Emotional Development of the Gifted Through the Lifespan

8/13/2019 Emotional Development of the Gifted Through the Lifespan

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/emotional-development-of-the-gifted-through-the-lifespan 1/10

Gifted Development Centera service of The Institute for the Study of Advanced Development

1452 Mari on Street Denver, CO 80218 (303) 837-8378

Emotional Development of the GiftedThrough the Lifespan

Linda Silverman, Ph.D.

Traditional Perspectives of Giftedness

The study of giftedness was inaugurated by Sir Frances Galton in 1869, with the publication of his book, Hereditary Genius, in which he equated ability (genius) with eminence, ranking men as 1 in

4,000 according to the prestige that they had attained. Galton made a series of lists of the mostillustrious statesmen, commanders, literary men, men of science, poets, musicians, and painters ofwhom history makes mention, and men whose biographies were accessible. His plan was to show that

“reputation” is an accurate test of high ability, and that unusual ability runs in families.

“By reputation, I mean the opinion of contemporaries, revised by posterity-the favorable result of a critical analysis of each man's character, by many

biographers...” (p. 33).

It is well over a century since this field began; yet, Galton is ever-present in our modern day

conceptions of giftedness. To educators, psychologists, and the man on the street, giftedness impliesthe attainment of glory. The achievement orientation to giftedness-i.e., the quantity, quality andinfluence of one's accomplishments in adult life -- is a view not unlike that of Galton. And, as Galton

so clearly brought to our attention, it is not possible to accurately assess the impact of a life until the person isn't living any more and other people are writing about him or her. However, the

“posthumous” determination of giftedness is not a particularly useful paradigm for selecting andserving gifted children, or for nourishing their emotional growth.

In addition, the equation of giftedness with eminence has built-in sexist, socio-economic, and racist

biases, since women, the economically disadvantaged, and minority groups are not equallyrepresented among the eminent. Galton's notions were challenged early in this century by Leta Stetter

Hollingworth (1914, 1926), who argued that eminence is largely the result of opportunity, closelylinked to social position in the society, and generally inaccessible to women.

If opportunity were indeed the prime determinant of eminence, then we should expectthose who belong to socially inferior categories to be excluded from it. This is justwhat we do find, since the uncultured, the poor, servants, and women are very seldom

found to have achieved eminence. (Hollingworth, 1926, p. 11)



Emotional Development of the Gifted Through the Lifespan


C-85; 2

http://www.gifteddevelopment.com

It is undesirable to seek for the cause of sex differences in eminence in ultimate and

obscure affective and intellectual differences until we have exhausted as a cause theknown, obvious, and inescapable fact that women bear and rear the children, and that

this has had as an inevitable sequel the occupation of housekeeping, a field whereeminence is not possible. (Hollingworth, 1914, p. 529)

The quest for lasting recognition has little or nothing to do with one's emotional development, and it is

not equally attainable by all who have similar levels of ability.

Implications for Gifted Education

An outgrowth of the Galton tradition has been the assumption that the study of eminent adults canlead to means of identifying gifted children and prescriptions for their education (e.g., Renzulli, 1978).This assumption is widely accepted in psychology and education, despite its inherent biases and the

obvious distinctions between the developmental tasks of childhood and those of adult life. Many ofour current leaders in the field are even uncomfortable with the concept of a “gifted child,” preferring

such terms as “potentially gifted,” “gifted program children,” “gifted behavior,” or “talented.” These pseudonyms imply that (a) only adults can be considered gifted; (b) children are only gifted within thecontext of a school program; (c) giftedness is not inherent in the child, but in the child's behavior; or

(d) children can be talented in specific areas, but not globally gifted.

Giftedness, then, becomes an adult focused work-related phenomenon. In this paradigm, gifted

children are those who show potential for attaining eminence in their adult lives by behaving likeminiature adults. “Eminent” children achieve outstanding grades in school, produce products that gainattention, or show precocious development in a specific domain that rivals adult level performances

(i.e., the prodigy).

The underlying value being taught in the contest for becoming head of the class is competitiveness.

Bloom (1982) found that those individuals who achieved excellence in their fields by the age of 35showed “great competitiveness with other peers in the talent field and a determination to do their bestat all costs” (p. 512). Competitiveness has been an important value in building the strength of

American society, but as we enter the 21st century, we are witnessing a shift in values throughout theworld; new models of cooperation and compassion are needed for the creation of a more humane

society.

