Su búsqueda

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 68(1) of Gifted Child Quarterly (see record 2024-34178-006). In the original article, an error impacting the results of the analysis occurred when the authors inadvertently flipped the interpretation of anxiety scores in the Tong and Yewchuk (1996) study. Upon reanalysis with the corrected number, the effect was not significant at the 5% significance level, but there is evidence of an effect at the 10% significance level. Rather than dichotomizing the interpretation based on p < .05, some prefer reporting the “degree of evidence”: there was weak evidence (.05 < p < .10) of a difference in anxiety between gifted and non-gifted students in this meta-analysis. The corrected Figure 2 based on this statement (using a 90% CI) is present in the erratum.] Given the ongoing debate over whether giftedness is associated with mental health disorders, there is a great need to highlight and compare results from the most methodologically rigorous studies. Surprisingly, the vast majority of literature reviews and background sections of research articles include studies that do not directly compare gifted and nongifted youth. Furthermore, almost no attention has been paid to how differences in the definitions of giftedness or mental health outcomes of interest affect the interpretation and comparison of studies. The authors apply an epidemiologic perspective for thinking about these issues, highlight many of the challenges of studying this population, and present results from meta-analyses that include the most methodologically rigorous studies comparing rates of depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety, suicide ideation, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) between gifted and nongifted youth. They conclude with recommendations to strengthen research in this area. Putting the research to use: Through this review we sought to provide concrete recommendations to strengthen future research on the mental health of gifted children. Most notably, future studies should assess large, population-based cohorts that include both gifted and nongifted individuals. Researchers should also move toward describing their study population according to their specific aptitudes, talents, skills or abilities, rather than using the general term ‘gifted’. Thinking more specifically about these relationships will not only help us to understand the association between giftedness and mental health, but will also increase the potential to effectively shape programs and policies for gifted youth, focusing resources on the most vulnerable. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This article provides an introduction to the special issue "Intelligence, creativity and giftedness". Intelligence, creativity and giftedness are often studied separately. Journals and conferences are mainly focused on just one of these topics. However their joint examination presents interest in theoretical, social and practical respects. The articles of this special issue reflect the cooperation initiated by researchers from Germany, France and Russia. This cooperation lead to a number of conferences held in Moscow, Paris and Muenster with the large international participation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

This editorial briefly describes the articles featured in this issue of Gifted and Talented International. The featured articles have diverse range of topics—related to giftedness, talent development, educating gifted students, mathematically advanced students and their programs, psychological effects related to giftedness, theoretical studies and sociocultural perspectives of gifted development, and so on. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved)

The process of identifying students as creatively gifted provides numerous challenges for educators. Although many schools assess for creativity in identifying students for gifted and talented services, the relationship between creativity and giftedness is often not fully understood. This article reviews commonly used methods of creativity assessment, looking specifically at their role in identifying students as eligible for gifted and talented programs. Issues in understanding the creativity and giftedness relationship are reviewed, with special attention given to problems in assessing creatively gifted students. A multi-method best practice approach for assessing and identifying creatively gifted students is proposed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Giftedness can be both an asset and a burden when gifted students respond to developmental challenges. Characteristics associated with high intellectual ability likely affect how gifted students experience social, emotional, and career development, regardless of level of academic achievement. Counselors' lack of awareness of such qualitative differences, as well as positive and negative biases, may interfere with the therapeutic relationship. Characteristics related to giftedness, vulnerabilities, concerns, and counseling strategies are the focus of this article. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This special issue, pay tribute to Gallagher’s work by examining representative articles in five major areas in gifted education: theories of giftedness, curriculum and instruction, social and cultural acceptance of giftedness, the needs of underrepresented gifted students, and gifted educational policies. Two articles represent each area: an article by Gallagher and a reflection on its significance. Each reflection addresses three questions: "What were Dr. Gallagher’s major ideas?" "What is the current state of the field?" and "What would Dr. Gallagher advise us to do as we move forward?" (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Dr. James Gallagher published widely on most topics in gifted education, and was often invited to provide commentary on basic theories of giftedness for audiences of psychologists and educators. His own background as a psychologist and special educator as well as a gifted educator positioned him well to hold the theoretical views he did on the nature of giftedness and how it might be nurtured. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Social coping and self-concept were explored among Irish ( n = 115) and American ( n = 134) grades 3–8 students. Denying one’s giftedness or the impact it has on peer relationships were associated with poor self-concept in both samples. Among Irish students, denying giftedness was associated with more positive self-concept when paired with a high activity level. Engaging in many activities in the US sample and helping one’s peers in the Irish sample were positive predictors of academic self-concept. Findings suggest young gifted students may benefit from learning more about their exceptional abilities and their impact on peers. They should also be encouraged to engage in extracurricular activities and find ways to use their exceptional abilities to support their peers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

