Su búsqueda

The six articles in this issue demonstrate how broad the field of giftedness research is today not only regarding the domains and constructs under investigation, but also with respect to the methodologies being implemented. The first contribution addresses deliberate practice and the development of expertise. They investigated elite and sub-elite soccer players between the ages of 9 and 18 in a retrospective cross-sectional design. The second contribution to this issue analyzes the relationships between components of leadership giftedness and multiple intelligence. The next article estimate the proportion of students who are underachieving using Rasch measurement models. The next contribution submitted examined how giftedness is defined by the Ndebele culture of Zimbabwe and what this culture acknowledges as the major attributes of giftedness. The last two articles in this issue are devoted to the topic of creativity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

This issue of High Ability Studies pertains to sex differences and implicit theories among gifted students. The issue particularly focuses on the misconceptions, dogmas and popular views regarding giftedness commonly found among layperson as well as perceptions of giftedness held by parents and implicit theories of creativity held by educational researchers. To conclude, multi-method research studies in particular can contribute a great deal—both to our understanding of the individual constructs and of the differences between gifted students and students of average giftedness as well as to the optimal improvement of educational and gifted-support efforts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Introduces the target article for this issue, 'Giftedness and evidence for reproducibly superior performance: an account based on the expert performance framework.' In this paper, the authors address the question of whether giftedness and attained level of achievement can be empirically distinguished. The target article is followed by peer commentaries among expertise and giftedness researchers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

This editorial informs the readers that the current and following issue of High Ability Studies share a focus on a special topic: motivational and emotional aspects of high ability. Together, the issues will present articles on various motivational and emotional aspects and their meaning for learning and achievement behavior as well as for learners of various giftedness and achievement levels. While some contributions focus on motivational aspects of high ability, others consider emotional aspects or both motivational and emotional components in equal measure. The authors employ a large variety of methods, ranging from experience sampling and interviews to questionnaires and standardized tests. Many of the contributions in both special issues offer new insights for giftedness research, and they show just how much giftedness research can profit from the work being done in other fields. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

This issue of High Ability Studies appears to be a further indication that giftedness research and expertise research do not necessarily have to be considered contending fields, and can very well complement one another. Three of the articles in this issue are founded in the area of classical giftedness research. They address theoretical and practical questions associated with the measurement of high abilities, the significance of motivation within the framework of conceptions of giftedness, and issues of social adjustment among gifted children. The fourth contribution creates a link between the two fields in that it examines the academic achievements of talented athletes and describes the structures and qualification profiles of special schools for talented athletes. The three remaining articles pertain to expertise research—two address the concept and significance of early sport specialization, and the third is concerned with excellence and professionalism among environmental experts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

This issue collects articles offering markedly divergent approaches to the topics of talent development and excellence. Alongside empirical studies within various talent domains, the authors present theoretical reflections on the best measures for supporting and encouraging giftedness and expertise, and take a closer look at common notions regarding giftedness. The first two contributions describe work done in the realm of athletics. With their examination of the meaning of creative behavior in team ball sports. Some of the authors concentrate on self-efficacy in career and talent development as well as the identification of career and talent development needs among Hong Kong middle-school adolescents. In contrast to results for other countries, Author's research points to a multidimensional understanding of giftedness in which both intrapersonal and environmental contributions are regarded as meaningful for talent development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Presents an interview with Françoys Gagné, who recently retired from his full professorship in the Department of Psychology (Educational Psychology) at the Université du Québec à Montréal and is now honorary professor. Dr. Gagné is better known in the US and abroad for his Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT), as well as his psychometric studies of peer nominations (Tracking Talents). He has won major awards in the field of gifted education, among them awards from the American MENSA Association in 1993 and 1998 for his research in gifted education, and an award from Gifted Child Quarterly in 1994 for best article of the year. In this interview he speaks about the following topics: his reasons for choosing gifted research, his first work in this field, his thoughts on the most important questions in this field, the importance of giftedness research and the support of gifted and talented, ability grouping, intrapersonal and environmental catalysts for gifted persons, cross-cultural validity of the DMGT model, teacher preparation, and important teacher qualities to support giftedness and talent. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

This issue sets itself apart from earlier issues through its lack of traditional giftedness research articles. This is not simply a coincidence. The work on display here is becoming generally more prevalent, and I see at least two developments in our field that help explain this shift. The issue's first contribution raises fundamental questions about giftedness research and the nature and quality of the relationship between the field and its various parent disciplines. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