One of the tasks of parenting and educating gifted children is to prepare them to enter the world ofwork in a competent manner, but we must also prepare them to enter the world of parenting, of caring,

and of ethical responsibility for the survival of the planet. With this in mind, the emotional

development of the gifted is just as important as their cognitive development and cannot beoverlooked.





C-85; 3


Giftedness as Advanced Development

An alternative to the achievement orientation to giftedness is the definition of giftedness as advanced

development in any area (Silverman, 1986b). From a developmental vantage point, the characteristicsof giftedness are inborn traits that can be observed in early childhood and continue into adult life. Thecapacity for abstract thought, insightfulness, intellectual curiosity, compassion, sensitivity, perfectionism, intensity, creative imagination, sophisticated sense of humor and unusual energy typify

the gifted individual throughout the life span and result in unusual life experiences.

In adulthood, advanced development is measured by the quality of one's life, not by the quantity or

influence of one's work. The qualities of one's inner life include the integrity of one's values; thestrength of one's desire to help others; the consistency of one's self-examination; the depth of one'scommitment to self-development; and the expansion of one's sense of responsibility. These are more

elusive factors to observe and to measure than achievement-more internal than external.

Unlike the achievement orientation, it is actually easier to measure developmental advancement inchildhood than in adult life. Just as developmental delays can be detected in infancy, and even inutero, developmental advancement can be discovered in infancy, or earlier if we were to choose to doso. It manifests itself in the early transition from reflexive to intentional behaviors, in rapid

progression through the developmental milestones, in personality traits such as those described above,and in the attainment of high IQ scores in early childhood, indicating advanced cognitive

development. The unevenness of gifted children's development- "developmental dyssynchrony"(Terrassier, 1985)-results in their frequently being at many different developmental stagessimultaneously (Tolan, 1989) and out of sync with their agemates.

The developmental dyssynchrony of the gifted child seemed to be better understood earlier in thecentury than in the modern era. Binet and Simon (1911), Terman (1931), Hollingworth (1926), and

Witty (1930) all thought of gifted children as those whose “mental ages” far exceeded theirchronological ages. The concept of mental age has been abandoned in recent years, replaced bydeviation IQs and percentiles. But the “99th percentile” does not convey the developmental problem

as graphically as a “5 year old with an 8 year old mind.”

Hollingworth (1940) often referred to gifted children as “old heads on young shoulders” (p. 104). She

also observed that when gifted children reach a mental age of 12 or 13 years of age they becomeconcerned with origins, destinies, religion, and problems of good and evil. She found that childrenwho tested above 180 IQ (no longer attainable on current IQ tests) developed a pressing need for an

explanation of the universe and a desire for a systematic philosophy of life and death when they wereonly 6 or 7 years of age (Hollingworth, 1931). Therefore, many of the existential conflicts of

adolescence affect the gifted at a much earlier point in their development. What are the long termeffects of the pervasive psychological traits of the gifted, the unevenness of their development, andtheir early philosophical concerns?





C-85; 4


Dabrowski's Theory of Emotional Development

Dabrowski's Theory of Emotional Development (Dabrowski, 1964, 1972; Dabrowski & Piechowski,

1977) provides a framework for understanding the unique characteristics of gifted children and theways in which these characteristics transform their life paths. The “overexcitabilities” described byDabrowski (1938, 1972) are observable in infancy and thought to be innate. They representheightened awareness and a heightened capacity to respond to stimuli of various types. Because of

these overexcitabilities, gifted children are bombarded with so much internal stimulation that they arecontinuously forced to exert conscious control over their internal worlds. The overexcitabilities are the

seeds of self-development. The rich, turbulent, intense inner worlds of the gifted often lead to greaterawareness of the pain and suffering of others, higher levels of moral concern, higher expectations ofthemselves, and greater commitment to serve. Advanced development in adulthood is the result of the

interplay of these internal forces and external experiences in childhood.

Overexcitabilities

Dabrowski (1938) postulated five “overexcitabilities” (OEs): psychomotor, sensual, imaginational,intellectual and emotional. The term, “overexcitability,” is translated from the Polish word for

“superstimulatability,” and carries with it a positive connotation, as in a superabundance of money,time or energy. The OEs are an abundance of physical, sensual, creative, intellectual and emotionalenergy. The strength of these overexcit-abilities -- particularly imaginational, intellectual and

emotional OEs -- is positively related to advanced emotional development in adulthood. In studying agroup of gifted children and youth in Warsaw in 1962, Dabrowski (1972) found that every one of

them showed considerable manifestations of the overexcitabilities.