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)

The giftedness ideal of the 20th century is a gifted person who is able to fit in, someone whose outstanding abilities and creativity can be diagnosed with tests. Giftedness, however, is not measurable. There an increasing amount of evidence that even thoroughly elaborated methods can fail in the case of people with atypical cerebral structure, in the case of exceptions, the idiosyncratic minority, the number of whom is increasing, and of whom many can be able of outstanding achievements. The first and foremost stumbling-block in the diagnosis of giftedness is creativity. Creative power essentially resists identification. Something is creative by the very fact that it transcends the existent. Creative people appear as a disorder in most cases. The unbalanced profile of abilities and the manifestation of an idiosyncratic personality, charactersitic of the exceptionally gifted, render traditional assessment methods unreliable and unsuitable for identifying the gifted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

For more than ten years, gifted children have attracted media attention. Such a situation contrasts with the limited number of scientific studies devoted to these children. However, several questions about giftedness would deserve substantial research. These questions belong to four main categories. The first category refers to the identification of gifted children. New intelligence tests and current models of giftedness nowadays question the use of IQ as the sole criterion. A second category of questions refers to how to capture the core of giftedness and its development: Which are the variables supporting or hindering the potential of gifted children? A third category of questions concerns the psychological, relational and academic characteristics of these children. Finally, a fourth category refers to the education of gifted children: Which are the most appropriate and efficient educational practices for these children? (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This article presents a discussion on giftedness and how to define and measure intelligence. During the past few years, the researchers have been having a renewed discussion about the definition of giftedness and how to define and measure intelligence. Actually, much of the discussion is a replay of earlier debates. Questions are being asked as though they were fresh and new when they have been asked and answered before. The author cites some examples of the studies conducted by his favorite philosophers and psychologists including the works of George Santyana and Lewis Terman and J. P. Guilford. The data they collected and models that they presented were steps to the present and future research in the field of giftedness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

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)

This article examines the cultural-activity approach to the study of giftedness, which is based on the ideas of L. S. Vygotsky, A. N. Leontiev, and O. K. Tikhomirov. Three basic principles of this approach are described: the principle of polymorphism, the dynamic principle, and the principle of the holistic analysis of the giftedness phenomenon. The article introduces the results of empirical research (including a 10-year longitudinal study), which verifies the efficacy of the cultural-activity approach and its prospects for solving actual problems in the psychology of giftedness in light of the creation of new diagnostic procedures and methods of education and the development of gifted children. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In this article, we present a subtest of the Aurora Battery, Metaphors, a new measure for the identification of gifted students. Metaphors is an assessment of analytical thinking in the verbal domain with an open-ended response format, an alternative to the conventional achievement measures or analytical assessments in multiple-choice format often used for giftedness identification. The comprehension of metaphors requires a combination of comparative, categorical, and evaluative thinking, and an ability to map meanings—literal and figurative—from one word to another. In this article, we first show that performance on Metaphors can contribute to the identification of giftedness, and we identify the items that seem to contribute to this discrimination most effectively (Study 1). Next, the comparative terms of each subtest item were characterised according to two key aspects—the concreteness and similarity of their comparative terms (Study 2). Results showed that gifted children may be better identified when these aspects are considered. New perspectives on metaphor processing in gifted students and premises for the identification of giftedness are then discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

