The Journal of Genetic Psychology
ISSN: 0022-1325 (Print) 1940-0896 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgnt20
Three Wishes of Gifted and Nongifted Adolescents Jih-Perng P. Chiu & John R. Nevius To cite this article: Jih-Perng P. Chiu & John R. Nevius (1990) Three Wishes of Gifted and Nongifted Adolescents, The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 151:2, 133-138, DOI: 10.1080/00221325.1990.9914649 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1990.9914649
Published online: 06 Jul 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 10
View related articles
Citing articles: 5 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vgnt20 Download by: [York University Libraries]
Date: 07 November 2015, At: 22:52
The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 151(2), 133-138
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
Three Wishes of Gifted and Nongifted Adolescents JM-PERNG P. CHIU JOHN R. N E W S Department of Early Childhood Education Texas Tech University
ABSTRACT. Three wishes of 69 gifted and 66 nongifted adolescents within the United States were solicited in a group situation. The findings indicated that personal wishes we? of the most concern for both gifted and nongifted adolescents, and that male adolescents in both groups tended to value material possessions more often than did female adolescents. A significant between-groups difference revealed that gifted adolescents expressed more altruistic and fewer goal wishes than their nongifted peers. These kinds of data are one more means of describing, for teachers and counselors, a general picture of students’ psychological and social orientations.
RESEARCH ON THE WISHES of children and adolescents has yielded both psychologically and educationally meaningful data (Horrocks & Mussman, 1973). Generally, the research showed that American children’s wishes consistently varied as a function of age and sex. Wishes for material objects and possessions decreased with age and were replaced by ones with more inclusive and abstract natures (Ables, 1972; Horrocks & Mussman, 1973; Milgram & Riedel, 1969; Schaefer, 1975). Boys had a higher interest in individual accomplishmentsand material possessions (Cobb, 1954; Guamaccia & Vane, 1979), whereas girls had a higher interest in personal concerns, situations, and family relations (Kokonis, 1974; Vandewiele, 1981). The implications of data obtained from normal and problem children as applied to gifted children (Ables, 1972; Horrocks & Mussman, 1973) has been questioned by Kames and Wherry (1981), who investigated the wishes of 155 gifted children in Grades 4 through 7. Kames and Wherry reported Requestsfor reprints should be sent to John Nevius, Department of Early Childhood Education, Texas Tech University, Box 4560, Lubbock, Ix 79409-1071. 133
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
134
The Journal of Generic Psychology
that, like normal and problem children, gifted boys in the United States wished for material possessions more often than did gifted girls; but gifted girls expressed more personally related wishes than did gifted boys. Unlike normal and problem children, differences between sexes for wishes of individual accomplishment were not detectable. Interestingly, Kames’ and Wherry’s study suggests that gifted girls were as goal oriented as gifted boys. Kames and Wherry also indicated that gifted children most frequently wished for altruistic concerns; they suggested that greater cognitive ability might heighten children’s awareness of and concern for other people. Several research problems existed in Kames and Wherry’s (1981) study. First, as pointed out by Cobb (1954), the phrasing of the question, if too suggestive, may influence children’s responses. The statement Kames and Wherry used was, “Imagine that you have been magically granted the power that three of your wishes will come true. You are the only person with this power and you may make only three wishes.” The phrasing, “You are the only person with this power . . .” may impose some responsibility on the wisher, which may result in the making of more altruistic wishes. Second, some of the 13 wish categories used by Kames and Wherry (1981), such as pets, travel, and activities, may be classified as subcategories of materialistic or personal wishes. Logically, if the specific objects or events, such as pets or travel, are treated as separate categories, then the gross descriptor altruism should also be divided into subcategories. Finally, because Kames and Wherry dealt only with gifted children, their suggestion that the intellectual characteristics of gifted children may account for their more altruistic wishes requires substantiation by comparative data. In the present investigation, developed from Kames and Wherry’s methodology, we studied the wishes of both gifted and nongifted adolescents. Three assumptions guided us. First, as an expression of personal feelings, attitudes, or desires (Guamaccia & Vane, 1979), wishes should range from self-oriented interests to concerns for society or humankind as a whole; hence, if better cognitive ability heightens the awareness of and concern for other people, gifted adolescents ought to make more altruistic wishes than nongifted adolescents. Second, because adolescence is especially critical for the establishment of sex-appropriate roles (Adams & Looft, 1977), sex differences ought to be reflected in the wish choices of adolescents in the materialistic, goal, altruistic, and personal categories. If gifted girls and boys are equally goal oriented, however, sex differences with regard to goal wishes ought not to appear in the gifted group. Third, if the content of a wish is valued highly by the wisher (Milgram & Riedel, 1969), then the frequencies of wishes in each category ought to reflect the particular concerns of male and female, gifted and nongifted, adolescents.
