Self-concept and sex-role orientation in gifted high school students.

Gifted Child Quarterly (Impact Factor: 0.75). DOI: 10.1177/001698629604000103

ABSTRACT Examined sex-role orientation (SRO) and self-concept (SCT) in 39 high school students (Grades 10–12) enrolled in a gifted challenge program, and a control group of 39 students matched on gender and grade. Ss were administered the Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale and the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. No effect of gender or program was found for SRO or global SCT. Analysis indicated that gifted Ss were more anxious and less satisfied with life than regular program Ss, and that females were more anxious but better behaved than males. Ss with an undifferentiated SRO scored lowest on global SCT and certain domain-specific aspects of SCT, especially in comparison with masculine and androgynous Ss. The relationship between SRO and SCT was consistent across program and gender. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study explored the relationships among IQ, perceptions of giftedness, and self-concepts in a sample of 116 Chinese junior secondary school students in Hong Kong. These students, nominated by their schools to join the university gifted programs, were assessed on their IQ, global and domain-specific self-concepts, as well as their perceptions of their own giftedness in terms of their concern for feeling different, their critical attitude in evaluating their own performance, and their experience of high expectation to achieve from their parents. The findings indicated that in general the ways students perceived their giftedness affected differentially global self-worth and specific self-concept domains. While difference concern and critical evaluation affected students' specific self-concepts adversely, high parental expectation had a more positive influence. Self-concept domains related to social acceptance and friendship issues were most strongly and adversely affected. Implications of the findings for interventions to enhance the self-esteem of gifted students through restructuring their perceptions of giftedness are discussed.
    Journal of Youth and Adolescence 07/2002; 31(4):243-252. · 2.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Counseling concerns of highly able students may reflect characteristics associated with giftedness. Yet school counselor training programs give scant attention to this phenomenon and to the social and emotional development of these students. School counselors therefore may be unaware of and unequipped to respond to these concerns. Referencing scholarly literature related to giftedness as both asset and burden, the author explores school counselors' potential roles in responding to the needs of gifted students.
    Professional School Counseling. 01/2006;
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This research examined the relationships among personality factors, social support, emotional well¬being, and academic achievement in 65 gifted secondary students, a sample drawn from a longitudinal study of over 950 students. The research demonstrated that, compared to their nongifted peers, gifted students had significantly higher academic outcomes for all subject areas except Geography and Physical Education. Teachers rated the gifted students as being well-adjusted and less likely to have behavioural or emotional problems than nongifted students. The gifted students, however, reported feeling more sad and less satisfied with their social support than their nongifted counterparts. There were no significant differences in terms of self-esteem, trait hope, problem orientation, or attitudes towards education. Within the gifted sample, the research found that the students who were most likely to get poor grades were those who scored high in psychoticism and low in conscientiousness, trait hope, joviality, and in attitudes towards schools. Interestingly, self-esteem was entirely unrelated to gifted performance.
    Educational Research and Evaluation 01/2007; 13(6):569-586.