Su búsqueda

This editorial presents the summary of the papers which were featured in this special issue of Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling. The papers in this special issue share the aim of assessing - and, indeed, understanding - giftedness in some of its manifestations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)

Exceptional cases such as Michael Jackson and Mozart illustrate the concepts of high potential, talent and precocity. If their musical worlds are distant, at least by a few centuries, their environment (notably the family environment), developmental path and personality show notable similarities. Studying these two cases of exceptional musical talent sheds light on a multidimensional approach to intelligence, which is not limited to academic abilities, allows a better understanding of the process leading a gift to be transformed into talent, and fosters the examination of asynchronies observed in great musicians between extreme talent and impaired socio-affective development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

The Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (MDDT) is a broad theory of talent development in academics, arts, science, and sports. At its core is a clear distinction between outstanding aptitudes (the gifts or G) and outstanding achievements (the talents or T). Talent development (the D component) represents the progressive transformation of specific gifts into outstanding competencies (knowledge and skills) in a given field of human activity. Apart from this basic trio of dynamically linked components, the DMGT includes two additional components, called catalysts: intrapersonal (I) catalysts (e.g., temperament, needs, interests, will power) and environmental (E) catalysts (e.g., social and family environments, significant persons, enrichment provisions). The DMGT represents a psychosocial model of talent development. But, all the components have their roots in biological and genetic underpinnings that contribute significantly to their development. Complex interactions between the G, D, I, E, and T components, as well as the positive or negative influence of chance, will determine to what extent high aptitudes—the gifts—will eventually be realized as talents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

The proposal of Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, and Worrell (see record 2012-24309-002) on rethinking giftedness and gifted education has a number of implications from an occupational/career decision-making perspective. In this examination of their ideas, consideration is given to the literature in vocational psychology/career development, the emerging findings on the occupational/career decisions of gifted adolescents, and the existing research in gifted education. The new model represents a timely platform and impetus for a constructive discussion and debate on rethinking and advancing the field of gifted education. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

We were thrilled to see an article focusing on giftedness, written by such thoughtful and well-respected researchers as Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, and Worrell (see record 2012-24309-002). The expansive scope of their synthesis is so impressive that it could serve as a crash course introduction to gifted education. In our commentary, we focus specifically on the perspective of education service delivery. From this perspective, we review their guiding principles, chief goal, and provide some follow-up questions for further clarification as well as an implementation option also based on talent development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Comment on Subotnik et al.'s article (see record 2012-24309-002). The talent development approach to the conceptualization of giftedness has historical precedent in the field. Examples of large-scale and longitudinal research studies from previous decades guided by the talent development approach are provided as illustrations. The implications of focusing on domain-specific talents in academics, the arts and sport, their individual patterns of development, and the use of eminence as a goal for programs and services in gifted education are discussed. The importance of linking theoretical debates and research with the realities of policies, resource allocation, and advocacy is emphasized. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

In this article, the authors respond to the eight commentaries, J. Y. Jung (see record 2012-24309-003); A. Ziegler, H. Stoeger and W. Vialle (see record 2012-24309-004); M. C. Makel, M. Puttalaz and J. Wai (see record 2012-24309-005); A. Robinson (see record 2012-24309-006); A. N. Rinn (see record 2012-24309-007); M. T. McBee et al. (see record 2012-24309-008); T. C. Grantham (see record 2012-24309-009) and J. A. Plucker (see record 2012-24309-010) , on the original article “Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education: A Proposed Direction Forward Based on Psychological Science” (see record 2012-24309-002), using several themes to organize their response. These themes include ability, developmental trajectories, effort and opportunity, psychosocial factors, eminence, and equity. The authors reaffirm the contention that eminence is an appropriate standard for assigning the gifted label in individuals with well-developed talents. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Despite numerous calls for research on parents of gifted learners, researchers have given only cursory treatment to the topic. In this article, the authors review and synthesize 53 sources, published since 1983, on parents of gifted learners. Existing research on parents of gifted learners may be categorized into three thematic areas that include (a) parent influence, (b) parent perceptions of giftedness and ability, and (c) parent satisfaction with gifted programming. Theory-driven research is conspicuously absent from this body of work, and study designs emphasize self-report measures and lack control groups. The analysis of this literature reveals gaps in the research record and offers recommendations about where future research should be focused. These areas include attitudes, values, and expectations of families of underserved gifted children; relationships between parents and schools; parents’ understanding of giftedness; parents of gifted underachievers; and how parents support and influence their children at home. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

