Paula Olszewski-Kubilius, Saiying Steenbergen-Hu, Eric Calvert, Susan Richert Corwith, Sarah Bright
{"title":"A Meta-Analysis of Research on the Relationship Between Overexcitabilities and Giftedness","authors":"Paula Olszewski-Kubilius, Saiying Steenbergen-Hu, Eric Calvert, Susan Richert Corwith, Sarah Bright","doi":"10.1177/00169862251370377","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This meta-analysis explored a total of 230 effects that were extracted from 20 empirical studies on overexcitabilities (OEs) to study the relationship between giftedness and OE. Variables studied included operationalization of giftedness, use of explicit benchmarks for identifying giftedness, type of OE instrument, gender, developmental level of participants, and national setting and timing of study. Overall, there was a positive and significant relationship found between OE and giftedness with the strongest relationship being with Intellectual OE and the weakest with Sensory and Emotional OE. However, the strength of the relationship varied significantly by operationalization of giftedness, being strongest when giftedness was operationalized as previous identification as gifted and non-existent when operationalized as general intelligence or cognitive ability. In addition, when no explicit benchmarks were employed for gifted identification, there was no evidence of such a difference between the gifted and non-gifted. When comparing gifted to non-gifted students, differences were found only for high school-aged students, but not for elementary and/or middle school age or adults. The differences obtained in OE between the gifted and non-gifted are likely to be overestimated due to a presence of publication bias, that is, an overrepresentation of studies with relatively small sample sizes. Recommendations include caution about assumptions regarding the prevalence of OEs among gifted students, using OEs as indicators of giftedness in school-based referral and identification processes, and for designing affective education curricula and services targeting gifted students.","PeriodicalId":47514,"journal":{"name":"Gifted Child Quarterly","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gifted Child Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862251370377","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This meta-analysis explored a total of 230 effects that were extracted from 20 empirical studies on overexcitabilities (OEs) to study the relationship between giftedness and OE. Variables studied included operationalization of giftedness, use of explicit benchmarks for identifying giftedness, type of OE instrument, gender, developmental level of participants, and national setting and timing of study. Overall, there was a positive and significant relationship found between OE and giftedness with the strongest relationship being with Intellectual OE and the weakest with Sensory and Emotional OE. However, the strength of the relationship varied significantly by operationalization of giftedness, being strongest when giftedness was operationalized as previous identification as gifted and non-existent when operationalized as general intelligence or cognitive ability. In addition, when no explicit benchmarks were employed for gifted identification, there was no evidence of such a difference between the gifted and non-gifted. When comparing gifted to non-gifted students, differences were found only for high school-aged students, but not for elementary and/or middle school age or adults. The differences obtained in OE between the gifted and non-gifted are likely to be overestimated due to a presence of publication bias, that is, an overrepresentation of studies with relatively small sample sizes. Recommendations include caution about assumptions regarding the prevalence of OEs among gifted students, using OEs as indicators of giftedness in school-based referral and identification processes, and for designing affective education curricula and services targeting gifted students.
期刊介绍:
Gifted Child Quarterly (GCQ) is the official journal of the National Association for Gifted Children. As a leading journal in the field, GCQ publishes original scholarly reviews of the literature and quantitative or qualitative research studies. GCQ welcomes manuscripts offering new or creative insights about giftedness and talent development in the context of the school, the home, and the wider society. Manuscripts that explore policy and policy implications are also welcome. Additionally, GCQ reviews selected books relevant to the field, with an emphasis on scholarly texts or text with policy implications, and publishes reviews, essay reviews, and critiques.