Individuals with the gift of extra physical energy are “doers,” highly active and constantly on the go.

One of the earliest signs of Psychomotor OE is less need for sleep in infancy. A parent of a highlygifted child remarked, “When other babies were getting 12 hours of sleep, I was lucky if he slept 6hours. I figured he was smarter than other children his age because he had been awake twice as long”

(Silverman & Kearney, 1989, p. 52). Some children with high Psychomotor OE are misdiagnosed as“hyperactive.” Hyperactive children have little vo luntary control over their constant movement,whereas gifted children high in Psychomotor energy have long periods of intense concentration with

little motoric activity interspersed with very high activity levels.

By itself, Psychomotor OE usually does not differentiate gifted from average development in children,

adolescent or adult populations. It must be integrated with other OEs before it becomesdevelopmentally significant (Manzanero, 1985; Piechowski & Cunningham, 1985). But manydevelopmentally advanced adults, such as Albert Schweitzer, had unusual physical energy and were

capable of working for excessively long periods.

Sensual OE may be the most elusive of the overexcitabilities to measure and understand. It is marked

by heightened experience of the senses, sexuality, and desire for physical admiration. The child wholoves to touch different textures, smell paint and tar, and taste unusual foods is showing signs of





C-85; 5


Sensual OE. Adult gifted populations have been found to be higher than unselected groups in this

dimension (Silverman & Ellsworth, 1980); however, no differences in Sensual OE have been revealed between gifted and average children (Rogers, 1986), or between gifted and average adolescents

(Gallagher, 1985; Schiever, 1985). One study of gifted adolescents found levels of Sensual OE to bedepressed in comparison to two adult samples (Piechowski & Colangelo, 1984), which may indicatethat Sensual OE increases with age. It is also plausible that adolescents are reluctant to reveal

information in a questionnaire that is of an intensely personal nature (e.g., their sexual feelings).

The other three overexcitabilities bear a more direct relationship to giftedness. Imaginational OE-vivid recall, dreaming in technicolor, inventiveness, active fantasy life -- is closely allied with

creativity. Artists and creative children tend to be particularly high in Imaginational OE (Piechowski,Silverman, & Falk, 1985; Schiever, 1985) and gifted adolescents have been found to be consistently

higher than their average peers in this domain (Gallagher, 1985; Piechowski & Colangelo, 1984;Schiever, 1985). Early signs of Imaginational OE include imaginary companions and mixing of truthand fiction. When gifted children have imaginary companions, they tend to have more of them than

average children (Rogers, 1986), sometimes creating entire families or communities.

Intellectual OE is particularly reminiscent of intellectual giftedness: curiosity, concentration,

theoretical thinking, introspection, extensive reading, capacity for sustained intellectual effort, love oflearning and problem solving, and moral concern. All gifted samples studied were high in IntellectualOE, and artistically gifted adults were found to be as high as the intellectually gifted in this domain

(Piechowski & Cunningham, 1985). But Piechowski (1979) warns that Intellectual OE is not the sameas intelligence. Not all intelligent individuals are intellectuals or have high levels of Intellectual OE.

The last, and perhaps most important of the overexcit-abilities, is Emotional OE-the capacity foremotional depth, attachment to people and animals, intensity, sensitivity, empathy, self-criticism,inhibition, fears, guilt and anxiety. Gifted children, adolescents, and adults exhibit high levels of

Emotional OE (Gallagher, 1985; Piechowski & Colangelo, 1984; Schiever, 1985; Silverman, 1983;Silverman & Ellsworth, 1980). Again and again, we see signs of Emotional OE in gifted children

beginning early in life. The following are examples from my case files at the Gifted DevelopmentCenter:

B is a very sensitive child. Although not overly physically affectionate to many, his

feelings for others are very deep-he feels hurt and pain when he feels he hasdispleased someone and also feels great pride, especially toward the achievements of

his younger sibling. (Age 4)

R had early awareness and empathy with others' feelings... She had amazing toleranceand emotionally is beyond her age. She wears her heart on her sleeve and is honest in

her feelings with adults as well as with other children. (Age 4)

M is a very loving and compassionate child. Cannot stand to hear a baby crying. Puts

his hands over his ears if he hears anything too loud or too violent. His feelings arehurt in an instant. Concerned about the welfare of others. (Age 3 3/4)





C-85; 6


I first observed R's great sensitivity at the age of 5 1/2 months.

