UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA
Ļubova Černova
11 -15 YEAR-OLD GIFTED ADDOLESCENTS’
PERSONALITY TRAITS
SUMMARY OF PROMOTIONAL PAPER
Riga, 2005
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE DISSERTATION
Fostering the strategic resources of population intellectual and creative potential has been one
of the developed countries' priorities during the recent decades. In 1994 the Council of Europe
adopted Recommendation 1248 on the education for gifted children, stating the following, "No
country can indeed afford to waste talents and it would be a waste of human resources not to
identify in good time any intellectual or other potentialities... Gifted children should be able to
benefit from appropriate educational conditions that would allow them to develop fully their
abilities, for their own benefit and for the benefit of society as a whole" (Recommendation 1248 on
education for gifted children, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, 1994). In
accordance with these statements, the Council of Europe recommended the Ministries of Education
of the member states a number of concrete measures.
Discovery, support and socialisation of gifted children, the so-called "gold reserves", should
become a priority task of the modern state and society. A long-term national educational
programme would facilitate the process of discovering and educating gifted children, enhancing the
chances to realise their potentials and grant their social security. Complex and specific work with
gifted children involves different professionals - teachers, psychologists, scientists, and specialists
in culture. The necessary condition for children's positive development is co-operation between
their parents, teachers and other specialists. Work with gifted children cannot be based only on
empirical, spontaneous experience; it must be supported by scientific and methodological studies.
Today the Latvian state and society need people who can make non-trivial decisions, think
creatively, and meet the challenges of modern dynamic life. These people usually have an active
life position; they generate new ideas and original solutions. In this respect Cari Rogers emphasised
that if modern society had no people responding to the smallest changes in society development in
a constructive way, the human race would become extinct, and that would be the cost of such lack
of creativity (Rogers, 1959).
General goal of the research:
to study 11-15 year-old gifted adolescents' personality traits.
Research objectives:
1. to study research-relevant specialised literature, to analyse scientific sources on the
phenomenon of giftedness and its specifics, concepts and theories of giftedness, characteristics
and peculiarities of gifted children;
2. to get familiar with results and statements of different psychological research on personality
traits of gifted adolescents;
3. to select adequate research methods and to apply them in a sample group of gifted adolescents;
4. to obtain empirical data and process statistical data;
5. to provide analyses and psychological interpretation of personality traits in intellectually gifted
adolescents.
The subject of the study:
personality traits, anxiety and aggression of intellectually gifted adolescents.
The sample
292 children of 11-15 years of age from 16 comprehensive schools participated in the
research. The sample included 194 adolescents with Russian mother tongue and 98 - with Latvian.
The Russian sample included 66 intellectually gifted adolescents (IQ≥130 points in WISC-R), and
128 adolescents, whose IQ is within the norm (100±15). The Latvian sample included 47
intellectually gifted adolescents and 51 adolescents, whose IQ is within the norm (100±15).
The dissertation sets the following questions:
1. What are, if any, the differences between personality traits in intellectually gifted adolescents of
different age groups (IQ ≥ 130 points in WISC-R), and adolescents with IQ scores within the
norm (100±15)?
2. What are, if any, the differences between aggression in intellectually gifted adolescents of
different age groups (IQ ≥ 130 points in WISC-R), and adolescents with IQ scores within the
norm (100±15)?
3. What are, if any, the differences between anxiety traits in intellectually gifted adolescents of
different age groups (IQ ≥ 130 points in WISC-R), and adolescents with IQ scores within the
norm (100±15)?
Additional research questions were:
What are, if any, the gender differences in personality traits of intellectually gifted
adolescents?
What are, if any, the differences in aggression between 11 12 and 13 15 year-old
intellectually gifted adolescents?
What are, if any, the gender differences in aggression of intellectually gifted adolescents?
What are, if any, the differences in anxiety traits between
intellectually gifted adolescents?
11-12 and 13-15 year-old
What are, if any, the gender differences in anxiety traits of intellectually gifted adolescents?
Research methods:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale Tor Children -Revised (WISC-R; D.Wechsler, 1976);
Children's Personality Questionnaire (R.B. Cattell, R.B.Poller, I960);
High School Personality Questionnaire (R.B.Catlell, M.D.L.Cattell& E. F.Johns, 1953);
Personality anxiety scale (Шкала личностной тревожности, A.M.Пpuxoжaн, 1983);
Buss-Durkee inventory (Buss & Durkee, 1957).
Data were processed using SPSS programme (Statistical Package for the Social Science).
Co-operation with:
• Centre for the Study of Giftedness, University of Nijmegen;
• Creativity centre (head Dr.psych. R. Bebre);
• Latvian School Psychologists Association;
• Teachers, schoolchildren and their parents from "Optional School for (lilted Children";
• Researchers of the Laboratory of the Psychology of Giftedness in the Psychology Institute of
Russian Educational Academy (Russia).
The author of the dissertation participated in C1F International Exchange program in the
Netherlands from 04.05.2003 till 01.06.2003, dedicated to the problems of working with gifted
children and theoretical issues related to giftedness.
The novelty and theoretical significance (topicality)
The present research is topical and innovative both for the science of psychology in general
and for Latvian science of psychology in particular, as:
1. The issue of giftedness has not been much studied in Latvia. Although modern society
demonstrates great interest to the specific features of giftedness and gifted children, which could
he explained by the pragmatic needs.
2. This is the first research in gifted adolescents' personality traits done in Latvia.
3. Having studied international research findings and conclusions on personality traits, anxiety and
aggression manifestations in gifted children, it was stated that the psychology of giftedness offers
very contradictory views and research results of personality traits in gifted adolescents
(Ackerman & Paulus, 1997; Belts & Neihart, 1988; Clark, 1997; Dauber & Benbow, 1990;
Delbridge Parker & Robinson, 1988; Gallagher, 1990; Garland & Zigler, 1999; Geiger, 1992;
Janos & Robinson, 1985; Kellian, 1983; Kitano, 1990; Lewis, Feiring, & McGuffog, 1986;
Milgram & Milgram, 1976; Norman, Ramsay, Martray, & Roberts, 1999; Riyanto, 2002; Saak,
2004; Shaughnessy, Hee Kang, Greene, Misutova, Suomala & Siltala, 2004; Sheras, 1997, cited
by Riyanto, 2002; Silverman, 1998; Webb, 1993; Zeidner & Schleyer, 1999; Zuo & Tao, 2001
etc.), that prevent us from developing generalised and universal concepts. However the author of
the dissertation has attempted to contribute to studying this issue.
Practical significance (topicality)
1. In the framework of the research, a large group of intellectually gifted adolescents has been
formed that in future will allow us to create data base of gifted children in Latvia and offer them
opportunities for self-realisation and education adequate to their abilities and needs.
2. First time in Latvia the research has tried out Personality Anxiety Scale (Шкала личностной
тревожности, A.M.Пpuxoжaн, 1983), as well as has continued in working with The Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children (partly adapted in Latvia).
3. This research is relevant both for theoretical psychology as well as practical work of professional
psychologists, psychotherapists and teachers dealing with intellectually gifted children and their
parents, besides it promotes the understanding of the concept of intellectual resources and
potentials in the context of Latvian society.
CONTENTS OF THE DISSERTATION
The dissertation includes 4 parts, bibliography and appendices covering 169 pages. In the
introduction, research topicality is stated, the goal and main variables are defined, and the choice of
research issues is explained.
Theoretical background
Children's giftedness traditionally has been in the focus of research in various disciplines.
Giftedness is a psychological phenomenon characterised by its variability and individual character.
Today there are over 100 definitions of giftedness (Freeman, 1997).
In the dissertation, theories, concepts and ideas of J. Renzulli, A. Tannenbaum, R. Sternberg,
F, Monks, E, Torrance, A. J. Cropley, R. B. Cattell, D. Wechsler, W. Stern, A. Matuskin
(Maтюшкин A.), N. Leites (Лейтес H.C.), V. Jurkevich ( B.), S. Rubinstein (Рубинштейн Cю), B.
Teplov (Теплов Б.), M. Holodnaja (Холодная M.) and D. Ushakov (Ушаков Д.В.) are reviewed.
Although several significant studies on creating the concept and model of giftedness have
been undertaken to facilitate our understanding of the structure of this phenomenon, ways of its
detecting, and prognosing the main directions of its development, the issue still remains topical and
demands further research.
Giftedness can be treated both in qualitative and quantitative terms. The qualitative
characteristics of giftedness feature specific abilities of human psychics and peculiarities of its
manifestation in particular activities. The quantitative characteristics measure its manifestations.
Giftedness types can be manifested in different ways and giftedness development may pose
different problems depending on the child's individual trails and the milieu. Singling out giftedness
types we can broaden the spectrum of investigated abilities, enhance the identification of gifted
children and foster their development.
