove undergraduates’ focus from failure. This avoidance strategy can also help undergraduates regulate their negative emotions. Taken together, reading struggle stories and achievement stories of role models provide undergraduates with different emotional regulation strategies, which can improve their positive emotions after experiencing failure.

The current study found that reading 5 struggle stories of role models enhanced the persistent intentions of undergraduates. Persistent intentions reflect persistent behavior to some extent. Therefore, it can be concluded that reading 5 struggle stories of role models increases the persistent behavior of undergraduates. The current study found reading a few struggle stories of role models can improve confidence in success and positive emotions of undergraduates, consistent with the findings of using stories to improve growth mindsets of undergraduates (Du et al., 2021b). However, many factors need to consider before individuals making persistent decisions, such as possible difficulties, the probability of overcoming the failure, and so on. A role model might easily be dismissed as an exception (Lockwood & Kunda, 1999), and thus may not be enough for undergraduates to make persistent decisions. After reading 5 struggle stories of role models, undergraduates found that many role models have used effort to succeed and overcome failure. Their growth mindsets, confidence in success and positive emotions are further improved, which subsequently prompts them to finally engage in persistent behavior.

Herrmann et al. (2016) found that the persistent behavior of female undergraduates improved after reading only 1 struggle story of a role model. McIntyre et al. (2005) found that reading 3 struggle stories of role models could improve the academic performance of female undergraduates after exposure to setbacks. In fact, participants in the former study (Herrmann et al., 2016) did not experience failure before reading the struggle story. In addition, McIntyre et al. (2005) only focused on the effect of reading struggle stories of female role models on female undergraduates; thus, their conclusions cannot be extended to male participants.

Furthermore, the present study found neither a significant interaction between the perseverance group and the story type nor a significant interaction between the perseverance group and the number of stories, suggesting that undergraduates can benefit from reading struggle stories of role models regardless of their perseverance. Therefore, reading struggle stories of role models is an effective method by which to improve the perseverance of undergraduates.

The present study has theoretical implications. First, the current study clarifies that reading struggle stories of role models can improve the perseverance of undergraduates, while reading achievement stories of role models cannot. Our findings confirm and enrich the perspectives of Hong and Lin-Siegler (2012). Second, previous studies have mainly focused on the effect of mindset intervention on academic performance. Recent studies have focused on the effects of mindset intervention on challenge-seeking behavior (Yeager et al., 2016), resilience (Yeager & Dweck, 2012), and aggressive behavior (Calvete et al., 2020, 2022), thereby reflecting the trend of diversification of dependent variables in mindset intervention studies. The current study clarifies the effects of story-based mindset intervention on perseverance, which expands the relevant results of mindset intervention research. Third, previous studies have mainly focused on the effect of story reading on students’ beliefs or behavioral performance. The present study systematically examines how many specific stories undergraduates need to read to effectively improve their confidence in success, emotional experience and persistent behavior after experiencing failure, thereby revealing that the improvements of emotions and beliefs of individuals are quicker than that of behavior.

The present study also has practical implications. The current study adopted a 25 min single-session story-based mindset intervention, and successfully improved confidence in success, positive emotions, and persistent behavior in undergraduates after experiencing failure. The results of the current study provide educators with a time-saving, student-led and effective tool to improve undergraduates’ perseverance. Undergraduates often experience failure or difficulties in learning activities. Educators can provide struggle stories of role models for undergraduates who have failed exams or competitions, and undergraduates who need to learn difficult courses (i.e., mathematics, physics and so on) to help them overcome failures and difficulties.

There are several limitations of the current study that are worthy of discussion. Persistent intentions were used to represent the persistent behavior of the participants in the current study. The effect of reading struggle stories of role models on actual persistent behavior could be investigated in future research. Moreover, the current study only verified the immediate effect of story reading on perseverance. Future research should examine the delayed effect.

In conclusion, reading struggle stories of role models is an effective method by which to improve the perseverance of individuals after encountering failure. The confidence in success and emotional experience of individuals can be improved quicker than the persistent behavior after experiencing failure.