K is very hard on herself. She doesn't forgive herself easily if she has hurt someone's

feelings or makes a mistake... She has a special sensitivity rarely seen in other childrenher age. (Age 4) (Silverman, 1986a, p. 16)

These extraordinary levels of sensitivity do not disappear with age. Gifted adults retain theiremotionality and are often perceived as “too sensitive” by others around them. Emotional OE can be

seen quite clearly in the following passage written by a gifted adolescent:

We tend to be much more sensitive than other people. Multiple meanings, innuendoes,and self-consciousness plague us. Intensive self-analysis, self-criticism, and the

inability to recognize that we have limits make us despondent. In fact, most times our self-searching leaves us more discombobbled than we were at the outset. (American

Association for Gifted Children, 1978, p. 9)

The emphasis on the importance of emotional development distinguishes Dabrowski's theory fromother theories of development. Dabrowski (1972) predicted that when Emotional, Imaginational and

Intellectual OEs surpassed Sensual and Psychomotor OE in strength, the individual had greater“developmental potential” to attain high levels of personality development. And this is exactly the

pattern that was found in a study of gifted adults (Silverman & Ellsworth, 1980). Emotional andIntellectual OE are the most powerfully represented in the protocols of gifted adults, withImaginational OE significantly higher than in nonselected groups, but of less strength than the other

two OEs. This same pattern has emerged in gifted adolescents as well (Gallagher, 1985; Piechowski& Colangelo, 1984; Schiever, 1985). Dabrowski's observations of the developmental significance of

these OEs have been at least partially confirmed by Lysy and Piechowski (1983), who determined that

the combination of Intellectual and Emotional OE accounted for 48 percent of the variance in levels ofdevelopment.

Levels of Development

The second part of Dabrowski's theory involves five levels of development: self-serving, group

domination, self-examination, self-actualization, and attainment of the personality ideal. At the lowestlevel, individuals have little concern for others, no introspection and an absence of inner conflict.

They externalize all conflict and blame others. They have a “What's in it for me?” orientation. AtLevel II, individuals are motivated by desire for approval, fear of punishment, ambivalences andambitendencies. As there is no inner core of values from which to make solid judgments, they are

easily swayed.The third, fourth and fifth levels are called “multilevel development.” Level III marks the transition

into advanced development. Individuals begin to develop an inherent set of values and to experiencetheir own inadequacies intensely. They are deeply troubled by the gap between “what is” and “whatought to be.” At Level IV, the gap narrows as they learn how to live in accordance with their ideals.





C-85; 7


“What ought to be will be” becomes the metaphor for the self-actualizing life. Level V is the

attainment of authenticity, harmony, altruism, empathy for all living creatures. Mother Teresa andDag Hammarskjold are considered to have reached this highest level of development (Dabrowski &

Piechowski, 1977).

The Relation between Overexcitabilities and Levels

The overexcitabilities are the “building blocks” of the levels (Piechowski, 1979); they are the sands in

the oyster. Children who experience intense physiological reactions to a variety of stimuli mustdevelop some means of internal control in order to function. A gifted child high in all the OEs may

simultaneously have a strong desire to continue a book she has begun (Intellectual OE); experience a physical need to play baseball with her friends (Psychomotor OE; Emotional OE); feel intensely hurt by one of her friends and want to avoid her (Emotional OE); have an almost uncontrollable urge to go

out for a sundae (Sensual OE); and imagine in great detail what would happen if she chose to do

anything but her homework (Imaginational OE; Emotional OE). Which of these urges will sherespond to? In selecting one, she must suppress the others and exercise control over exceedinglystrong impulses. This provides daily practice in setting priorities and gaining inner directedness, thesame skills that are needed later in life to construct a set of values for oneself.