Chiu & Nevius
135
Method
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
Subjects
The sample consisted of 135 adolescents, 69 gifted (34 boys and 35 girls) and 66 nongifted (31 boys and 35 girls). The 69 gifted adolescents were randomly selected from a pool of 108 gifted students (12 to 14 years old) attending a special summer program at a university in the southwestern United States. Each gifted student enrolled in this program was required to meet at least two of the following criteria: (a) be accelerated one or more grade levels above the average age or grade placement, (b) have achievement test scores at least two grades higher than the student’s present grade, (c) have demonstrated leadership ability, (d) have unusual creative or productive thinking ability, (e) have standard test scores of above average intelligence, and (f) have excep tional skill in the visual or performing arts. The 69 gifted subjects were between 12.2 and 13.9 years old (M = 12.8, SD = S 2 ) . The 66 nongifted subjects, randomly selected from a public junior high school, ranged in age from 12.2 to 14 years old (M = 13,
SD
= .41).
Procedure
The wishes of gifted adolescents were obtained by program counselors in a regularly scheduled group meeting. The wishes of nongifted adolescents were collected by teachers in a school classroom situation. The counselors and teachers first informed the students that they had been selected as respondents to a university research project studying the wishes of children and adolescents and that the information they provided would be confidential. Then, each student was issued a “My Three Wishes” questionnaire, which consisted of a number of questions on one side (concerning the student’s birthday, sex, grade, parents’ occupations, and so on) and three columns (labelled A, B, and C) on the other. After students completed the background information section, they were asked to wiite their three wishes in Column A following this statement: “If you could have three wishes, any three wishes in the whole world, what would you wish for?’. When the students finished recording their wishes, they were asked to respond in Column B to the following: “If all of your three wishes could come true, which wish would you like to happen first, which one second, and which one third? Use numbers 1, 2, and 3 to indicate the order-number 1 for the first wish, number 2 for the second wish, and number 3 for the third wish.” Finally, the students were asked to respond in Column C to the following: “Give a true reason for each of your wishes. If you do not have a reason, you can leave the space blank.”
136
The Journal of Generic Psychology
Categories of Wishes
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
The predetermined wish categories (Chiu & Nevius, 1983) were 1. Materialistic Wishes-wishes that express personal desire to have or to possess specific material objects, pleasant activities, and tangible inclusive material gains. 2. Altruistic Wishes-wishes that express concern for specific individuals or for other people, society, and humankind as a whole. 3. Personal Wishes-wishes that express personal desires or needs for general intangible happiness, for change of personal physical or psychological characteristics, and for improvement of personal social relations or family relations. 4. Goal Wishes-wishes that reflect personal goals and aspirations for educational or vocational careers or that express needs for opportunities to accomplish something. Data Analysis
Two raters (interreliability = 82) categorized the wish choices. Both raters were graduate students and did not know the purpose of the study. They separately categorized each wish into one of the four categories on the basis of the central idea of the wish. The raters disagreed on 16 out of 399 (4%) wishes. These 16 were reanalyzed, using both the wish content and the reasons for the wishes as provided by the students. After reanalysis, 2 wishes remained uncategorized. Consequently, a third rater (Chiu) analyzed the wishes. The category of the final two wishes was then mutually agreed on by the three raters. The categorical and nominal nature of the data required analysis hy nonparametric means. Chi square was the chosen statistic of measurement. Frequencies of the first, second, and third wishes were tabulated separately, using the four wish categories. One-sample chi-square values were computed to determine the nature of the distribution, and 2 x 4 (Group X Category) contingency tables were calculated to detect the difference between sexes and between gifted and nongifted adolescents. The alpha level was set at .05.
Results When gifted and nongifted adolescents were compared, a significant difference was indicated in their first-choice wishes, x2(3, N = 135) = 8.48, p < .05. The gifted group made more personal (33%) wishes, followed by altruistic (30%) wishes; the nongifted group made more goal (32%) wishes, followed by materialistic (29%) wishes.
