Su búsqueda

Despite multiple edited volumes dedicated to the various theories and conceptions of giftedness and talent that have been published over the past 40 years, the field of gifted education is still definitionally and paradigmatically fractured. These differences have led to a misunderstanding about the social and emotional experiences of gifted individuals that has further divided the field of gifted education. One purpose of this paper is to explain how varying definitions and paradigms of giftedness lead us to different answers and assumptions about the social and emotional experiences of gifted individuals, and the implications of those. The other purpose of this paper is to outline a framework for moving forward in thinking about and conducting research on the social and emotional experiences of gifted individuals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Empirical testing of talent development models or contextual developmental models of giftedness is enhanced by longitudinal research that considers contextual factors as well as individual/psychological factors. Relying on findings from the longitudinal TALENT project in Flanders, we aimed to shed light on the role of social-contextual factors (i.e., relationships with teachers, peers, and parents) and psychological (i.e., motivational) factors in the developmental process of transforming high cognitive ability into high achievement levels. Also, we aimed to gain insight into which developmental processes are specific to high-ability students and which are generalizable across ability levels. The findings provided longitudinal evidence for the key role of social-contextual and motivational resources in the process of academic talent development. Overall, they call for further integration of giftedness models with general developmental theories and elaboration of the role of social-contextual factors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

What happens when a gifted child grows up? Despite a slew of provocative book titles regarding gifted adults in the mainstream media, and the inclusion of the notion of giftedness among adults in the definition of giftedness proposed by Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, and Worrell, there is a limited amount of research that has examined the gifted adult. In this systematic review of the literature, we categorized the available research literature into nine thematic areas: (a) whether or not gifted children become gifted adults; (b) family of origin; (c) effects of early educational experiences; (d) characteristics of gifted adults; (e) career; (f) family of procreation; (g) career and family interaction; (h) life goals, satisfaction, and well-being; and (i) counseling. Implications for gifted adults and the field of gifted education are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Many gifted characteristics overlap the symptoms of attention deficity-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The potential for the misdiagnosis of giftedness as ADHD exists, but so does the potential for a dual diagnosis of giftedness and ADHD. A decade after the misdiagnosis of giftedness as ADHD was first investigated we examine lessons learned regarding misdiagnosis, dual diagnosis, and the identification of giftedness and ADHD. The current study reviewed empirical studies of the misdiagnosis, identification, and dual diagnosis of giftedness and ADHD published in peer-reviewed domestic and international academic journals between 2000 and 2014. We explored the literature for diagnostic trends and challenges, theories of misdiagnosis, and empirical findings on dual diagnosis. We discuss differences between misdiagnosis and dual diagnosis and conclude with a description of limitations found within reviewed studies and suggestions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