This issue of High Ability Studies stands out with regard to diversity in two respects. First, it includes contributions from various areas of talent development and expertise, some of which have been studied very little to date. It features studies focusing on, for instance, expertise in poker, the musically gifted, talented dancers and academic giftedness. Second, highly diverse aspects of talent development, giftedness, and expertise such as decision making, cooperative learning, competition perfectionism, and ability climates are examined. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

This editorial focuses on the articles in this issue of High Ability Studies. This issue will present four more articles on motivational and emotional aspects, and their meaning for learning and achievement behavior as well as for learners of various giftedness and achievement levels. The authors again employ a large variety of methods and offer many new insights for giftedness research and gifted education. Obergrießer and Stoeger analyze relationships between achievement emotions (enjoyment, anxiety, anger, and boredom), learning preferences, and the use of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies in a sample of 200 students from 20 primary schools in Germany who were about to start high-achiever track secondary school in the following school year. In their study, Vladut, Vialle, and Ziegler propose two general motivational strategies for gifted educators: a learning resource-oriented homeostatic orientation and a learning resource-oriented allostatic orientation. McCoach, Newton, Siegle, Baslant, and Picho consider questions of measurement methodology in the area of motivation and learning. The contribution of Fugate and Gentry sets itself apart from the other eight articles in this two-part special issue with regard to both its sample and method. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

With this issue of High Ability Studies, the journal continues its tradition of having distinguished colleagues comment on target articles. High Ability Studies received 49 peer commentaries from 17 nations in response to Ziegler’s and Phillipson’s article. A majority of these viewed the idea of a paradigm shift wholly or largely positively. This enthusiastic and positive reaction bespeaks the promising and innovative nature of Ziegler’s and Phillipson’s position. At the same time, some colleagues expressed reservations about such a paradigm shift. This issue not only presents a new theoretical approach to the field of gifted education. It also inaugurates a number of organizational changes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Over the past few decades, systemic thinking has gained in popularity in developmental and learning sciences. The trend has, however, shown up in gifted education research only occasionally. The aim of this article is to introduce systemic thinking to the field of giftedness and explore possibilities for its application. In the first part, a definition of a system is provided and basic concepts of systemic thinking are introduced. In the second part, a full-fledged systemic model is introduced, the actiotope model of giftedness. In the third part, implications for gifted education are elaborated. In the discussion, the authors explain (a) how systemic thinking can make a valuable contribution to gifted education, (b) why systemic thinking will complement rather than replace current approaches to gifted education, and (c) the necessity of combining systemic thinking with other empirically testable theories. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Traditionally, in giftedness research, the intelligence quotient has been presumed to be the best predictor of high achievement levels. From the perspective of the Actiotope Model of Giftedness, however, it is merely one indicator among several on the effectiveness of the academic action repertoire. In this model, learning is considered to be more important than personal traits for attaining high levels of achievement. This is confirmed with three studies conducted with pupils in grades 8 through 11. In Study 1 it was shown that high achieving pupils in the subject of mathematics can be differentiated from other pupils according to the learning orientation of their subjective action space. High achievement can be better predicted over a temporal distance of six months through the learning orientation of the subjective action space than through intelligence. This finding was replicated in Study 2 for the scholastic subject of biology. In Study 3, an investigation was undertaken to determine whether the performance enhancing effect of a learning oriented subjective action space is also beneficial in coming to terms with experiences of failure. This premise could also be confirmed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

A perennial topic of research on giftedness has been individuals’ perceptions of and attitudes towards giftedness, the gifted, and gifted education. Although giftedness is a culturally constructed concept, most examination of the term’s meanings and implications has used reactive measures (i.e., surveys) to tap respondents’ giftedness-related perceptions and attitudes within the context of formal education. To provide a better understanding of the cultural meanings associated with giftedness—the term’s cultural framing—we investigated the depiction of giftedness within a professional cultural product removed from education, namely, a large corpus of US fictional texts. We examined patterns of word usage in the vicinity of the term gift*, when used in the dictionary senses related to giftedness, in a large corpus of US fictional texts of recent decades, consisting of 485,179 text samples and 1,002,889,754 word tokens. Via inductive methods of quantitative text analysis, we explored themes occurring in the vicinity of gift*; and with an existing lookup dictionary, we assessed deductively the overall emotional valance of the writing near gift*. Our investigation revealed ways in which the literary exploration of giftedness coheres with and distinguishes itself from the outlooks on giftedness noted for survey-based research in education settings. In fictional texts, giftedness evinces special associations with humanities domains and beauty and, on balance, correlates positively with emotionally positive words. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This commentary addresses Subotnik et al.’s (see record 2012-24309-002) target article from the perspective of researchers active in the field of giftedness. First, we self-critically examine the current standing of giftedness research within the scientific community. Second, the authors’ critique of gifted education is sharpened in three respects: (a) gifted identification, (b) effectiveness of gifted education, and (c) credentials of gifted education. Finally, four necessary and productive lines for future research are proposed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