To compare the occurrence of bullying among students with and without characteristics of giftedness and talent it was applied a questionnaire to 339 elementary school students, being 59 of them gifted students. No significant differences were found between subgroups with and without giftedness in regard to their involvement with bullying, types of aggression suffered and sociometric variables. Gifted students more often adopt the behavior of calling for help to combat bullying. Students with talent for arts tend to be more victimized than the ones gifted in other domains. Although few variables related to socioemotional adjustment have been investigated, the results may imply that students with giftedness do not necessarily differ from peers regarding that aspect of human development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Comments on an article by Albert Zieglera & Shane N. Phillipson (see record 2012-16824-002). Current gifted education clearly has its problems as outlined by Ziegler and Phillipson. The focus on personal traits and the assumption of an autocatalytic development of gifts into extraordinary achievement has not been proved a valid approach for designing effective supportive measures. At least one of the reasons proposed by Ziegler and Phillipson—lacking consideration of the very individual contexts the gifted persons find themselves in—is also acknowledged by counselors in the field of giftedness. To sum up, all counseling centers show at least tendencies towards systemic counseling strategies. Obviously, these principles are viewed as essential to reach long-term effects in fostering giftedness. Despite this practical need for a holistic–interactive theoretical approach common theories of giftedness do not explain the complex process of talent development in a realistic way. Gifted education as well as counseling practice show the need for a paradigm shift which has already begun.But the empirical and theoretical foundation must extend dramatically to ensure the required professional standards an educational system should fulfill. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Comments on an article by Albert Zieglera & Shane N. Phillipson (see record 2012-16824-002). The beginning of China’s gifted education programs in universities seemed promising. However, its proceeding was frustrating. By the end of the 1990s, eight out of the 13 universities had ended their programs for various reasons. How can Chinese gifted education best emerge from this predicament? Undoubtedly, AMG has some implications for the possible solutions. According to the AMG, there is no choice but to go in two directions. First, if we continue to put gifted children into special programs, we must pay more attention to the systematic characteristics of gifted education, particularly to the dynamic, interdependent, interconnected, and interactive characteristics of the system. Second, we must lay more emphasis on the equifinality of the gifted education system. Giftedness is not a personal trait, but a product of systematic achievement behaviors. A gifted education program, even if it is very specialized, does not necessarily bring about giftedness. Common college education, if meeting students’ needs well, can also cultivate giftedness. Thus, another realistic solution to China’s gifted education problems is to offer good developmental opportunities for the ordinary students. In my view, this is a broader way forward. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Spousal giftedness, dual-career status, and gender were studied in relation to marital and life satisfaction among gifted adults. The data for the present study were collected twice over a 5-year period in order to examine the stability of the findings over time. Results indicated that marital satisfaction was significantly related to life satisfaction at both episodes of data collection. However, differences were found between the first and second data collection period regarding spousal giftedness and dual-career status. No gender differences were found in marital or life satisfaction at either data collection period. Further, qualitative data were collected regarding areas of spousal giftedness. The most commonly identified areas were math and science, interpersonal skills, creativity, and general intelligence. Example responses were provided for each of the identified areas. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Definitions of what constitute students who are gifted and talented as well as policies and procedures to identify these high-ability students play a critical role in determining which individuals actually receive gifted services. This article reports on a national survey of how state policies and practices define giftedness, identify gifted students, and accommodate for gifted minority group students. Results indicate substantial changes in definitions and categories of giftedness over the past decade. Results also reveal variability in identification methods, with a majority of states using a 3–5% cutscore for demarcating giftedness while endorsing a multiple cutoff or averaging approach to gifted decision making. Most noteworthy is the fact that at present, no state advocates using a single-score decision-making model for gifted classification. The authors discuss the implications for school psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)