The purpose of this study was to replicate and extend Hartnett, Nelson, and Rinn's (2004) study using a sample of preservice teachers in order to examine the potential for the misdiagnosis of giftedness and ADHD. Participants included 132 preservice teachers enrolled in a comprehensive university in the South. A chi-square analysis indicated the suggestion of giftedness influenced the diagnosis of behaviors that can be typical of both giftedness and ADHD, as found in Hartnett et al. Conclusions and implications are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Gifted children and adolescents can display behavioral characteristics similar to those exhibited by children and adolescents who have been diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), leading to potential issues with misdiagnosis. The overlapping characteristics between giftedness and ADHD are often seen as anecdotal or to only exist in theory, such as that explained by Dabrowski's theory of positive disintegration and his notion of overexcitabilities. There is a paucity of empirical data to support this perceived relationship between ADHD and overexcitabilities. This study provides empirical support for a relationship between ADHD and overexcitabilities within a sample of gifted adolescents. Implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Dąbrowski’s theory of positive disintegration has been associated with the psychology of giftedness for four decades, and Sal Mendaglio has significantly contributed to the thoughtful understanding of the theory throughout those 40 years. In this interview, Mendaglio discusses the relationship between the theory of positive disintegration and the psychology of giftedness. Mendaglio addresses potential misunderstanding of the theory as well as the concept of overexcitabilities. He clarifies that Dąbrowski’s theory is not a theory of giftedness; however, the theory as well as Dąbrowski’s concept of intelligence contributed to Mendaglio’s understanding of the psychology of giftedness. Mendaglio cautions against the oversimplification of overexcitabilities and the tools with which the construct has been measured. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In a previous article, we provided a review of the literature pertaining to the potential misdiagnosis of giftedness as ADHD, as well as a small-scale study to illustrate this potential misdiagnosis (see record 2004-11177-002). In this issue of Roeper Review, Mika (see record 2006-11964-007) provides several criticisms of that paper. In this article, we provide responses to her arguments by discussing the "symptoms" of giftedness; the relationship between ADHD, giftedness, and overexcitabilities; and the diagnosis of ADHD. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This research intends to provide empirical support for the possibility of misdiagnosis of giftedness and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Forty-four graduate students enrolled in a school counseling program acted as participants. Participants were given one of two forms, both of which provided a hypothetical case study of a young boy with characteristics of both giftedness and ADHD. Participants were then asked for a diagnosis. A chi-square analysis suggests a statistically significant difference whereby the suggestion of the diagnosis of giftedness can lead participants away from a diagnosis of ADHD. Implications for educators and graduate level counseling and psychology programs are provided. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In this chapter, the integrative model of talent development (IMTD), and especially its differentiating model of giftedness and talent (DMGT) component, will serve as the conceptual framework to answer the five following questions: (1) How does the DMGT distinguish gifts from talents? (2) How does the DMGT describe the talent development process? (3) Where do gifts come from; are they innate? (4) How can we best foster academic talent development? (5) What makes the DMGT/IMTD unique? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Gifted people have a special responsibility to use their talent to participate in finding out novel solutions to the challenges of our century. This chapter focuses on the practices of talent support actions that may foster contemplation, creative; deep thinking; and deliberative discussions of gifted people. Importantly, the chapter links these practices to the development of wisdom, as an emergent property of mind that can be obtained by the successful integration of life experiences, where success means a balanced, impartial, and independent life and is guided by universal love—as explained in the next section. Summarizing three case studies of talent support programs, this chapter shows that developing deep thinking and wisdom is an important, but heretofore not well-developed, aspect of gifted education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Athletic talent development typically follows a similar path (often conceptualized as a pyramid) regardless of the sport of interest. At the base, we find children engaged in play or recreation, with local clubs and high school sports typically forming the next level. Some young athletes are identified for entry into elite programs, such as traveling teams or Olympic development programs. From there, athletes join regional or college teams. Next may come a pre-elite level. Finally, the tip of the pyramid is the elite level comprised of professional and Olympic athletes. To understand effective talent development, it is important to first take a critical look at this traditional pathway. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Do gifted students have unique social and emotional needs? Are gifted students more vulnerable to social and emotional difficulties than average-ability students? Common perceptions of the gifted include that they are more likely to suffer from emotional problems and more likely to have difficulties in social relationships (Bain, Choate, & Bliss, 2006), but what does the research say? Some researchers argue gifted individuals do have unique characteristics that render them particularly vulnerable to an array of social and emotional problems, such that gifted individuals experience the same developmental milestones and tasks as average-ability individuals (e.g., identity development, career decision-making, and friendship formation), but “the characteristics associated with giftedness . . . may make the subjective experience of meeting normal challenges qualitatively different from others’ experience and also sometimes hinder task accomplishment” (Peterson, 2009, p. 281). Further, some developmental tasks (e.g., development of abstract thought) are accelerated for gifted individuals compared with average-ability individuals (Moon, 2009). Others argue that gifted students are no more likely to be vulnerable to, or experience, social and emotional difficulties than students of average ability levels (Bain & Bell, 2004; Nail & Evans, 1997; Shechtman & Silektor, 2012). The purpose of this chapter is to explore findings from existing research regarding the social and emotional development of gifted children and adolescents, as well as the circumstances in which social and emotional development may be compromised. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Unfortunately, an approach to talent identification that suggests that individuals either are or are not gifted fails to recognize the complex nature of cognitive abilities and the many factors that influence the development of those abilities in children and adolescents. Although talent search programs do require certain scores for eligibility for their programs, the purpose of the talent search assessment is not to determine who is gifted, but to provide insight into students’ abilities so that academic needs can be met in school and elsewhere through appropriate programmatic options. There is much in this approach to talent identification and development that schools might replicate as they seek to address the needs of students who exhibit advanced academic abilities and/or achievement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