Gifted children often differ from their peers in several aspects: mental, emotional, social and
even motor aspect (Clark, 1997; Dauber & Benbow, 1990; Freeman, 1983; Janos &. Robinson,
1995; Norby, 1997; Porter, 1999; Richards, Encel, & Shute, 2003; Riyanto, 2002; Runco, 1999;
Sheras, 1997, cited by Riyanto, 2002; Silverman, 1998; Webb, 1993; Whitmorе, 1980;
Богоявленская & Шадриков, 2003; Щебланова, 1999; Юркевич, 2003). According to modern
researchers (Ackerman & Paulus, 1997; Bain & Bell, 2004; Beer, 1991; Cross & Coleman, 1993;
Csikszentmihalyi, et al, 1993; Field, et al, 1998; Gciger, 1992; Howard-Hamilton & Franks, 1995;
Jackson & Peterson, 2003; Kelly & Cobb, 1991; Kleine & Short, 1991; Lee, 2002; Luthar, Ziglar,
& Goldstein, 1992; Milligan, 2004; Moon & Thomas, 2003; Norman, Ramsay, Martray, & Roberts,
1999; Stopper, 2000; Tieso, 1999; Tirri & Pehkonen, 2002; Woitaszewski & Aalsma, 2004) in most
cases gifted adolescents have several characteristic traits which differs them from other adolescents,
for example, well-developed cognitive processes, self-appraisal, learning styles, motor and social
skills as well as emotionality.
Giftedness includes advanced cognitive development and specific instrumental and motivation
behaviour (Богоявленская & Шадриков, 2003; Бурменская & Слуцкий, 1991).
Gifted child's advanced cognitive development may be manifested by excellent memory,
information capacity (Davis & Rimm, 1998; Freeman, 1985; Lewis, Fciring, & McGuffog, 1986;
Lewis & Michalson, 1985; Morclock & Morrison, 1996; Rabinowitz & Glascr, 1985; Silverman,
Chitwood, & Waters, 1986; Бурменская & Слуцкий, 1991; Богоявленская, et al, 2003),
developed language skills and extended vocabulary (Lewis, Feiring, & McGuffog, 1986;
Бурменская, et al, 1991), fertile imagination and creativity (Gallagher, 1985; Louis & Lewis, 1992;
Lovecky, 199,3; Piechowski, Silverman, & Falk, 1985; Sternberg & Lubart, 1993; Ward, Saunders,
& Dodds, 1999; Дьяченко, 1997), high mathematical abilities and logical thinking (Baska, 1989;
Gross, 2004; Бурменская, et al, 1991).
The instrumental behaviour aspect features special operational strategics (Pеrleth, Schatz, &
Monks, 2002; Shore & Kanevsky, 1993; Sternberg, 2002; Богоявленская, et al, 2003; Дьяченко,
1997), original operating style (Runco, 1993; Winner, 1996), specific knowledge structuring
(Davidson, 1986; Davis & Rimm, 1998; Parkinson, 1990; Shore & Kanevsky, 1993; Sternberg,
2002) and unique learning styles (Grigorenko He Sternberg, 1997; Winner, 1996; Богоявленская,,
ct al, 2003; Ландау, 2002).
The motivational behaviour aspect may be expressed through high selectivity related to
concrete reality and personal activities (Clark, 1997; Piechowski, 1991; Roеpеr, 1982; Webb, 2000;
Whitmore, 1980; Лейтес, 2001), thirst of knowledge, motivation manifested by curiosity and
readiness to go above the set thresholds as well as high concentration (Baska, 1989; Bloom, 19X2;
Feldhusen, 1986; Freeman, 1985; Howe, 1999; Lewis & Michalson, 1985; Louis & Lewis, 1992;
Parkinson, 1990; Sternberg, 2002; Winner, 1996; Дьяченко, 1997; Лейтес, 2001). Gifted children
are distinguished by high energy (Feldhusen, 1986; Louis & Lewis, 1992; Whitmorе, 1980;
Гильбух, Гарнец, & Коробко, 1990), pronounced interest, zest, persistence and diligence (Clark,
1992; Porter, 1999; Winner, 1996; Богоявленская, et al, 2003; Ландау, 2002), high personal result
standards and aspiration for and persistence in achieving challenging goals as well as perfectionism
(Clark, 1997; Feldhusen, 1986; Lewis &. Michalson, 1985; Mendaglio, 1994; Parker, 1997;
Silverman, Chitwood, & Waters, 1986; Whitmore, 1980).
The psychological traits of gifted children can be viewed only as features accompanying, but
not necessarily as factors fostering giftedness. Manifestations of giftedness are variational and often
contradictory. These traits and peculiarities deserve professional attention, focusing on a long-term
analysis of every single case.
(iifted adolescents are a special category of children (Bireley & Genshaft, 1991; Buescher,
1991; Howard-Hamilton & Franks, 1995; Stormont, et al, 2001). This age group are often prone to
certain risks: they can lose their giftedness ("going-by giftedness"), as well as their manifest antisocial behaviour (Tieso, 1999; Ушаков, 2000). Some sources claim that contradiction is a typical
gifted adolescent behaviour; they care for their peers' company, but often have problems contacting
other people due to their non-comformism, high standards, egocentrism, etc. (Buescher, 1991; Lee,
2002; Roedell, 1984; Silverman, 1993; Stormont, el al, 2001; Богоявленская & Шадриков, 2003;
Ушаков, 2000). Therefore quite a number of gifted adolescents may refuse to admit or even reject
their giftedness, trying to conceal the outstanding abilities in order to be accepted by peers
(Buescher, 1991; Kleine & Short, 1991a). M.Kle emphasises that teenage is a turning point in
intellectual development as early teens are characterised by a radical change of intellect indices
(Кле, 1991). J.Gilbuh calls this phenomenon "extinguishing giftedness". According to her it can be
caused either by lack of creativity components or by change in the environment. Growing up, a
gifted adolescent as if gets into new cultural and educational settings, where his/her superiority
status could be preserved only in case of continuous development of new advanced abilities
(Гильбух, 1991). Gifted school students may demonstrate rapid decrease in motivation; they
gradually fall out of hard working and tend to be arrogant with their less capable peers (luju.fiyx,
Гарнец, & Коробко, 1990). Then they may face academic problems caused by a certain lack of
knowledge and skills (Xеллер, Перлет, & Сиервальд, 1991). The cease of learning motivation may
have undesirable consequences, such as a gifted adolescent's antisocial behaviour risks. Gifted
adolescents manifest their behavioural and social psychological problems in maladaptive behaviour,
such as aggressiveness, drug abuse, high anxiety and character accentuation (Buescher, 1991;
Tieso, 1999; Ушаков, 2000).
Some researchers point out that many gifted female adolescents experience significant
regression in giftedness (Kerr, 2002; Olshen, 1987; Silverman, 1993; Stormont, et al, 2001; Попова,
1995). This could be explained by women's fear of success and increased anxiety as they believe
men would not tolerate female superiority or leadership (Colangelo & Assouline, 1995; Hollinger
& Fleming, 1988; Попова, 1995). Gifted female adolescents may have lowered self-esteem,
dominating achievement motivation as well as pronounced perfectionism and sensitiveness (Kleine
& Short, 1991b; Lamke, 1982; Luscombe & Riley, 2001; Riyanto, 2002; Silverman, 1993;
Stormont, et al, 2001; Матюшкин, 2004). This can be often observed that while adolescents start
developing interest towards the opposite sex girls stop their intellectual progressing and sometimes
obviously regress (Kerr, 1994; Stormont, et al, 2001; Бурменская, et al, 1991). Modern studies
have shown that gifted girls are more prone to conformism and adjustment as they start to adjust
themselves to gender roles much earlier (Buescher, 1991; Callahan & Cunningham, 1994;
Hollinger & Fleming, 1988; Lee, 2002; Smutny, 1998; Ландау, 2002; Попова, 1995; Попова
&Орешкина, 1995).
Giftedness in adolescents has its specifics as this is the very age when giftedness further
development aa well as life perspectives become clearer; whether a adolescent develops a positive
and successful life scenario that will allow them to realise their potentials or a negative life
scenario.
Today an increasing number of gifledness researches stress that it is impossible to separate
human cognitive environment from the personal one (Бабаева & Вайскунский, 2003). Modern
psychology applying personality approach to the issue of giftcdness focuses on the motivational
and emotional aspects, identifying and analysing gifted people's personality traits (Heller &
Schofield, 2002; Ziegler & Heller, 2002; Савенков, 2000; Щебланова, 1999). Modern psychology
considers giftedness to be not only as "a set of cognitive abilities, but also as a personality inherent
phenomenon" (Бабаева & Вайскунский, 2003, 89).
Personality of a gifted child is characterised by explicit excellence. The degree of originality
and individuality of such child is mostly determined by his/her personality that also guides his/her
activities. Comprehending the gifted child's personality peculiarities is especially important in case
of the so-called "hidden" giftedness that is not manifested as successful long-term activities
(Юркевич, 2003). Many gifted children experience developmental dissynchrony that directly
affects personality development process and causes many personal problems (Alsop, 2003;
Morclock, 1996; Terrassier, 1985; Webb, 2000; Winner, 2000a; Бабаева & Вайскунский, 2003;
Богоявленская & Горячева, 2002).
Although gifted children may differ in temperament, interests, education, as well as
personality manifestations, there still are common personality traits typical of most children and
adolescents of high intellect. The most important personality trails detecting intellectual giftedness
include particular value system, advanced sensitiveness, inner locus control, contradictory and
unstable self-esteem, non-conformism. Due to their irregular development process, intellectually
gifted adolescents often have problems with communication, emotional development, will and
personality (Alsop, 2003; Lovecky, 1992; Norby, 1997; Riyanto, 2002; Tieso, 1999; Whitmore,
1980; Богоявленская & Щадриков, 2003). It is especially typical for children with IQ from 130 to
160, the sample group of adolescents represented in the research. In this respect, relevant sources
especially emphasise that the process of development of giftedness in such children often is
accompanied by a number of complicated psychological, psychosomatic and even
psychopathological problems, thus they can be included in the "risk group" (Baska, 1989;
Богоявленская & Щадриков, 2003; Ушаков, 2000). Most authors (Freeman, 1983; Norby, 1997;
Riyanto, 2002; Webb, 1993; Whitmore, 1980) believe that in particular gifted and talented children
face with serious problems more often than others, therefore demanding special attention and
appropriate assisstance of teachers and psychologists (Moon & Thomas, 2003). It is very important
and necessary to study personality traits and characteristics of intellectually gifted adolescents in
order to detect their specific needs and demands as well as their potential problems. Any forms of
working with gifted adolescents, such as development games, regular classes, tutorials, trainings,
etc. should take into account their personality features and target at effective assistance in their
problem solving.
