Overexcitabilities and Openness to Experience Are Not the Same: A Critique of a Study and Reflections on Theory, Ethics, and Truth

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
B. Grant
{"title":"Overexcitabilities and Openness to Experience Are Not the Same: A Critique of a Study and Reflections on Theory, Ethics, and Truth","authors":"B. Grant","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1881852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A recent study claiming to provide a basis for gifted education to drop the construct of overexcitabilities in favor of the construct of openness to experience and align itself with the Five Factor Model and a talent development perspective on gifted education is shown to be without merit. An analysis shows that the study supports the conclusion that the constructs are less similar than they appear to be from descriptions in the literature. This raises questions about the evidence needed for a field to drop constructs and the role of theory and research in guiding practice. It is argued that proposals for a field to change direction must be very strong and that gifted education should pay increased attention to justifying ethical claims.","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881852","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881852","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT A recent study claiming to provide a basis for gifted education to drop the construct of overexcitabilities in favor of the construct of openness to experience and align itself with the Five Factor Model and a talent development perspective on gifted education is shown to be without merit. An analysis shows that the study supports the conclusion that the constructs are less similar than they appear to be from descriptions in the literature. This raises questions about the evidence needed for a field to drop constructs and the role of theory and research in guiding practice. It is argued that proposals for a field to change direction must be very strong and that gifted education should pay increased attention to justifying ethical claims.
过度兴奋和对经验的开放是不一样的:对理论、伦理和真理的一项研究的批判和反思
摘要最近的一项研究声称,为天才教育提供了一个基础,即放弃过度兴奋的结构,转而支持体验开放的结构,并与五因素模型保持一致,而天才教育的人才发展观被证明是没有价值的。一项分析表明,这项研究支持这样一个结论,即这些结构不像文献中描述的那样相似。这就提出了关于一个领域放弃结构所需的证据以及理论和研究在指导实践中的作用的问题。有人认为,改变方向的建议必须非常有力,天才教育应该更加注意证明道德主张的合理性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
20.00%
发文量
33
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信