Patterns of Overexcitability Overexcitabilities - Kazimierz ...

Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 21:10 26 March 2011overexcitability, rather than justexcitability, was chosen to convey theidea that this is a special kind ofexcitability, one that is enhanced and distinguishedby characteristic forms ofexpression. Dabrowski's theory hasengaged theorists, researchers, and educatorsin the field of gifted education formany years. Researchers, intrigued bythe blending of affective and cognitivedomains, have developed tools—first,the Overexcitability Questionnaire(OEQ) and, then, the OEQII—to helpilluminate and measure heightened manifestationsof overexcitabilities.Group Characteristics andOverexcitabilitiesResearchers, using an open-endedquestionnaire, examined profiles of OEsamong gifted individuals and found similarpatterns among various subgroups.Several studies found differences in OEsamong children and adolescents, withthose students identified as gifted scoringhigher than their nongifted peers(Gallagher, 1986; Piechowski & Colangelo,1984). Some OEs were moreprevalent in artists (Piechowski & Cunningham,1985; Piechowski, Silverman,& Falk, 1985), and these tended to havegreater strength in more creative, giftedadolescents than less creative ones(Schiever, 1985). Ely (1995) found nostatistical differences between groupmeans of creative students who had notbeen identified for gifted services andintellectually gifted students who hadbeen identified for gifted programs.However, when she conducted a discriminantfunction analysis (DEA), she foundthat the linear function of Intellectualand Emotional OEs best predictedwhether students were classified as creativelyor intellectually gifted. In anotherstudy of gifted, near-gifted, and nongiftedstudents, Breard (1995) found that theIntellectual and Emotional OEs best predictedgroup membership. Additionally,Miller, Silverman, and Falk (1994)found gender differences in whichfemales had significantly higher Emotionaland Sensual OE scores than males.In one of the few studies that examinedprofiles of OEs between gifted and typicalstudents, Ackerman (1997) foundthat Grade 9 and 10 gifted students whowere enrolled in two private schoolswere differentiated from their nongiftedpeers based on their higher Psychomotor,Intellectual, and Emotional OEscores, with Psychomotor providing thebest predictor or giftedness.Previous discussions (Ackerman,1997; Ely, 1995; Nelson, 1989;O'Connor, 2002; Silverman, 1993) havedescribed the role of the OEs as a meansto describe the intensity often demonstratedby gifted, talented, and creativestudents. Gifted students, by nature oftheir maturational and intellectual asynchrony(Hollingworth, 1929; Lovecky,2004; Silverman), may be more susceptibleto these intensities, which then affecttheir reactions to and interactions withtheir world. Few empirical studies, however,have explored the utility of the OEsas a tool for uncovering evolving profilesof OEs for gifted students in elementaryand middle school. The purpose of thisstudy was to describe and explain differencesbetween gender, age, and typicaland gifted groups on the overexcitabilitiesand to illuminate issues that mayaffect patterns of OEs in elementary- andmiddle-school gifted students. Previousresearch on OEs has led to the identificationof several questions about potentialdifferences between groups:1. Do males and females differ inmean OE scores?2. Do elementary- and middleschoolstudents differ in meanOE scores?3. Do typical and GT students differin their mean OE scores?4. Do gifted, elementary-schoolstudents differ from their middleschoolpeers in their mean OEscores?MethodsTo address the research questions, asurvey using a convenience sample oftypical and gifted students wasemployed. Data were analyzed usingdescriptive and multivariate analyses andcommon post-hoc procedures.SampleThe convenience sample consisted of510 elementary and secondary studentsfrom five diverse school districts throughoutthe east coast of the United States.Making up the valid responses were 263females and 217 males, 249 elementaryschoolers and 231 middle-school students,and 184 typical and 296 gifted students.For the purposes of this study,students classified as GT were identifiedusing a multifaceted state matrix. A minimumscore on standardized tests ofachievement, ability, or creativity representsthe baseline for placement in GTservices, so students classified as giftedwere identified through similar measures.There is no delineation among studentsbased on identification by ability orachievement scores (i.e., highly gifted,talent pool, etc.). Students identified astypical include some students with identifiedlearning disabilities. The age of theparticipants ranged from 7 to 15 becausesome secondary students with learningdisabilities were older than typical middle-school-agestudents.ProcedureThe OEQII (Falk, Lind, Miller,Piechowski, & Silverman, 1999) and abrief demographic questionnaire wereadministered to participants. The OEQIIconsists of 50 Likert-type items thatmeasure each of the five OEs: Psychomotor,Intellectual, Imaginational,Sensual, and Emotional (Bouchet &Falk, 2001). It was adapted fromresponses by children and adults to anearlier questionnaire (OEQ) that used 21open-ended interview questions(Piechowski et al., 1985). Means (withstandard deviations in parentheses) forthe five subscales of OEs. from the originalOEQ pilot study (N = 563 collegestudents aged 15-62) were 3.35 (.79) forPsychomotor, 3.28 (.87) for Sensual,2.86 (.83) for Imaginational, 3.50 (.79)for Intellectual, and 3.72 (.77) for Emotional.The pilot study was repeated withan additional sample of 324 students,49% of whom were 17 years old oryounger. Original alpha reliability estimatesfrom the pilot sample using theoriginal OEQ were .86 for Psychomotor,.89 for Intellectual, .89 for Sensual, .84for Emotional, and .85 for ImaginationalOEs (Falk et al., 1999).Dr this study, researchers solicitedassistance from preserviceteachers enrolled in a university GT certificationprogram. Local GT teachersinvited their school colleagues and theirgifted and typical students to participatein this study. The OEQII and demographicquestionnaires were distributedto study participants during the falls of2003 and 2004 and took approximately15 minutes to complete. Informed consentand assent was solicited from parentsand students prior to administrationof the questionnaires. Participants wereinformed that their participation was voluntaryand that they would not be punishedin any way if they decided not toparticipate or to withdraw. Students werepromised a small gift by returning completedquestionnaires.Summer, 2007, Roeper Review/233