Modern psychology differentiates giftedness as a harmonious or a disharmonious type of
development. Adolescents of the harmonious developmental type are distinguished by physical
maturity that corresponds to their age. Their high and objectively significant achievements in a
specific field organically match with a high level of intellect and personality development. Gifted
adolescents of disharmonious developmental type demonstrate a very high level of separate abilities
and achievements. They have an irregular development of certain psychic traits and adaptation
problems. "Especially" gifted adolescents (IQ from 150 to 180) can often experience neurological
disorders, marked accentuation, excessive dominating, and negativism. These children have
increased emotional disharmony and communication problems(Богоявленская&Щадриков, 2003).
Research data on gifted children's emotional development are contradictory enough. Some
authors (Clark, 1997; Lee, 2002; Peterson, 2003; Runco, 1999; Sheras, 1997, cited by Riyanto,
2002; Silverman, 1998; Webb, 1993; Ларионова, 2002) claim that gifted children have adaptation
problems and suffer from emotional problems more often than their peers; they tend to be isolated,
suffer from lowered self-esteem, depressions, hypersensitiveness and commit suicides (Dixon 8c
Schеckel, 1996; Gallucci, 1988; Gust-Brey & Cross, 1999; Jackson, 1998; Kline 8c Short, 1991b;
Sheras, 1997, cited by Riyanto, 2002; Silverman, 1998; Webb, 1993; Weisse, 1990). Gifted
adolescents manifest neurotic behaviour more often than their peers with normal intellects. Setting
loo high standards to themselves and others, gifted adolescents become more sensitive, critical and
subject to frustration (Freeman, 1983; Webb, 1993). Other authors, on the contrary, (Beer, 1991;
Garland & Zigler, 1999; Luthar, Ziglar, & Goldstein, 1992; Milgram & Milgram, 1976/2001; Nail &
Evans, 1997; Olszewski-Kubilius & Kulieke, 1989; Shore & Kanevsky, 1993) state that children
with excellent abilities are emotionally stable, have strong characters, and are less anxious than their
less talented peers.
Contemporary researchers believe that perfectionism (Adderholdt-Elliot, 1989; Baker, 1996;
Clark, 1997; Dixon, Lapsley, & Hanchon, 2004; Gallagher, 1990; Kerr, 1991; Kitano, 1990;
Mendaglio, 1994; Orange, 1997; Parker, 1997; Parker & Adkins, 1995; Porter, 1999; Roedell, 1984;
Schiller, 2000; Silverman, 1993; Webb, 1993; Whitmore, 1980), inner locus control (Юркевич,
2003; Богоявленская & Щадриков, 2003), special value system (Janos 8c Robinson, 1985;
Nurvuez, 1993; Юркевич, 2003), and autonomy are characteristic for gifted children, which makes it
difficult, and sometimes impossible, for them to work in a group, to think and act in a trivial way
(Mures, 1991; Kitano, 1985; Юркевич, 2003). Gifted adolescents are more responsible, more
independent than their peers, and they often violate established social norms and rules, as they do
not consider them logical or correct (Clark, 1997; Morelock, 1996; Tapacoвa, 2002). Gifted
children have either inadequately high or low self-esteem (Bireley 8c Genshaft, 1991; Park, 1992;
Sheras, 1997, cited by Riyanto, 2002; Silverman, 1993; Webb, 1993).
Many studies (Janos 8c Robinson, 1985) characterise moderately gifted children (IQ=130-145)
as much more mature, more extraverted and socially active, while highly gifted adolescents (IQ145-160) are socially less active, less popular in the group of peers and seldom become leaders
(Dauber & Benbow, 1990). Research has shown that many gifted children are less egocentric, more
empathic and more sensitive to other people's feelings and needs (Shore & Kanevsky, 1993).
From the theoretical data and contradictory research results reviewed in the dissertation, a
conclusion can be drawn that there is no enough evidence on personality traits in intellectually gifted
children. Therefore the following research question has been set:
1" research question; What are, if any, the differences between personality traits in intellectually
gifted adolescents of different age groups (IQ ≥130 points in W1SC-R), and adolescents with IQ
scores within the norm (100±15)?
Among aggressive adolescents, there are often intellectually and artistically gifted children.
Some intellectually and socially well-developed children use aggressiveness as means of raising
their status, confirmation of their independence, adulthood, and self-dependence. For others,
aggressiveness is normal behaviour in communicating with peers. In any sphere they aim at leading
positions, subjugating and suppressing others. In conflict situations, they ignore peers' worries and
bitlerness, being oriented just towards personal desires. Gifted children from this group are well
aware of and recognise verbally formulated behaviour norms and rules, but keep violating them. At
the same lime they seem not to pay attention to personal aggressiveness; for them, their own way of
acting is usual, normal and only possible means for achieving their goals. Some gifted adolescents
often apply aggression to find emotional respond in others (peers, parents, and teachers) (Смирнова &
Хузеева, 2002). However, there are situations when gifted adolescents use aggressiveness for
demonstrating protest, or as a defence tool (Bepakca & Булычева, 2003). Such children often
experience exclusion from their classmates, and are qualified as "underachievers" (Clasen &
Clasen, 1995; Seile, 2002). Gifted adolescents' aggressiveness could also result from lack of
communication skills due to dissynchrony of psychic development (Alsop, 2003; Terrasier, 1985;
Norby, 1997). High intellectual development quite often is associated with great problems in
establishing contacts and maintaining communication. One of the reasons of gifted adolescents'
maladaptive behaviour in their interactions with the environment may also be dissynchrony.
Aggression in gifted children is often related to difficulties in learning social norms and
restrictions (Bepakca & Булычева, 2003). Gifted children, especially adolescents, are very
sensitive to any family or school restrictions (Ландау, 2002).
Reducing destructive aggression and using it as a driving force for self-realisation is still a
challenge for gifted children's upbringers and teachers. In this line the dissertation research has set
the following research question:
2nd research question: What are, if any, the differences between aggression in intellectually gifted
adolescents of different age groups (IQ ≥ 130 points in WISC-R), and adolescents with IQ scores
within the norm (100± 15)?
N. Leites (Лейтес, 2000) and J. Babayeva (Бабаева, 2003) in their studies have discovered
that many intellectually gifted children are too self-critical. Such inadequate self-appraisal often
results in unrealised potentials and even poor academic performance. Besides, gifted children are
very vulnerable and sensitive to anything related to their "I", or endangering their self-esteem; they
tend to set themselves unachievable goals and take their failures hard.
Gifted adolescents' suspiciousness, high sensitivity and vulnerability cause their stable
personal anxiety (Alan & Gail, 2005; Baska, 1989; Clark, 1997; Janos & Robinson, 1985; Lovecky,
1992; Mendaglio, 1995; Piechowski, 1997; Webb, 2000). Anxiety driven gifted child can become
socially maladaptive, and they immerse in their inner world. They become "chameleons" guided by
the principle "I'll be like others" (Buescher, 1991; Stormont, et al, 2001). They can also become
aggressive as aggression reduces anxiety.
Furthermore, gifted adolescents' high anxiety can be caused by failures in most significant
spheres of activities and communication. In such cases, anxiety often leads to self-esteem conflict
due to contradictions between ambitious claims and lack of self-confidence. This type of conflict
may force a gifted child to strive for success in every possible sphere, though preventing him/her
from adequate assessment of achievements, which may be the reason for the child's permanent
discontent, lability and tension (Janos & Robinson, 1985; Silverman, 1993).
Gifted children are characterised by high reactivity with a tendency to stormy affects. They
may demonstrate a hysterical type; in difficult situations they may have a pronounced infantile
reaction, for example, they may burst into tears because of a critical comment and any failure may
make them feel ruined. Although in some cases their emotions may be not disclosed, they are shy
communicators, poor sleepers and even might suffer from some psychosomatic disorders (Baska,
1989; Богоявленская & Щадриков, 2003; Ушаков, 2000).
The nature of gifted child's anxiety can be revealed in the analysis of their relationships with
peers and adults. Dissynchrony may lead to poorly developed and ineffective behavioural skills
then the child experiences communication problems manifested in often conflicts and increased
anxiety (Богоявленская & Щадриков, 2003). This is why the dissertation has set the following
research question:
3rd research question: What are, if any, the differences between anxiety traits in intellectually
gifted adolescents of different age groups (IQ ≥ 130 points in WISC-R), and adolescents with IQ
scores within the norm (100± 15)?
Method
Measures:
Both the sample of 11-12 year-old adolescents and the sample of 13-15 year-old adolescents filled
in the following:
1. The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Revised (WISC-R) (D.Wechsler, 1976) with
the aim to determine their intellect quotient (IQ) and form two study groups: intellectually
gifted adolescents (IQ > 130) and adolescents with intellect within the norm (100±15);
2. a) Children's Personality Questionnaire (R.B. Cattell, R.B.Porter, 1960; K. Agadžanjana, T.