For a full personal development, the planning of curricula tailored to individual capabilities is essential. This argument regards all individuals, including those who are characterized by exceptional skills. Enhancing everyone's talents is a factor of social development empowering human capital, especially when gifted people are targeted. An overview of the European context makes it imperative not to delay the empowerment of giftedness in the school. Thus it is useful to provide school professionals with instruments for its assessment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Current models of cognition and behavioral diagnosis emphasize categorical classification over continuous considerations of function and promote the “differential diagnosis” of various conditions according to observational criteria. However, an overemphasis on a purely behavioral, categorical approach to understanding human function fails to address the comorbidity of different disorders and does not include a consideration of overlapping levels of function, from “pathological” through “normal,” to “gifted” or exceptional. The frequent co-occurrence of “gifted” and “pathological” function is thus difficult to understand from a corticocentric and purely behavioral and observational point of view. This article reviews “giftedness” in relation to the diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, coexistence of which is termed “twice exceptional.” It additionally considers problems in assessing these functions using current neuropsychological tests and methodologies that are presumably based upon a corticocentric model of cognition. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Why and how should a society devote special resources to the development of giftedness in young people for the twenty-first century? If we agree that the goals of gifted education and talent development are to maximize young people’s opportunities for self-fulfillment and increase society’s reservoir of creative problem solvers and producers of knowledge, then it would seem wise that programming and services enhance students’ capacity for creative productivity, not just content acquisition. This general theory for the development of human potential is discussed through an exploration of four research-based subtheories: the Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness, the Enrichment Triad Model, Operation Houndstooth, and Executive Functions. In this article, a reexamination of current gifted and talented programming is intended to generate future research, extend dialogue among scholars, and inspire continued support for programming based on theory and related research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Comments on an article by Albert Zieglera & Shane N. Phillipson (see record 2012-16824-002). In their article, Ziegler and Phillipson criticize the “erroneous view” of the research paradigms mentioned with respect to gifted education as well as to our understanding of the development of excellence or exceptionality. Instead of them, they plead for a “paradigm shift” and describe “basic principles of gifted education” based on the “actiotope model” in a systemic view. This reminds me of the controversial debate on psychometric research approaches versus process diagnostics and “action research” in the field 25 years ago. In the first part of their article Ziegler and Phillipson review the “state of the art” and complain the deficiencies of many current fundamental principles of gifted education including talent search and identification approaches in educational and school psychology. All in all: Ziegler and Phillipson offer a very stimulating article, which provides the reader with many new insights into gifted education and useful information relevant to its improvement. (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)

Comments on an article by Albert Zieglera & Shane N. Phillipson (see record 2012-16824-002). Ziegler and Phillipson draw upon the Actiotope Model of Giftedness (AMG) to give an overview of a systemic approach to gifted education. They argue the value of such a systemic approach for understanding the development of exceptionality. We certainly agree that the achievement of excellent performance is not only the result of individual abilities and efforts but also the collective support from interactive components within the system. In our field, the AMG has provided us with a conceptual framework that helps us interpret our data on connectedness and life skills development among children in Hong Kong. Ziegler and Phillipson also point out weaknesses in key models and strategies established so far in gifted education. They certainly challenge the fundamentals of the current mode of nurturing giftedness. They hold that the development of exceptional achievement requires attention to students’ needs at an individual level, rather than group or class level. As suggested by Ziegler and Phillipson, one of the few strategies implemented at the moment that can cater to students’ individual needs is mentorship found that gifted students regard interaction with experienced people from their field of interest as the most valued and helpful means for their development. Similarly, our study of high ability adolescents in Hong Kong has shown that many students benefit from peer mentoring and counseling in school (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

