Problem Finding, Divergent Thinking, and Evaluative Thinking Among Gifted and Nongifted Students

IF 1.2 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Ahmed M. Abdulla Alabbasi, Amnah S. M. Hafsyan, M. Runco, A. Alsaleh
{"title":"Problem Finding, Divergent Thinking, and Evaluative Thinking Among Gifted and Nongifted Students","authors":"Ahmed M. Abdulla Alabbasi, Amnah S. M. Hafsyan, M. Runco, A. Alsaleh","doi":"10.1177/01623532211044539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Investigations of differences between gifted and nongifted students have examined cognitive abilities, including intelligence quotient (IQ) differences, higher order thinking skills, and divergent thinking (DT). However, little is known about differences in problem finding (PF). Moreover, previous works on gifted students have never explored associations between PF and evaluative thinking (ET). Both PF and ET play a role in the creative process. The present study tested relationships between PF, DT, and ET and examined differences between gifted (N = 175) and nongifted students (N = 188). An analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed significant differences between gifted and nongifted students’ PF, DT, and ET, with effect sizes (η2) ranging from 0.048 to 0.192. Gender differences were also analyzed; gifted girls scored significantly higher than gifted boys in PF fluency and originality, DT originality, and in ET in PF. Originality scores in DT and PF significantly predicted the accuracy of students’ ET (R2 = 34%–42%). Finally, canonical correlation analyses showed moderate-to-strong correlations between DT, PF, and ET scores. Limitations of this study are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51648,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL FOR THE EDUCATION OF THE GIFTED","volume":"44 1","pages":"398 - 413"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL FOR THE EDUCATION OF THE GIFTED","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532211044539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Investigations of differences between gifted and nongifted students have examined cognitive abilities, including intelligence quotient (IQ) differences, higher order thinking skills, and divergent thinking (DT). However, little is known about differences in problem finding (PF). Moreover, previous works on gifted students have never explored associations between PF and evaluative thinking (ET). Both PF and ET play a role in the creative process. The present study tested relationships between PF, DT, and ET and examined differences between gifted (N = 175) and nongifted students (N = 188). An analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed significant differences between gifted and nongifted students’ PF, DT, and ET, with effect sizes (η2) ranging from 0.048 to 0.192. Gender differences were also analyzed; gifted girls scored significantly higher than gifted boys in PF fluency and originality, DT originality, and in ET in PF. Originality scores in DT and PF significantly predicted the accuracy of students’ ET (R2 = 34%–42%). Finally, canonical correlation analyses showed moderate-to-strong correlations between DT, PF, and ET scores. Limitations of this study are discussed.
资优与非资优学生的问题发现、发散性思维与评价性思维
对天才和非天才学生之间差异的调查考察了认知能力,包括智商差异、高阶思维技能和发散思维。然而,人们对问题发现(PF)的差异知之甚少。此外,以前关于天才学生的研究从未探讨过PF和评价思维(ET)之间的联系。PF和ET都在创作过程中发挥作用。本研究测试了PF、DT和ET之间的关系,并检验了天才(N=175)和非天才学生(N=188)之间的差异。方差分析(ANOVA)显示,资优学生和非资优学生的PF、DT和ET存在显著差异,效应大小(η2)在0.048至0.192之间。还分析了性别差异;天才女孩在PF流利性和独创性、DT独创性以及PF中的ET方面的得分显著高于天才男孩。DT和PF中的独创性得分显著预测了学生ET的准确性(R2=34%-42%)。最后,典型相关分析显示DT、PF和ET得分之间存在中等到强烈的相关性。讨论了本研究的局限性。
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
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
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