Beļkova, L. Kozlova, & G. Lāce adapted and standardised, 2003) - further BPA, to determine
personality traits in 11-12 year-old Latvian adolescents;
b) R. Cattell's Children's Personality Questionnaire, adapted and modified (Э.M.
Александровская, H.H. Гильяшева, 1993) to determine personality traits in 11-12 year-old
Russian adolescents;
c) High School Personality Questionnaire (R.B.Cattell, M.D.L. Cattel and E.F. Johns, 1953;
K. Agadžanjana, T. Beļkova, L. Kozlova, & G. Lāce adapted and standardised, 2003) -further
VPA, to determine personality traits in 13-15 year-old Latvian adolescents;
d)R. Cattell's High School Personality Questionnaire (adapted by B.И. Чирков, 1998) - to
determine personality traits in 13-15 year-old Russian adolescents4;
3. Personality Anxiety Scale (Шкала личностной тревожности, А.М.Прихожан 1983) to
determine personality anxiety;
4. Buss-Durkee Inventory (Buss & Durkee, 1957) with the aim to assess aggression
manifestation, aggression and hostility indices.
Research sample and procedure
Three hundred and forty six 11-15 year-old adolescents from 16 comprehensive schools
participated in the research. With the help of WISC-R final research sample was completed, made
of 292 schoolchildren aged 11-15.
The final research sample included 113 intellectually gifted adolescents (IQ>130 points in
WISC-R), and 179 adolescents, whose IQ is within the norm (100±15). Forming the research
sample, specifics of intellectually gifted children was taken into account - they made up 3-5% of the
population. For the research, 137 girls (47 %) and 155 boys (53%) were selected. That made up 152
(52%) 11-12 year-old respondents, and 140 (48%) 13-15 year-old respondents.
The sample included 194 adolescents with Russian mother tongue and 98 - with Latvian. The
Russian speakers included 103 boys (53%) and 91 girls (47%), of which 11-12 year olds were
presented by 96 respondents, and the 13-15 age group - by 98 respondents. The average age in the
group of intellectually gifted Russian children is 12.3, but in the group with their IQ within the
norm
- 12.8. The average IQ index in the group of intellectually gifted Russian adolescents' group is 135
points (moderate giftedness; IQ=130-144 in WISC-R), and in the control group - 104 points
(IQ=85-115 in WISC-R). The Latvian speakers included 52 boys (53%) and 46 girls (47%), among
them 56 (57%) 11-12 year-old respondents and 42 (43%) - 13-15 year olds. The average age in the
Latvian intellectually gifted teenage group was 12.2 years, and in the group with IQ within the
norm
- 12.6 years. The average IQ index in the group of the intellectually gifted Latvians is 135 points
4
The Latvian and Russian versions of R. Cattell's High School Personality Questionnaire are identical in form and
content, while Children's Personality Questionnaire's Latvian version differs from the Russian one.
(moderate giftedness; IQ=130-144 in WISC-R), and in the control group - 104 points (IQ=85-115
WISC-R). 6 (3 Latvian and 3 Russian speaking) respondents (5%) with high giftedness (IQ=145159) and one Russian-speaking respondent with especially high giftedness (IQ=160-179)
participated in the research.
70% of intellectually gifted respondents (79 adolescents; of which 46.3 % are Latvians and
53.7 % Russians) attended additional classes at The Optional School for Gifted Children (ABFS) 2.5 hours per week. In the teaching process, ABFS use an interdisciplinary programme, "The gifted
child", designed for children with advanced general intellectual development, and with inquisitive
minds. The initial testing of applicants took place on their entering the School and was performed
by the author of the present dissertation within the period from 2001 to 2004. Since the selection
of children is done before actual classes start, thus the School can hardly have influence on the
test results of the children. It should be mentioned that the other 30% of adolescents took
additional classes of in music, fine arts, technical design and sports. The research demographic
data arc presented in Table 1.
The data of The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children were obtained (approximately 2 2.5 hours) from 346 respondents aged 11-15 with their parents' consent during the period from
2001 to 2004. The data of Children's Personality Questionnaire, High School Personality
Questionnaire, Personality Anxiety Scale and Buss-Durkey Inventory were obtained both
individually and frontally in small groups. The information about the results of the psychological
research was offered to all schoolchildren and their parents.
Table 1. Demographic Data on the Gifted Adolescents and Adolescents with Intellect within the
Norm Included in the Research Sample
Results
The demographic criteria for dividing the research sample into groups were the following:
age (analysis of differences in age groups is a relevant component of the research), gender and
ethnicity (as respondents were asked to fill in the test and method forms in their mother tongues, for
scientific correctness reasons the obtained results should not be generalised).
The differences in personality traits between intellectually gifted adolescents of different age
groups(IQ&130 points in WISC-R),and adolescents with IQ scores within the norm(1001± 15).
After analysing the differences in personality traits between intellectually gifted adolescents of
different age groups and their peers with IQ within the norm, the following was stated 5;
5
The Latvian and Russian versions of R. Cattell's High School Personality Questionnaire arc identical in form and
content, while Children's Personality Questionnaire's Latvian version differs from the Russian one.
1. In the sample of 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents, factors A (warmth) (M
gift=6.26; M norm=5.45; t=2.05; p<0.05), B (intelligence) (M gift=7.76; M norm=4.45; U408.0; p<0.00t), C (emotional stability) (M gift=6.37; M norm=4.86; t=3.51; p<0.001) and E
(dominance) (M gift =5.55; M norm=4.64; t=2.11; p<0.05) are statistically significantly
higher than those in the sample of adolescents with intellect within the norm of the same age
group. At the same time, factor Q3 (self-discipline) (M gift=4.79; M norm=5.66; U=829.0;
p<0.05) indices are statistically significantly lower in the sample of 11-12 year-old
intellectually gifted Russian adolescents in comparison with their peers with intellect within the
norm (see Figure 1).
2. Statistically significantly higher results in B factor (intelligence) (M gift=4.32; M
norm=3.23; t = 2.83; p<0.05) have been observed in intellectually gifted Russian adolescents
of 13-15 years old, in comparison with their peers with intellect within the norm (see Figure 2).
3. Lower results within statistic significance in J factor (withdrawal) (M gift=4.22; M norm=5.55;
t=-2.06; p<0.05) have been observed in intellectually gifted 11-12 year-old Latvian
adolescents as compared to their peers group with intellect within the norm (see Figure 3).
4. The other personality factors showed no statistically significant differences between the
samples of 11-12 and 13-15 year-old Russian as well as Latvian adolescents (see Figure 4).
After analysing the gender differences in personality traits of intellectually gifted adolescents of
different age groups and their peers with IQ within the norm, the following was stated:
1. In the sample of 11-12 year-old Russian boys with IQ within the norm, factors Q3 (selfdiscipline) (M male=6.23; M fem=5.04; t=2.12; p<0.05) are statistically higher than those in
the sample of their female peers.
2. In the samples of 11-12 year-old Latvian intellectually gifted boys as well as those with IQ
within the norm, factors B (intelligence) (Gifted: M male=7.00; M fem=4.25; t=5.34;
p<0.001; Norm: M male=6.43; M fem=4.27; t=3.55; p<0.001) are statistically higher than in
the samples of their female peers.
3. In the sample of 13-15 year-old Russian male adolescents within intellect norm, factors I
(sensitivity) (M male=5.90; M fem=5.l4; t=2.06; p<0.05) are statistically higher than in the
sample of their female peers.
4. In the sample of 13-15 year-old Russian female intellectually gifted adolescents, factors L
(dominance) (M fem=5.77; M male-=.67; t=-2.70; p<0.0l) arc statistically higher than those in
their male peer sample.
5. The intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents aged 13-15 demonstrated gender difference in Ci
factors (conformity); female G indices (M fem=5.67; M male=3.17; t=-3.19; p<0.0l) are
significantly statistically higher than the male ones.
6. The Latvian male adolescents aged 13-15 withi n intellect norm have demonstrated factors C
(emotional stability) (M male=7.75; M fem=5.07; t=3.37; p<0.01) and I (sensitivity) (M
male=5.00; M fem=2.79; t=2.79; p<0.01) significantly statistically higher than those of their
female peers.
7. The Latvian female adolescents aged 13-15 within intellect norm have factors E (dominance)
(M fem=7.57; M male=6.12; t=-2.10; p<0.05) and F (cheerfulness) (M fem=6.50; M
male=4.75; t=-2.76; p<0.0l) significantly statistically higher than those of their male peers.
8. The other personality factors have showed no statistically significant gender differences
between the samples of both Latvian and Russian intellectually gifted as well as those within
intellect norm adolescents of different age groups.
Aggression differences between intellectually gifted adolescents of different age groups and
adolescents whose intellect is within the norm
After analysing aggression differences between intellectually gifted adolescents of different age
groups and their peers with 1Q within the norm, the following was stated:
I. In the sample of 11-12 year-old Russian gifted respondents, the values in the negativism scale
(M gift=2.33; M norm=2.94; t=-2.22; p<0.05) are statistically significantly higher than in the
sample of their peers within the intellectual norm.
2. In the sample of 13-15 year-old Latvian adolescents within the intellectual norm, indices of
physical aggression (M gift=5.20; M norm= 7.45; t=-2.72; p<0.01), irritation scale (M gift=5.07;
M norm=6.77; t=-2.38; p<0.05), suspicion scale (M gift=4.47; M norm=5.64; t=-2.24; p<0.05)
and aggression index (M gift=18.47; M norm=22.59; t=-2.27; p<0.05) values are statistically
significantly higher than in the sample of their intellectually gifted peers.
