International perspectives and trends in research on giftedness and talent development.

Autor/inn/en	Stoeger, Heidrun; Balestrini, Daniel Patrick; Ziegler, Albert
Titel	International perspectives and trends in research on giftedness and talent development.
Quelle	Aus: Pfeiffer, Steven I. (Hrsg.); Shaunessy-Dedrick, Elizabeth (Hrsg.): APA handbook of giftedness and talent. First edition. Washington DC: American Psychological Association (2017) S. 25-37 PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei (1); PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei (2) Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Reihe	APA Handbooks in Psychology
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	online; gedruckt; Sammelwerksbeitrag
ISBN	978-1-4338-2696-2
Schlagwörter	Hochbegabung; Internationaler Vergleich
Abstract	Before this chapter can focus on international perspectives and trends in research on giftedness and talent development, we need to clarify the meaning of central key terms. Neither common usage nor scientific parlance offer generally accepted definitions of giftedness and talent (Carman, 2013). Most definitions fit roughly into one of four categories: psychometric definitions, performance definitions, labeling definitions, and specific giftedness/talent definitions. According to psychometric definitions, the terms apply to individuals who score well in psychometric tests (e.g., tests of intelligence or creativity). Performance definitions describe those individuals as gifted or talented who demonstrate high achievements, for instance the best pupil in a certain class or a school valedictorian. According to labeling definitions, gifts/talents are socially accorded, usually by an expert. In the case of specific giftedness/talent definitions, strengths in a particular domain (e.g., music, mathematics, endurance running) qualify a person as gifted or talented. The lack of uniform distinctions between the terms giftedness and talent is as problematic as the sheer variety of definitions that can be found in the literature. There is no generally accepted understanding of the difference between the two. Although some researchers use both terms synonymously (e.g., Csikszentmihalyi & Robinson, 1986), others seek clear distinctions. Some researchers view talent as a hyponym of giftedness (e.g., Haensly, Reynolds, & Nash, 1986); others equate talent with potential and giftedness with achievements (e.g., Tannenbaum, 1986; but cf. also Gagné, 2005). In this chapter we will use the terms giftedness and talent as conceptually overlapping terms (e.g., Ericsson, Roring, & Nandagopal, 2007). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved). (Verlag).
Erfasst von	Externer Selbsteintrag
Update	2019/1