An unfortunate feature of much research is the tendency to attract attention—such as increased citations—by advocating extreme positions on difficult questions, the nature-nurture issue decidedly among them. The downside of this practice for our understanding of giftedness is that the complex interactions between genetic and environmental factors tend to get overlooked. Worse yet, in minimizing the function of one or the other side of the debate, proponents of single-factor explanations tend to vastly oversimplify the supposed operation of the neglected factor. That oversimplification is certainly apparent in the advocates of deliberate practice as the sole factor in talent development—a point that I wish to elaborate in this chapter. As will be seen below, the genetics of genius, talent, or giftedness is far more complex and nuanced than these extremists realize. I begin by showing that any innate gift or talent for a given domain must be defined in terms of deliberate practice for the definition to feature any scientific validity. I then focus specifically on the genetics side of the foregoing demonstration, showing that nature most likely operates in a far more complex and dynamic manner than often realized. A gift or talent does not work anything like the inheritance of eye color or even height. After these two arguments are presented, I close by discussing some implications for practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Grouping used by teachers to address the diverse needs of their students and with aim to close the achievement gaps has become more popular recently and is one set of education strategies. Grouping can be used in schools to meet the needs of students with gifts and talents without incurring additional cost. However, grouping, and specifically, ability grouping, has been the subject of much and heated debate during the past three decades. Researchers from both sides of the ability grouping debate continue to discuss the pros and cons of its application in schools. As such, not all educators support the use of grouping, and further, not all forms of grouping strategies bring about the same results. For grouping strategies to appropriately meet the needs of students with gifts and talents, there are more factors to consider than simply putting students of similar levels of academic achievement together. Namely, curriculum and instruction has to be adjusted to accommodate the needs of these students, and care must be taken to ensure that other students receive appropriately enriched instruction and interesting curriculum so that they have a high-quality education that promotes academic growth and achievement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Paula has been teaching for more than 30 years at a school specializing in gifted education. She loves working with her students, who are quick and dedicated learners. In 2016, the school was taken over by a new consortium, which decided to adopt a more contemporary school approach to replace the existing one that had been in force for more than 30 years. The consortium appointed Paula to put together an Innovation Team to oversee the transition to the new structure. Paula happily accepted. In this chapter, we will report Paula's initial thought processes. She was fully cognizant that the efficiency and success of the Innovation Team would depend on the quality of her preparatory work. Along with carefully monitoring and analyzing her school and conducting a thorough examination of the relevant literature, she also consulted several experts from various backgrounds. These included experts in gifted education (representatives from other gifted schools and researchers), experts in administration and governance, parents of gifted students, and organizational psychologists and sociologists. She also consulted specialists, such as the program director of a mentoring program and the head of a school specializing in self-regulated learning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Both qualitative and quantitative longitudinal studies of school-wide enrichment model (SEM) gifted programs demonstrate positive outcomes in cognitive, affective, and social development of participating students. The participants increased their college and work aspirations, and maintained interests and creative productive work that begin in gifted programs after they finished college and graduate school. It is our hope that more schools and districts will continue to implement talent development programs based on the SEM in the years to come, whether as part of gifted or enrichment programs, magnet or theme schools, or as a part of a general education program. During the last decade, several Renzulli Academies, schools based on the SEM using the SEM-based strategies and methods described in this chapter, have been developed, focusing on the pedagogy described in this chapter for high-potential students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

When educational opportunities at any level are not offered as part of the public educational system, then some families will seek them at their own cost and some will not or cannot. This is one of the reasons that educational achievement and family income are so highly correlated—money is often directly linked to access educational opportunity. Families who are aware of supplementary options, can afford them, have the time to seek them out and enroll their children in them, and are willing to do so even when such content is not part of the local school’s curriculum, will take advantage of such opportunities in order to further their child’s learning. Some of this is due to financial capital and some due to cultural capital—the culture of knowing and being willing to challenge the system. All parents would want to provide advanced opportunities to their children, but only some have that option due to financial, cultural, logistical, or political barriers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Our goal in this chapter is to share a sociocultural perspective on gifted education and talent development that addresses the importance of context in children's development. Indeed, we believe context should be the primary concern of educators working with advanced students. We begin by defining our terms, followed by a summary of sociocultural perspectives on talent development. The chapter closes with an examination of the implications of this perspective for educators. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)