3. The other aggression scales have showed differences of statistic significance between
intellectually gifted adolescents of different age groups neither in the Latvian nor in the Russian
samples.
After analysing aggression differences between 11-12 and 13-15 year-old gifted adolescent
subgroups as well as their peers within the intellect norm, the following was stated:
1. The Russian sample of 11 12-year-old adolescents within the intellect norm have showed
statistically significantly higher values in suspicion scale (M11-12=5.82; M13-15 =5.15; t=2.04;
p<0.05) and in the hostility index (Mi 11-12=10.4 1; M13-15=9.31; t=2.16; p<0.05) than 13-15-yearold Russians within the intellect norm.
2. In the Russian sample of 1 1-12-year-olds both intellectually gifted (Mi 11-12=6.58; M13-15=5.32;
U=398.0; p<0.0l) and within-intellect-norm (M11-12=6.76; M13-15=5.78; U=1,233.0; p<0.05)
respondents had statistically significantly higher values in the guilt scale than the 13-15 year-old
respondents disregarding their intellectual parametres.
3. 11- 12 year-old gifted Latvians have higher values in the suspicion scale (M11-12=6.29; M13-15
=4.47; t=3.95; p<0.00l) than 13-15-year-old gifted Latvians.
4. The sample of 13-15 year-old Russian respondents within the intellect norm have showed
statistically significantly higher values in the physical aggression scale (Mi 11-12=6.35; M13-15
=7.25; t=-2.34; p<0.05) than their peers within the intellect norm.
5 The Russian sample of 13-15 year-old gifted respondents have showed statistically significantly
higher values in the verbal aggression scale (M11-12=7.33; M13-15=8.45; t=-2.04; p<0.05) than
11-12-year-olds.
6. In the other aggression scales, there was stated no statistically significant differences among
intellectually gifted adolescents of different age groups and their peers within the intellectual
norm either in the Latvian or Russian samples, or in the subgroups.
After analysing aggression gender differences of intellectually gifted adolescents of different age
groups and their peers with IQ within the norm, the following was stated:
1. The Russian sample of 11-12 year-old boys within the intellect norm have statistically
significantly higher physical aggression indices (M male=6.92; M fem=5.76; t=2.06; p<0.05)
than their female peers.
2. The Latvian sample of 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted girls have statistically significantly
higher values in the guilt scale (M male=4.87; M fem=6.62; t=-2.34; p<0.05) than their male
peers.
3. The Russian sample of 13-15 year-old females within the intellect norm have shown statistically
significantly higher values in the indirect aggression scale (M male=4.08; M fem=5.24; t=-2.62;
p<0.01)and the guilt scale (M male=5.28; M fem=6.41; t=-2.24; p<0.05) than their male peers.
4. The Russian sample of 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted females have shown higher values
within statistic significance in the indirect aggression scale (M male=3.94; M fem=5.38; t=-2.13;
p<0.05) and in the verbal aggression scale (t=-2.21; p<0.05) than their male peers.
5. The Latvian sample of 13-15 year-old females within the intellect norm have shown higher
values within statistic significance in the irritation scale (M male=5.50; M fem=7.50; t=-2.26;
p<0.05) and in the assault scale (M male-3.50; M fem=5.57; t=-3.04; p<0.0l) and the hostility
scale (M male=8.88; M fem=11.36; t=-2.31; p<0.05) than their male peers.
6. The Latvian sample of 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted males have shown statistically
significantly higher values in physical aggression (M male=7.00; M fem=4.00; t=2.27; p<0.05)
than their female peers.
7. The other aggression scales have demonstrated no gender differences of statistic value in
intellectually gifted adolescents of different age groups and their peers within the intellect norm
either in the Latvian or in the Russian samples.
Differences in anxiety between intellectually gifted adolescents of different age groups and
adolescents whose intellect is within the norm
After analysing differences in anxiety between intellectually gifted adolescents of different age
groups and their peers within the intellect norm, the following was stated:
1. The 11-12 year-old Russian sample within the intellectual norm have shown statistically
significantly higher values in the school anxiety scale (M gift=11.20; M norm=15.94; t=-3.29;
p<0.001), self-esteem anxiety scale (M gift=11.68; M norm=15.16; t=-2.53; p<0.01), magic
anxiety scale (M gift=9.10; M norm=14.71; t=-3.11; p<0.01) and general anxiety scale (M
gift=44.35; M norm=60.78; t=-3.03; p<0.01) compared to intellectually gifted Russian peers.
2. Higher values in the magic anxiety scale are characteristic of both 11-12 and 13-15 year-old
Russian adolescents within the intellectual norm in comparison with the gifted adolescents.
3. The other anxiety scales have detected no differences of statistic significance between
intellectually gifted adolescents of different age groups and their peers within the intellect norm
either in the Latvian or in the Russian samples.
After analysing the differences in anxiety values between the 11-12 year-old and 13-15 year-old
intellectually gifted and within-the norm adolescent subgroups, the following was stated:
1. The sample of intellectually gifted 11-12 year-old Russian adolescents have shown higher
results in the self-esteem anxiety scale (M11-12=11.68; M13-15=9.26; t=2.29; p<0.05), magic
anxiety scale (M11-12=9.10; M13-15=4.32; U=345.5; p<0.01) and general personality anxiety scale
(M11-12=44.35; M13-15=33.65; t=2.88; p<0.01) compared to 13-15 year-old gifted Russian
adolescents.
2. It is important to mention that 11-12 year-old adolescents within the intellectual norm have
showed higher results in all anxiety questionnaire scales than 13-15 year-old adolescents within
the intellectual norm have.
3. In other anxiety scales there were no statistically significant differences among intellectually
gifted adolescents of different age and their peers within the intellectual norm either in Latvian
or Russian samples, or in the subgroups.
After analysing the gender differences in anxiety values of intellectually gifted and within-the-norm
adolescent subgroups, the following was stated:
1. The Russian sample of 11-12 year-old girls within the intellect norm have shown higher values
of statistic significance in the school anxiety scale (M male=12.81; M fem=19.20; t=-3.08;
p<0.01), interpersonal anxiety scale (M male=12.65; M fem=17.52; t=-2.35; p<0.05), magic
anxiety scale (M male=l 1.88; M fem=17.64; t=-2.19; p<0.05) and general anxiety scale (M
male=51.08; M fem=70.88; t=-2.52; p<0.01) than their male peers.
2. The Latvian sample of 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted boys have shown higher values of
statistic significance in the self-esteem anxiety indices (M male=11.53; M fem=7.77; t=2.34;
p<0.05) than their female peers.
3. The Latvian sample of 11-12 year-old girls within the intellect norm have showed higher values
in the self-esteem anxiety scale (M male=8.21; M fem=12.50; t=-2.35; p<0.05), interpersonal
anxiety scale (M male=9.50; M fem=15.93; t=-2.80; p<0.01) and general personality anxiety scale
(M male=33.79; M fem=50.50; t=-2.45; p<0.05) than their male peers. 4. The other anxiety scale
has detected no gender differences of statistic significance in intellectually gifted adolescents of
different age groups and their peers within the intellect norm either in the Latvian or the Russian
samples.
Discussion
The goal of the present research was to study personality traits of 11—15 year-old
intellectually gifted adolescents.
The present research findings have demonstrated that both 11-12- and 13-15-year-old
intellectually gifted Russians feature more developed verbal intellect, analysis and synthesis skills
as well as abilities to learn faster as compared to their peers within the intellect norm. The
comparative analysis of intellectually gifted adolescents and their peers within the intellect norm
has proved that gifted children are more resourceful, attentive and smart; they have high intellects
and tend to aply abstract thinking. They are better at performing mathematical and logical tasks and
have extended knowledge background. These findings closely correlate with the high intellect
values according to the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children and confirm the WISC-R data.
The obtained results demonstrate that higher intellect factors are observed both in gifted Russian
boys aged 11-12 and girls of younger and older teenage groups as compared to their peers. This is
in line with other research conclusions (Porter, 1964, cited by Cattell, Cattell, & Johns, 1984;
Werner & Bachtold, 1969, cited by Cattell, Cattell, & Johns, 1984) that intellectually gifted male
and female adolescents have typically higher intellect factors (B) according to CattelPs Personality
Questionnaire than their peers within the intellect norm. However, the findings have not detected
higher intellect factors with 13-15 year-old Russian male adolescents as compared to their peers
within the intellect norm. These can testify for their low motivation, unwillingness "to think about
complicated things" or their challenging behaviour while filling in the test forms. Since the
research has applied a uniform selection method and IQ criteria to all respondents, the earlier
obtained data on participants' IQ can be presumed as reliable.
The dissertation research has showed that 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted Russian
adolescents are more open, more sociable, more socially sensitive and understanding than their
peers within the intellectual norm. They better work in a team, are socially more active, warmer
and more reliable. This result of the research to a great extent complies with the conclusions
already reviewed in theories (Shore & Kanevsky, 1993), that many gifted children are less
egocentric, more empathic and more sensitive to other people's feelings and needs. They start to
demonstrate leadership abilities, readiness to shoulder responsibility earlier than others (Clark,
1997).