Although most studies of gifted populations have focused on overexcitabilities rather than levels, thecase studies of individuals who have attained advanced development are clearly of gifted individuals

(Brennan, 1987; Grant, 1990; Piechowski, 1978; Piechowski, 1990). Intelligence, however, is aninsufficient predictor of multilevel development; Emotional overexcit-ability of significant strengthmust also be present. One preliminary study (Felder, 1982) comparing gifted education graduate

students with chemical engineering graduate students found the mean of the gifted education majorsto be a full level beyond the chemical engineering majors (2.7 vs. 1.7). Both groups appeared to be at

least mildly gifted and had approximately equal Intellectual OE scores. However, significantdifferences were found between the two groups in Emotional OE (18.1 vs. 11.3) and ImaginationalOE (11.7 vs. 5.8). The chemical engineering students were more competitive, goal and success

oriented, and focused on their careers, whereas the gifted education majors were more introspective,self-critical, and concerned with people, relationships and global issues. A confounding variable in the

study may have been sex differences, since 12 of the 14 gifted education majors were female, and 14of the 16 chemical engineering majors were male.

The strength of the OEs theoretically predicts “developmental potential”-the potential to attain higher

levels of development in Dabrowski's framework. The concept of developmental potential adds animportant dimension to our understanding of the traits of giftedness and provides a new direction for

the development of gifted individuals. Piechowski (1986) writes:





C-85; 8


The concept of developmental potential offered in this paper broadens the conception

of giftedness by addressing the personality correlates of high ability. This model also suggests a method of identifying individuals with high potential beyond the traditional

IQ tests, and binds the goals of their education to self -actualization and advancedmoral development, rather than merely to productivity in adult life. (p. 190)

Advanced Development in Adulthood

The natural trajectory of giftedness in childhood is not a six figure salary, perfect happiness, and aguaranteed place in Who's Who. It is the deepening of the personality, the strengthening of one's

value system, the creation of greater and greater challenges for oneself, and the development of broader avenues for expressing compassion. Advanced development in adulthood is the commitmentto becoming a better person and helping to make this a better world. Sometimes that results in fame

that was not particularly sought as a goal. And sometimes one's contribution is of a quieter nature.

Piechowski (1989) describes one of the less obvious pathways to enhancing society:

The great achievers and the eminent as a rule have a parent or mentor especiallydevoted to them (Albert, 1980). No doubt it takes considerable dedication and integrityto live for the child but not through the child, to cherish and guide rather than to want

to own. Thus, the nurturing generations appear to be necessary to the achieving ones.The idea behind this view is simply to acknowledge the great importance of those who

nurture the talents of their children. (p. 25)

In the achievement orientation to giftedness, there is no place for a “gifted mommy.” Yet, when White(1990) asked three of Leta Hollingworth's above 180 IQ subjects what they considered to be their

greatest achievements, the man referred to his mathematical theories and the two women replied, their“children.” All three devoted some part of their lives to improving education. There has to be room in

our definitions of giftedness for an emotional, nurturing framework-one in which parenting andteaching are not perceived as less important than attaining eminence. We must nourish the emotionalas well as the cognitive resources of our gifted young, because it is this combination that will lead us

to the kinder, gentler society we envision.

REFERENCES

Albert, R. S. (1980). Family position and the attainment of eminence: A study of special family positions and special

family experiences. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24 , 201-211.

American Association for Gifted Children. (1978). On being gifted . New York: Walker.

Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1911/1915). A method of measuring the development of the intelligence of young children (Clara H. Town, Trans.). Chicago: Chicago Medical Books.

Brennan, T. P. (1987). Case studies of multilevel development . Unpublished doctoral dissertation. NorthwesternUniversity, Evanston, IL.





C-85; 9


Bloom, B. S. (1982). The role of gifts and markers in the develop ment of talent. Exceptional Children, 48, 510-521.

Dabrowski, K. (1938). Typy wzmozonej pobudliwosci: psychicnej (Types of increased psychic excitability). Biul . Inst.

Hig. Psychicznej, 1(3-4), 3-26.

Dabrowski, K. (1964). Positive disintegration. London: Little, Brown.

Dabrowski, K. (1972). Psychoneurosis is not an illness . London: Gryf.

Dabrowski, K., & Piechowski, M. M. (1977). Theory of levels of emotional development (Vols. 1 & 2) . Oceanside, NY:Dabor Science.

Felder, R. F. (1982, October). Responses o f gifted education and chemical engineering graduate students on the OEQand DRI . Paper presented at the National Association for Gifted Children Conference, New Orleans, LA.

Gallagher, S. A. (1985). A comparison of the concept of overexcitabilities with measures of creativity and school

achievement in sixth grade students. Roeper Review, 8, 115-119.

Galton, F. (1869/1870). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences. London. (New York: Appleton).

