Su búsqueda
Resultados 3 recursos
-
The lack of a unified definition of giftedness leads researchers to use very different operationalizations when selecting a sample of gifted individuals for use in research. We found 104 empirical articles from 38 journals that differentiated between gifted and nongifted students which were analyzed to determine the most common methods of identifying individuals in research. Results of the analysis show a lack of consensus as to what qualifies a person to be defined as gifted for the purposes of research. This lack of consensus leads to lower generalizability of research about giftedness and to an inability for researchers in the field to compare results of studies. An agreed-upon unified definition of giftedness for the purposes of research will lead to a more homogeneous group of participants, which in turn would lead to multiple benefits, including higher external validity in research designs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)
-
One of the underutilized tools in gifted identification is personality-based measures. Previous research has shown the Overexcitability Questionnaire II (OEQII) is able to differentiate between gifted and nongifted respondents; however, the OEQII is difficult to administer and has questionable reliability. The Sensory Profile measures a similar construct to the OEQII without those issues. A multiple confirmatory factor analysis was utilized to examine the relationships between traditional identification methods (grade point average, achievement test, intelligence test, high school class rank) and personality-based measures (OEQII and Sensory Profile). The pattern of correlations between the four latent variables indicate this model could be measuring two constructs, one related to traditional intelligence-related aspects of giftedness and the other related to personality-related aspects of giftedness. If that is the case, a personality-based measure could prove to be a good measure of “personality-related” giftedness. Multiple discriminant analyses were then conducted to determine if the identification method would discriminate between gifted and nongifted in a sample of adult students at a large Midwestern university. Traditional identification methods and the OEQII were able to discriminate between gifted and nongifted but the Sensory Profile was not. One potential reason is that both the OEQII and Sensory Profile measure psychomotor and sensual overexcitabilities but only the OEQII measures imaginational, intellectual, and emotional overexcitabilities. Future research finding a personality-based instrument that is easy to administer and reliably measures the imaginational, intellectual, and emotional overexcitabilities is encouraged. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)
-
This article is a mixed-methods exploration of the levels of stereotypic views about gifted individuals held by current and future educators. Because educators are often asked to provide recommendations for participation in gifted programs, it is important to determine whether those recommendations are based, in part, on stereotypic thinking. Stereotypic views held by educators could bias the selection of participants for gifted programs, preventing students from receiving appropriate gifted educational services. Participants were volunteer undergraduate ( n = 91) and graduate ( n = 20) education majors. Qualitative and quantitative data analyses were conducted to determine both the levels of stereotypic thinking within each group as well as differences in levels of stereotypic thinking between groups. Results suggest both preservice and in-service teachers hold stereotypical thoughts about the gifted in multiple areas. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)
Explorar
Tipo de recurso
Año de publicación
- Entre 2000 y 2026 (3)