11-12 year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents differ from their peers with their
emotional maturity, ego strength, emotional balance, self-dependence, self-control in difficult
situations and stable interests. These children are more self-confident and more confident of their
abilities than their peers with intellect within the norm. Intellectually gifted adolescents of such
age tend to rely on facts and avoid complicated situations. It should be emphasised that these
children are less subject to stress and neurotic reactions, psychosomatic disorders and irrational
fears. These findings testify that the above personality traits are more pronounced with
intellectually gifted Russian males of the younger subgroup. This conclusion conforms to some
research findings (Coleman & Fults, 1985; Janos & Robinson, 1985; Karnes & Wherry, 1981,
1983) claiming that children with excellent abilities are emotionally stable, with strong character
and they are not as anxious as their less lalented peers. Other psychology studies (Dauber &
Benbow, 1990) characterise moderately gifted children as much more mature, more extraverted and
socially active.
Studying anxiety in 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents and their peers
within the intellectual norm, it has been detected that intellectually gifted Russian adolescents in
most cases are less anxious in comparison with their peers within the intellectual norm. It should be
noted that differences in anxiety are more pronounced in the Russian female sample with intellect
within the norm as compared to their male peers as well as intellectually gifted females. These
findings conform to other research (Davis & Connell, 1985; Grossberg & Cornell, 1988; Milgram
& Milgram, 1976/2001; Nail & Evans, 1997; Olszewski-Kubilius & Kulieke, 1989, Zeidner &
Schleyer, 1999) conclusions that intellectually gifted adolescents have lower anxiety values thai
their peers within the intellect norm. It is interesting that adolescents within the intellectual norn
feel more anxiety related to situations at school than their intellectually gifted peers do. This fact
cai bo explained by intellectually gifted adolescents' higher competence during the learning process
Wide scope of knowledge, extended information and high learning abilities make intellectual!;
gifted adolescents feel comfortable and confident in situations related to school and sludyini
process.
It was also found out that magic and mystical fears are characteristic for both 11 — 12- and 1315-year-old Russian adolescent subgroups within the intellectual norm. It should be emphasised
that higher magic anxiety has been observed in 11-l2-year-old girls within the intellect norm in
compared to their male peers. It is also interesting that 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Russia)
males have demonstrated lower magic anxiety than their peers within the intellect norm. We can
assume that higher magic anxiety level is related to their lower level of information, education
settings and less realistic life perception.
Having studied anxiety in 11-12 year-old adolescents, wc can state (bat Russian adolescent:
within the intellectual norm, unlike their intellectually gifted peers, typically feature self-esteem
anxiety. It has also been stated that 1 1-12 year-old Russian adolescents demonstrate higher self
esteem anxiety values compared to 13-15 years old respondents irrespective of intellect
development level. This fact can be explained by age specifics, puberty period experiences and self
esteem stabilisation. In case of lower self-esteem, it is typical for the adolescent to have higher
anxiety, fear of negative assessment and higher sensitivity. This period is characterised by special
interest in one's body, appearance and developing new contacts with peers.
It should be noted that Russian adolescents within the intellect norm have demonstrated age
subgroup differences with statistic significance in anxiety: 11-12 year-old respondents have higheir
values in all anxiety scales than their 13-15 year-old peers. High general personality anxiety has
been detected in intellectually gifted Russian adolescents. It can be assumed that the younger
subgroup is characterised by higher anxiety irrespective of their intellect development.
The findings related to self-control in the sample of 11-12 years old intellectually gifted
Russian adolescents allow us to assume that these children are not always successful in integrating
into the society and accepting norms and demands of the milieu as compared to their peers with
intellect within the norm. It would be wrong to conclude that gifted children at this age cannot learn
or do not understand social norms and expectations of the society, but they more often do not
recognise and do not follow accepted social norms, because they consider them illogical and
inconvenient. They often are reluctant to follow social rules, which can provoke problems and
conflicts with others - parents, teachers and peers. Also other research showed that gifted
adolescents often violate established social rules and norms (Clark, 1997; Morelock, 1996).
Furthermore, the analysis of the data on 11-12 year-old Russian adolescents within the intellect
norm has shown that reluctance in observing social rules and accept milieu norms and demands is
more typical of girls rather than boys.
In comparison with the peers within the intellectual norm, 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted
Russian adolescents are more excitable, more self-confident, and more strong-willed, with drive for
independence. The obtained results allow us to assume that these contradictory tendencies in 11 12 year-old intellectually gifted adolescents' behaviour (on the one hand, they wish to be accepted
by the group, tend to co-operate, conform, be socially active, and on the other hand, they tend to be
self-confident, obstinate, with low self-control and neither accepting nor following social
norms) are connected with searching for one's place in the society and self-acknowledgement. Selfacknowledgement both in the group of peers and in the whole society is a significant novelty in
adolescents' psychic development. Adolescents actively look for their Self and their social role,
their sense of significance increases. This is characteristic of all adolescents, but the obtained results
allow us to assume that 11 — 12 year-old intellectually gifted adolescents manifest it in a more
pronounced way. We can assume this is the affect of advanced intellectual development and
particular social demands set on male youngsters and men by the society. These findings are in line
with some other research conclusions (Werner & Bachlold, 1969, cited by Cattell, Cattell, & Johns,
1984) that intellectually gifted male adolescents feature higher dominance factors in Cattell's
Personality Questionnaire than their peers within the intellect norm. It should be also noted that this
personality trail is more pronounced in intellectually gifted Russian girls rather than their male
peers. The obtained data prove that both 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted and within-the-norm
Russian female samples, unlike their male peers, feature more realistic approach to problem
solving, expressed practicality and independence. This complies with some other research findings
(Bourke, 2002) that 13-16 year-old girls have higher dominance scale values than their male peers.
Some researchers (Cattell, 1989; (Geary, 1998) explain such differences by declared social selfacknowledgement and higher indirect aggression typical of the older teenage girls.
Comparative analysis of 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents and
adolescents within the intellectual norm also detected their differences in the negativism scale. It
proves that 11-12 year-old adolescents within the intellectual norm show oppositional behaviour
more often, as well as protest to the adults' demands, rules and laws than their intellectually gifted
peers. This can be explained by adolescents' within the intellect norm higher demands in selfacknowledgement and their destructive behaviour towards peers and adults, while gifted
adolescents tend to be co-operative and get their self-acknowledgements with peer groups in
socially acceptable ways.
Furthermore, 11-12 year-old Russian adolescents with intellect within the norm are
characterised by higher suspicion, tendency not to trust and caution in communication with other
people than 13-15 years old adolescents with intellect within the norm. It could be related to
increased emotionality and sensitivity towards criticism in the younger teenage, as well as to social
settings. Both parents and school keep teaching children safety rules - for example, not to talk to
strangers, not to go anywhere with and not to lake anything from adult strangers, to be cautious in
public transport, in the street etc. Schools are regularly visited by police officers informing
adolescents about safety and crime rates in cities. Suspicion and cautiousness in communication are
also promoted on TV and in newspapers. The younger adolescents are to a great extent
characterised by over-reacting, too sensitive perception, unstable emotional state, higher anxiety
level and higher development of social feelings than the older adolescents. It all develops suspicion
and cautiousness in younger adolescents.
The analysis of in-group differences has proved that intellectually gifted 13-15 year-old
Russian adolescents feature higher verbal aggression and less marked guilt than the younger
intellectually gifted adolescents. It is interesting that verbal aggression manifestations are more
pronounced in 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted Russian girls rather than their male peers. This
can be explained by even more intensive search for self-identity and teenage egocentrism. This
situation can be understood better, analysing other psychologists' research in the field. Recent
research (Семенюк, 1998; Драгунова, 1982) in aggressive behaviour manifestations in different
teenage groups lias shown that adolescents demonstrate a certain dynamics of verbal aggression
manifestations - as they grow up, their level of verbal aggression increases, reaching its peak at the
age of 14-15 both with boys and girls. Thus, we can presume that in case of intellectually gifted
adolescents, the principles of dynamics of verbal aggression behaviour are similar to those of their
peers within the intellectual norm.Such increased criticism, discontent, hypersensitiveness,
vulnerability and perfectionism can cause verbal aggression in intellectually gifted adolescents
(Porter, 1999; Silvermen, 1993; Webb, 1993).
It is interesting that 13-15 year-old Russian girls irrespective of their intellectual development
feature higher indirect aggression and 13-15 year-old Russian girls within the intellect norm feature
more pronounced guilt than their male peers. Some studies (Драгунова, 1982; Семенюк, 1998) in
different teenage groups have detected positive dynamics of indirect aggression manifestations in
female adolescents. It should be noted that girls' indirect aggression reaches its peak at the age of 14
- 15. This finding makes it possible to presume that intellectually gifted girls and girls within the
intellect norm have similar indirect aggression dynamics.
The research results have demonstrated that both samples of 11-12 year-old intellectually
gifted Latvian boys and those within the intellect norm have higher verbal intellect, better analysis
and synthesis abilities than their female peers. It is interesting that no gender differences in
intellect factors in 13-15 year-old Latvian samples. These data make us assume the difference is
related to the age and personality development specifics. Some researchers (Kerr, 1994; Stormont,
et al, 2001; Бурменская, et al, 1991) point out that during teenage, the period of increasing interest
in the opposite sex, girls typically make no intellectual progress and sometimes even obviously
regress. The younger teenage females, compared to their male peers, are more social-priorityoriented (establishing relations with peers, and the opposite sex, and searching for one's position in
the society). This conforms to other research conclusions (Hollinger & Fleming, 1992; Попова,
1995) that intellectually gifted teenage female experience a switch from achievement needs to the
needs for love and group belonging, while their male peers are more focused on intellectual
activities.