Grant, B. (1990). Moral development: Theories and lives. Advanced Development , 2, 85-91.

Hollingworth, L. S. (1914). Variability as related to sex differences in achievement: A critique. American Journal ofSociology, 19, 510-530.

Hollingworth, L. S. (1926). Gifted children: Their nature and nurture. New York: Macmillan.

Hollingworth, L. S. (1931). The child of very superior intelligence as a special problem in social adjustment. Mental Hygiene, 15(1), 3-16.

Hollingworth, L. S. (1940). Old heads on young shoulders. Public Addresses (pp. 104-110). Lancaster, PA: Science

Press Printing.

Lysy, K. Z., & Piechowski, M. M. (1983). Personal growth: An empirical study using Jungian and Dabrowskian

measures. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 108, 267-320.

Manzanero, J. (1985). A cross-cultural comparison of overexcitability profiles and levels of emotional development between American and Venezuelan artists. Unpublished master's thesis, Univ. of Denver, Denver, CO.

Piechowski, M. M. (1979). Developmental potential. In N. Colangelo & R. T. Zaffrann (Eds.), New voices in counseling

the gifted (pp. 25-57). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Piechowski, M. M. (1978). Self-actualization as a developmental structure: A profile of Antoine de Saint -Exupery.Genetic Psychology Monographs, 97 , 181-242.

Piechowski, M. M. (1986). The concept of developmental potential. Roeper Review, 8, 190-197.

Piechowski, M. M. (1989). Developmental potential and the growth of self. In J. VanTassel-Baska & P.

Olszewski-Kubilius (Eds.), Patterns of influence on gifted learners: The home, the self, and the school (pp.

87-101). New York: Teachers College Press. (Quotation from unabridged version, available from author, NorthlandCollege, Ashland, WI).

Piechowski, M. M. (1990). Inner growth and transformation in the life of Eleanor Roosevelt. Advanced Development , 2,35-53.

Piechowski, M. M., & Colangelo, N. (1984). Developmental potential of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28 , 80-88.





C-85; 10


Piechowski, M. M., & Cunningham, K. (1985). Patterns of overexcitability in a group of artists. Journal of Creative

Behavior , 19(3), 153-174.

Piechowski, M. M., Silverman, L. K., & Falk, R. F. (1985). Comparison of intellectually and artistically gifted on five

dimensions of mental functioning. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60, 539-549.

Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan , 60, 180-184.

Rogers, M. T. (1986). A comparative study of developmental traits of gifted and average children. Unpublished doctoraldissertation, University of Denver, Denver, CO.

Schiever, S. W. (1985). Creative personality characteristics and dimensions of mental functioning in gifted adolescents.

Roeper Review, 7 (4), 223-226.

Silverman, L. K. (1983). Personality development: The pursuit of excellence. Journal for the Education of the Gifted ,6 (1), 5-19.

Silverman, L. K. (1986a). Personality development and the gifted. Mensa Bulletin , No. 299, 14-16.

Silverman, L. K. (1986b). What happens to the gifted girl? In C. J. Maker (Ed.), Critical issues in gifted education: Vol.1. Defensible programs for the gifted (pp. 43-89). Rockville, MD: Aspen.

Silverman, L. K., & Ellsworth, B. (1980). The theory of positive disintegration and its implications for giftedness. In N.

Duda (Ed.), Theory of positive disintegration: Proceedings of the third international conference. Miami, FL:University of Miami School of Medicine.

Silverman, L. K., & Kearney, K. (1989). Parents of the extraordinarily gifted. Advanced Development , 1. 41-56.

Terman, L. M. (1931). The gifted child. In C. Murchison (Ed.), A handbook of child psychology (pp. 568-584).Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.

Terrassier, J. (1985). Dyssynchrony—Uneven development. In J. Freeman (Ed.). The psychology of gifted children (pp.

265-274). Chichester, England: John Wiley.

Tolan, S. (1989). Special problems of young highly gifted children. Understanding Our Gifted , 1(5), 1, 7-10.

White, W. L. (1990). Interviews with Child I, Child J, and Child L. Roeper Review, 12(3).

Witty, P. A. (1930). A study of one hundred gifted children. University of Kansas Bulletin of Education, 2(7), 3-44.

Linda Silverman, Ph.D., is a licensed psychologistand Director of the Gifted Development Center in Denver, Colorado.

Documents

Emotional Development of the Gifted Through the Lifespan