The paper argues that educators of the gifted have overlooked important evidence on the power of special environments because of our habit of considering cognitive outcomes and an outsider view of evidence as the standard for judging the benefits of special environments. The author proposes that social context be used as a construct to help rethink how to study the benefits of special environments. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

A study of the effects of schooling on the social cognition of gifted adolescents is reported. A student attitude questionnaire (SAQ) exploring the cognitive behavioral strategies utilized to manage the stigma of giftedness was developed after conducting phenomenological interviews of fifteen gifted adolescents attending the Tennessee Governor’s Schools (Coleman & Cross, 1988). The questionnaire asked subjects to respond to six scenarios described as potentially stigmatizing events during the normal school day. Five common strategies noted during the interviews were provided as options in each of the scenarios. The data reported herein are based on the responses of 1,465 students over a two-year period. The patterns of responses suggested that gifted adolescents utilize the five strategies to differing degrees across situations. Situations most closely associated with test performance seemed to elicit the greatest variation in coping strategies, while those primarily reflecting social situations showed a consistently narrow range of strategies. The “placate” coping strategy was the most frequently used across the school-based scenarios. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Background: According to empirical literature, low self-esteem is highly correlated to behavioural and emotional problems in gifted children and adolescents. Since self-esteem is an indicator of social and emotional adjustment, it would be interesting to better understand the meaning of this construct, as it is evaluated explicitly with the use of self-report questionnaires. In order to explore the psychological processes underlying the explicit self-esteem, we studied the relation of a self-report questionnaire and an indirect measure of self and interpersonal perception using the Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS). Method: The participants were 93 children, aged between 9 and 15 years old, with an IQ≥130. They were attending regular classes (no curriculum difference). Self-esteem was evaluated using the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory (SEI). We used the Rorschach CS measures of self and interpersonal perception. Results: The results showed no significant correlation between self-esteem and high IQ. A negative correlation between self-esteem evaluated on the SEI and the Rorschach Vista responses was found, which reflected self-critical introspection and painful self-appraisal. Then a positive correlation was observed between self-esteem and reflection answers on the Rorschach (Fr+rF>0), which are related to narcissistic-like features of personality. We also found a positive correlation between self-esteem and the Rorschach egocentricity index (EGO), which provides an estimate of self-concern. Finally, the strongest correlation was found between self-esteem and the dominance of good over poor human representations (GHR>PHR), which reveals effective interpersonal behaviour. Discussion: The psychological processes which seem to be related to low self-esteem in gifted children and adolescents are maladaptive interpersonal behaviours, painful experience of introspection focusing on perceived negative aspects of the self, absence of narcissistic-like features of the personality and low self-concern. These findings may suggest that intervention planning with gifted children and adolescents with low self-esteem should emphasize the accurate interpretation of interpersonal data, develop social skills and restructure negative self-thoughts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

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)

The present study reflects upon the identification process for gifted or highly able children through a systematic study of the literature, with the aim of providing them with an adequate and stimulating education beginning at an early age. The identification process requires an adequate diagnostic process of giftedness, and creativity is an important determining factor. Creativity, however, is a very complex construct due to differences in definition in the psychology field. This study aims to make a valuable contribution by discussing how to measure creativity in gifted or highly able children, as well as proving recommendations in the diagnostic process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Super-gifted individuals are considered to be very rare. This paper addresses one part of a larger body of research aimed at characterization of super-giftedness in mathematics. The research population consists of three groups of students who excel in mathematics: Super-gifted in mathematics (S-MG), generally gifted students who excel in school mathematics (G-EM) and students who excel in school mathematics but are not identified as generally gifted (NG-EM). Fifty-six male students who comprised these groups performed a battery of cognitive tests: memory, speed of information processing, visual perception, and attention. We found that the between-group differences are task depended and that S-MG students can be characterized by superior performance on Working Memory test (WM – span, WM – total score) and the accuracy of Pattern-recognition, which was an indicator of visual perception. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)