The sample of 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents preferred group work
and enjoyed attention, besides they were more willing to recognise and observe the rules and
conventions than their peers within the intellect norm. These findings have proved that 11-12 yearold intellectually gifted Latvian girls have more pronounced personality traits than their within-theintellect-norm peers; the same is true comparing 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted Latvian males
to their peers. Thus, an assumption can be drawn that these findings may be explained by 11-12year-old girls' more obvious conformism and adjustment tendencies, their striving for peer group
acceptance. The same situation is observed only with the older intellectually gifted male
adolescents. These results conform to other research findings (Buescher, 1991; Callahan &
Cunningham, 1994; Hollinger & Fleming, 1988; Lee, 2002a; Smutny, 1998; Ландау, 2002;
Попова, 1995; Попова & Орешкина, 1995) that gifted girls have stronger conformism and
adjustment tendencies as girls start to adjust themselves to gender role earlier than boys. Modern
studies (Basow & Rubin, 1999) mention this tendency to be most explicit in gifted girls aged 11.
The research results have proved that 11-12 year-old intellectually gifted Latvian girls have a
stronger guilt feeling than their intellectually gifted male peers. Some researchers (Allik, Laidra,
Realo, & Pullmann, 2004; McCrae, Costa, Terracciano, Parker, Mills, De Fruyt, & Mervielde,
2002; Twenge & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2002) emphasise that adolescent girls tend to experience
depressions, guilt feeling and neurotism. Gifted girls, unlike their male peers, feature increased
criticism, feeling of discontent, hypersensitiveness, vulnerability and perfectionism (Stormont,
Stebbins, & Holliday, 2001).
Nevertheless, it should be mentioned that 11-12 year-old Latvian girls within the intellect
norm have higher self-esteem, interpersonal and general personality anxiety than their intellectually
gifted peers and male peers. These findings conform to other research results (Davis & Connell,
1985; Milgram & Milgram, 1976/2001; Reynolds & Bradley, 1983) proving that gifted girls have
lower anxiety than girls with intellects within the norm.
The results of the research have showed that 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted Latvian
adolescents mostly have lower physical aggression; they also are less prone to irritation
manifestations, as well as impulsive and rude behaviour than their peers within the intellect norm.
This sample group has lower values in suspicion than their peers within the intellect norm and the
intellectually gifted younger samples. It could mean that intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents
are more successful in controlling their emotions and behaviour, they feature better self-regulation
and more socially acceptable conflict management strategies. In our opinion this is a case we can
talk about better social adaptation. It should be mentioned that the lowest values in physical
aggression, irritation manifestation and suspicion scales have been shown by intellectually gifted
Latvian girls aged 13-15, while their female peers within the intellect norm have demonstrated the
highest ones. These findings conform to Cattell's Personality Questionnaire data stating that 13-15
year-old intellectually gifted Latvian girls, unlike their female peers within the intellect norm, are
emotionally well-balanced and preserve self-control in tough situations. Besides, the obtained data
prove that gifted Latvian girls have lower physical aggression than gifted Latvian males aged 1315. Some researchers (Попова, 1995) mention that gifted girls feature higher social adaptation
abilities than gifted boys and their peers within the intellect norm (both in male and female
samples).
The research findings have proved that 13-15 year-old Latvian males within the intellect norm
are more self-confident, emotionally stable, composed and ready to act than their intellectually
gifted peers. We can also assume that these respondents are more purposeful, honest and
responsible and more care for moral norms and standards than their intellectually gifted male peers.
This can be explained by the fact that gifted adolescents, males in particular, are more concerned
with their own activities. Many gifted adolescents avoid any activities beyond their interests and
preferences, and even ignore the surroundings. This may result in a situation when gifted
adolescents, targeted at favorite activity, are not able to perform willpower, purposefulness and
responsibility demanding tasks, which are beyond their scope of interests (Юркевич, 2003).
The sample of 13-15 year-old Latvian girls, as opposed to their peers within the intellect norm,
feature emotional maturity, strong Ego, emotional balance, self-dependence and stable interests,
and preserve self-control in tough situations. Besides, highly intelligent girls are more sensitive,
gentle, and have more vivid imagination than their female peers within the intellect norm. These
findings conform to some theoretical statements on emotional stability of gifted adolescents (Janos
& Robinson, 1985), their high sensitiveness (Clark, 1997; Webb, 2000; Лейтес, 2001) and
explicitly vivid imagination (Lovecky, 1993; Ward, Saunders, & Dodds, 1999; Дьяченко, 1997).
Furthermore, 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted Latvian girls are more purposeful,
responsible and conscientious than their male peers. They have stronger responsibility sense and
higher personal standards than their male peers. These findings conform to other research results
(Попова, 1995), testifying that gifted girls more often tend to observe moral norms, and care for
moral standards than their male peers. Some psychologists (Silverman, 1993; VanTassel-Baska,
Olszewski-Kubilius, & Kulieke, 1994) point out that gifted girls have a more explicit perfectionism
tendency than boys do.
The research findings have proved that 13-15 year-old Latvian girls within the intellect norm
have lower emotional stability, and are more sensitive and vulnerable than their male peers. They
tend to be independent, obstinate and disobedient. Such girls feature realistic approach to problem
solution, active life position and enthusiasm. These findings conform to other research comparative
analyses (Bourke, 2002) of male and female adolescents' emotional stability and sensitiveness.
Some researchers (Cattell, 1989; Geary, 1998) explain the differences by girls' declared selfacknowledgement and the older teenage more explicit indirect aggression.
The comparative analysis of anxiety factors in the samples of intellectually gifted Latvian
adolescents and those within the intellect norm has detected no differences between the age
subgroups. Unfortunately, this psychological phenomenon can hardly find any explanations within
the present research and might as well be caused by differences in the number of people involved in
the subgroups.
Having analysed theoretical concepts, theories and results of research made by other
psychologists, in the framework of the present dissertation research we expected to state significant
differences in personality traits between intellectually gifted adolescents and adolescents within the
intellectual norm. However, the results of this research have not detected any statistically
significant differences between the sample groups, or any personality traits in intellectually gifted
adolescents that could hinder gifted children's self-realisation or create serious personality
problems.
The obtained results partly comply with some theoretical conclusions on aggressiveness and
anxiety in gifted adolescents. According to Landau (2002), aggression in gifted children is often
related to learning social norms and restrictions. Some researchers (Юркевич, 2003) emphasise that
among gifted adolescents, there is a distinguished group of disharmonious development type with
high intellect and high aggression level. The results of our research do not support this statement;
on the contrary, they have proved the opposite. We have stated that intellectually gifted adolescents
in many aggression manifestations mostly do not differ from their peers with intellect within the
norm, but 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents are able to control their emotions
and behaviour in a more efficient way, they are characterised by better self-regulation and more
socially acceptable conflict-management strategies. In this particular case we can judge about better
social adaptation and better adaptation abilities in 13-15 year-old intellectually gifted Latvian
adolescents.
Furthermore, the research findings have detected no evidence to support certain theoretical
statements (Alan & Gail, 2005; Janos & Robinson, 1985; Silverman, 1993; Webb, 2000) on
increased anxiety, irregular development, suspicion, hypersensitiveness, vulnerability and
perfectionism of gifted adolescents, which distinguish them from their within-the-intellect-norm
peers. In our opinion, gifted adolescents' development dissynchrony as well as other emotional and
personality factors, for example, self-appraisal, perfectionism, etc., have futher investigation
prospects in Latvia. However, the research findings are similar to some research (Davis & Connell,
1985; Grossberg & Cornell, 1988; Milgram & Milgram, 1976/2001; Nail & Evans, 1997;
Olszewski-Kubilius & Kulieke, 1989, Zeidner & Schleyer, 1999) proving that intellectually gifted
adolescents have lower anxiety values than their peers with intellect within the norm. Some
researchers (Payne, 1991; Zeidner & Schleyer, 1999) claim that high intellectual development
facilitates finding more effective problem-management strategies under stress and adapting to new
environment.
The present research has detected no personality traits that would allow us to include
intellectually gifted adolescents in a high risk group. Of course, it should be emphasised that our
sample has involved only few "especially" gifted children (1Q>150), whom many sources often
characterise as "problem children". Likewise, the obtained results have neither proved nor argued
in favour of intellectually gifted people's "special" personality traits that would originate and
develop under the influence of high intellect.
We can as well assume that the number of people involved in every subgroup affected the
obtained results. So, increasing the number of participants, we could achieve different research
results. Consequently, we should avoid drawing any generalised conclusions for the sake of
scientific correctness.
It should be noted that the present research involved adolescents with moderate giftedness
(IQ=130-144) who, according to many sources (Janos & Robinson, 1985; Hollingworth, 1942,
cited by Бурменская & Слуцкий, 1991) are characterised as more mature, extraverted' and
socially active. So, Hollingworth claims that IQ of 125-155 points corresponds to "socially optimal
intellect". Moderately gifted children are self-confident, well-balanced and socially adaptable. We
can assume that the level of participants' intellectual giftedness has also affected the research
results. Thus, an increased number of especially gifted participants would have produced different
research results.
Analysing the obtained results, we should take into account that the perception of gifted
people as a social category with special needs is practised in many countries. Unfortunately, Latvia
cannot boast such practice, moreover the society associates gifted people with various myths and
stereotypes. The society tends to relate people's difference in one aspect to the personality as a
whole.