The authors introduce readers to quantitative text analysis and its potential for analyzing text-based nonreactive measures as a means of broadening the evidential basis within research on giftedness and talent. After defining quantitative text analysis and describing how it can augment survey studies for analyses at individual and cultural levels, the special potential of quantitative text analysis for addressing cultural questions within gifted and talented research is described. Inductive and deductive techniques of quantitative text analysis are then introduced and illustrated with brief examples drawn from gifted and talented research. Finally, a brief illustrative study is presented via an extended series of linked worked examples focusing on the question of the place of giftedness and talent within mentoring discourse in US mass media of past and present in order to illustrate in more detail how quantitative text analysis can be used to improve the culture-level evidence base within gifted and talented education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This editorial discusses the identification of effective learning environments. Leading models of expertise development and giftedness have placed environmental factors as fundamentally important for understanding attainment. This special issue of Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling highlights the diversity of approaches used by researchers who have examined optimal environments for learning and achievement and the various influences of different forms of educational and learning capital. It is hoped that the papers featured in this special issue will enhance the knowledge of its readers in the field of educational and learning capital. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

Multidimensional models of giftedness specify individual and environmental moderators or catalysts that help transform potential into achievement. However, these models do not state whether the importance of the ‘individual boxes’ and the ‘environmental boxes’ changes during this process. The present study examines whether, during the early stages of talent development, the ‘environmental boxes’ play a more important role than the ‘individual boxes.’ To answer this question, we analyzed individual moderators and environmental moderators of achievement for fourth-grade primary-school students (N = 976). A cluster analysis that included intelligence, achievement, and two individual moderators (motivation and learning behavior) revealed three groups of students, two of which are of particular interest, as they both displayed high intelligence and achievement but differed in their motivation and learning behavior. Questionnaire data on family environment (filled out by parents, N = 682) and school environment (filled out by teachers, N = 47) supported the assumption that among young students an inauspicious set of individual moderators, in this case maladaptive motivation and learning behavior, can be compensated by a sufficiently propitious set of environmental moderators, in this case parents’ and teachers’ learning support, cultural capital within the family, and teachers’ commitment to support their students’ learning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Based on the Actiotope Model of Giftedness, this article introduces a learning-resource-oriented approach for gifted education. It provides a comprehensive categorization of learning resources, including five exogenous learning resources termed educational capital and five endogenous learning resources termed learning capital. Evidence from the literature is presented that supports the validity of each of the categories. Finally, 12 implications of a learning resource orientation for gifted education are discussed in relation to four areas: gifted education orientations, gifted identification, gifted education principles, and gifted learning resources management. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Before this chapter can focus on international perspectives and trends in research on giftedness and talent development, we need to clarify the meaning of central key terms. Neither common usage nor scientific parlance offer generally accepted definitions of giftedness and talent (Carman, 2013). Most definitions fit roughly into one of four categories: psychometric definitions, performance definitions, labeling definitions, and specific giftedness/talent definitions. According to psychometric definitions, the terms apply to individuals who score well in psychometric tests (e.g., tests of intelligence or creativity). Performance definitions describe those individuals as gifted or talented who demonstrate high achievements, for instance the best pupil in a certain class or a school valedictorian. According to labeling definitions, gifts/talents are socially accorded, usually by an expert. In the case of specific giftedness/talent definitions, strengths in a particular domain (e.g., music, mathematics, endurance running) qualify a person as gifted or talented. The lack of uniform distinctions between the terms giftedness and talent is as problematic as the sheer variety of definitions that can be found in the literature. There is no generally accepted understanding of the difference between the two. Although some researchers use both terms synonymously (e.g., Csikszentmihalyi & Robinson, 1986), others seek clear distinctions. Some researchers view talent as a hyponym of giftedness (e.g., Haensly, Reynolds, & Nash, 1986); others equate talent with potential and giftedness with achievements (e.g., Tannenbaum, 1986; but cf. also Gagné, 2005). In this chapter we will use the terms giftedness and talent as conceptually overlapping terms (e.g., Ericsson, Roring, & Nandagopal, 2007). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)