It is also essential for research findings analysis to consider the fact that 70% of intellectually
gifted respondents (79 adolescents including 46.3% Latvians and 53.7% Russians) attend classes
(2.5 hrs per week) at the Optional School for Gifted Children (ABFS). The School teaching process
is based on interdisciplinary program "The Gifted Child" designed for children featuring advanced
intellectual development and knowledge thirst. The other 30% attend additional music, arts,
technical designing and sports classes. We should also remember that ABFS students' testing took
place on their applying for the School and that all respondents are actively realising their abilities
and potentials; so, the view that the Optional School program could have affected testing results has
no grounds, as participants' selection had taken place before their School studies began.
We should also stress the care and motivation of gifted adolescents' parents facilitating their
children's intellectual development and providing support in difficult situations. We can assume
that the investigating of anxiety and aggression differences should consider some other relevant
factors, such as social and material status, family education and relations, as well as general
economic, political and social situation in the country.
The analysis of the family role should consider a crucial aspect of emotional contact between
children and parents, as well as parents' personality traits, such as emotional instability, increased
anxiety, suspicion, domination and conflict proneness, aggression, lack of self-confidence and
increased guilt feeling. The research has detected that parents of anxious children often put
inadequate and contradictory demands on their children, being unable to provide them with enough
individual love and care (3axapoB, 2000). In our opinion this aspect deserves further research.
The findings and conclusions of various researches in gifted adolescent personality traits
reviewed in the theoretical part of the dissertation support the statement that the psychology of
giftedness presents contradictory concepts and research results concerning personality traits of
gifted children, which fact prevents us from formulating uniform conceptions of the problem.
However, in 2004 an international team involving Korea, USA, Finnland and Slovakia
(Shaughnessy, Hee Kang, Greene, Misutova, Suomala, & Siltala, 2004) published their research
results; the research employed similar psychodiagnostic methods. The international research has
detected no crucial differences in personality traits between gifted adolescents and their peers
within the intellect norm. As the international research is still not completed the author of the
present work has applied to the international team offering her co-operation. We believe that the
present research findings may contribute to investigating personality traits in gifted children.
We would like to note that a number of researchers (Allik, et al., 2004; Austin, Deary, &
Gibson, 1997) point out the relation of intellectual development to personality trait differentiation.
They claim that people of high intellect are characterised by a broader spectrum of personality
variations. Thus, we can presume that a gifted child has a more varied personality; however,
personality developments of gifted and within-the norm children are defined by the same
principles.
Main conclusions
The goal set in the beginning of work - to study personality traits of 11-15-year-old
intellectually gifted adolescents - has been reached. Many researchers' conceptions of the
phenomenon of giftedness and its specifics have been analysed, studies in gifted children's
characteristics, peculiarities and personality traits have been reviewed, as well as answers to the
research questions have been found.
Results obtained in the dissertation work allow us to draw the following conclusions:
1. There are differences of statistic value in some personality traits between intellectually gifted
(IQ≥130 points with WISC-R) adolescents of different age groups and their peers within the
intellect norm (IQ=100±15):
a) there are statistically significant differences between 11-12-year-old intellectually gifted
Russian adolescents and Russian adolescents within the intellectual norm in several
personality traits factors - A (warmth), C (emotional stability), E (dominance) and Q3 (selfdiscipline). The research findings allow us to conclude that intellectually gifted Russians
aged 11-12 are more open, sociable, sensitive and understanding than their peers within the
intellect norm. They, unlike their peers, feature emotional maturity, balance, stability and
self-control in difficult situations. 11-12-year-old intellectually gifted Russians have higher
self-confidence, obstinacy and independence tendencies than their peers within the intellect
norm. The obtained results have proved that such children, unlike their peers within the
intellect norm, are not always successful in social adaptation, accepting social norms and
demands set by their environment;
b) there are statistically significant differences in J factor (withdrawal) between 11-12-year-old
intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents and Latvian adolescents within the intellectual norm.
11-12-year-old intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents, as compared to their peers, prefer
group work, enjoy attention, and are more willing to follow rules and norm;
c) no differences in personality traits between 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Russian
adolescents and Russian adolescents within the intellectual norm, as well as between 13-15year-old intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents and Latvian adolescents within the
intellectual norm have been detected.
2. There are statistically significant gender differences in personality trait factors of the
intellectually gifted adolescents' subgroups:
a) 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents have gender differences in certain
personality factors - E (dominance) and I (sensitivity). 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted
Russian females, as compared to their male peers, feature a more realistic approach to problem
solving, explicit practicality and higher independence;
b) 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents have demonstrated gender differences
only in one factor - G (conformity). 13-1 5-year-old intellectually gifted Latvian girls are
more purposeful, responsible and conscientious than their male peers. They feature higher
responsibility and higher personal standards than boys do;
c) no gender differences of statistic significance in personality traits of 11-12-year-old
intellectually gifted Russian adolescents as well as 11-12-year-old intellectually gifted Latvian
adolescents have been detected.
3. There are statistically significant differences in certain aggression scales between intellectually
gifted adolescents of different age groups (IQ≥130 in WISC-R) and adolescents within the
intellectual norm (IQ=100±15):
a) 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents have less physical aggression; they
have lower levels of suspicion and wish to irritate than their peers within the intellectual norm.
b) 11-12-year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents differ from their peers within the
intellectual norm with a lower negativism level;
c) no differences in aggression between 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents
and Russian adolescents within the intellectual norm, as well as between 11-12-year-old
intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents and Latvian adolescents within the intellectual norm
have been detected.
4. There arc differences in aggression between 11-12 and 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted
adolescents:
1) 13-15-year-old intellectually Rifled Latvian adolescents are less suspicious than 11 -12-yearold intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents;
2) 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents are more verbally aggressive and have
a less pronounced guilt feeling than I 1-12-year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents.
5. There arc gender differences of statistic significance in aggression of intellectually gifted
adolescents in different age groups:
a) 11-12-year-old intellectually gifted Latvian girls have a more pronounced guilt feeling than
their intellectually gifted male peers;
b) 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Latvian males have higher physical aggression than their
intellectually gifted female peers;
c) 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted Russian females feature higher indirect and verbal
aggression than their male peers;
d) 11-12-year-old intellectually gifted Russian adolescents have demonstrated no gender
differences of statistic significance in aggression scales.
6. There have been slated differences of statistic significance in anxiety between intellectually
gifted (IQ≥130 points with WISC-R) adolescents of different age groups and their within the
intellect norm (IQ=100±15) peers:
a) there arc differences of statistic value between 11-12-year-old intellectually gifted Russian
adolescents and Russian adolescents within the intellectual norm detected in school anxiety,
self-esteem anxiety, magic anxiety and general anxiety scales. The intellectually gifted
Russian adolescents aged 11-12 can be characterised as less anxious in school situations; they
have lower self-esteem anxiety and magic anxiety than their peers within the intellectual norm;
b) there arc differences of statistic value in anxiety between 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted
Russian adolescents and Russian adolescents within the intellectual norm detected in the
magic anxiety scale - gifted adolescents feature lower magic anxiety than their peers within the
intellect norm;
3) no differences of statistic significance in anxiety between 13-15-year-old intellectually gifted
Latvian adolescents and Latvian adolescents within the intellectual norm, as well as between
11-12-year-old intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents and Latvian adolescents within the
intellectual norm have been detected.
7. There are differences in anxiety between 11-12 and 13-15- year-old intellectually gifted
adolescents:
a) there are differences of statistic value between 11-12- and 13-15- year-old intellectually gifted
Russian adolescents detected in self-esteem anxiety, magic anxiety and general anxiety scales.
The intellectually gifted Russian adolescents aged 11-12 have lower self-esteem anxiety and
magic anxiety than the 13-15-year-old gifted Russians;
b) no differences of statistic value in anxiety have been detected between 11-12- and 13-15-yearold intellectually gifted Latvian adolescents.
8. There are no gender differences of statistic value in anxiety of intellectually gifted adolescents of
different age groups either in the Latvian or Russian samples with the only exception of 11-12year-old intellectually gifted Latvian boys featuring higher self-esteem anxiety than their female
peers.
9.
The present research results enable us to make conclusions on the Latvian WISC-R version's
adequacy and applicability in the local cultural and historical context.
Limitations of the research:
1. employment of single-factor research design;
2. discrepancies between the Latvian and Russian versions of Cattell's Children Questionnaire
offered to the respondents;
3. the inadequate number of research subjects;
4. lack of background information about the gifted children families' social demographic,
economic and emotional situations.
Suggestions for Further Research:
1) It is necessary to do longitudinal research in gifted children in Latvia that would provide broader
information on different aspects and traits of giftedness.
2) The present research should be continued and expanded with studying especially gifted children
(IQ>150) in order to find out their "special" needs and peculiarities. This sphere includes
perspectives of further research.
3) Adaptation and standardisation of psychological measures is necessary in order to do research
in gifted children's intellectual, creative and personality peculiarities in Latvia.
4) It is recomendable to expend the geographical borders of the research within the context of
Latvia and as well to add cross-cultural research to the present research.
5) The results of the present research should be publicised to provide information about gifted
children's needs and problems. The author of the dissertation claims that at present there are
many myths about gifted people and the society lacks information about the phenomenon of
giftedness. Such information can be useful for school psychologists, teachers, school
administration and parents.