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
Chiu & Nevius
137
When analyzed separately, the data for each wish choice revealed that both gifted and nongifted groups deviated significantly from random expectations. For their first choices, gifted adolescents made more personal and altruistic wishes, f(3, N = 44) = 9.64,p < .05, whereas nongifted adolescents made more goal and materialistic wishes, x2(3, N = 40) = 8.98, p < .05. For second choices, the gifted group made more personal and altruistic choices, ~ ~ ( N3 ,= 44) = 8.94, p < .05, and the nongifted group made more personal, materialistic, and goal-oriented selections, x2(3, N = 57) = 11.38, p < .01. The third choices for both the gifted, ~ ~ ( 3 , N = 4 9 ) = 15.88,p
ISSN: 0022-1325 (Print) 1940-0896 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgnt20
Three Wishes of Gifted and Nongifted Adolescents Jih-Perng P. Chiu & John R. Nevius To cite this article: Jih-Perng P. Chiu & John R. Nevius (1990) Three Wishes of Gifted and Nongifted Adolescents, The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 151:2, 133-138, DOI: 10.1080/00221325.1990.9914649 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1990.9914649
Published online: 06 Jul 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 10
View related articles
Citing articles: 5 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vgnt20 Download by: [York University Libraries]
Date: 07 November 2015, At: 22:52
The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 151(2), 133-138
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
Three Wishes of Gifted and Nongifted Adolescents JM-PERNG P. CHIU JOHN R. N E W S Department of Early Childhood Education Texas Tech University
ABSTRACT. Three wishes of 69 gifted and 66 nongifted adolescents within the United States were solicited in a group situation. The findings indicated that personal wishes we? of the most concern for both gifted and nongifted adolescents, and that male adolescents in both groups tended to value material possessions more often than did female adolescents. A significant between-groups difference revealed that gifted adolescents expressed more altruistic and fewer goal wishes than their nongifted peers. These kinds of data are one more means of describing, for teachers and counselors, a general picture of students’ psychological and social orientations.
RESEARCH ON THE WISHES of children and adolescents has yielded both psychologically and educationally meaningful data (Horrocks & Mussman, 1973). Generally, the research showed that American children’s wishes consistently varied as a function of age and sex. Wishes for material objects and possessions decreased with age and were replaced by ones with more inclusive and abstract natures (Ables, 1972; Horrocks & Mussman, 1973; Milgram & Riedel, 1969; Schaefer, 1975). Boys had a higher interest in individual accomplishmentsand material possessions (Cobb, 1954; Guamaccia & Vane, 1979), whereas girls had a higher interest in personal concerns, situations, and family relations (Kokonis, 1974; Vandewiele, 1981). The implications of data obtained from normal and problem children as applied to gifted children (Ables, 1972; Horrocks & Mussman, 1973) has been questioned by Kames and Wherry (1981), who investigated the wishes of 155 gifted children in Grades 4 through 7. Kames and Wherry reported Requestsfor reprints should be sent to John Nevius, Department of Early Childhood Education, Texas Tech University, Box 4560, Lubbock, Ix 79409-1071. 133
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
134
The Journal of Generic Psychology
that, like normal and problem children, gifted boys in the United States wished for material possessions more often than did gifted girls; but gifted girls expressed more personally related wishes than did gifted boys. Unlike normal and problem children, differences between sexes for wishes of individual accomplishment were not detectable. Interestingly, Kames’ and Wherry’s study suggests that gifted girls were as goal oriented as gifted boys. Kames and Wherry also indicated that gifted children most frequently wished for altruistic concerns; they suggested that greater cognitive ability might heighten children’s awareness of and concern for other people. Several research problems existed in Kames and Wherry’s (1981) study. First, as pointed out by Cobb (1954), the phrasing of the question, if too suggestive, may influence children’s responses. The statement Kames and Wherry used was, “Imagine that you have been magically granted the power that three of your wishes will come true. You are the only person with this power and you may make only three wishes.” The phrasing, “You are the only person with this power . . .” may impose some responsibility on the wisher, which may result in the making of more altruistic wishes. Second, some of the 13 wish categories used by Kames and Wherry (1981), such as pets, travel, and activities, may be classified as subcategories of materialistic or personal wishes. Logically, if the specific objects or events, such as pets or travel, are treated as separate categories, then the gross descriptor altruism should also be divided into subcategories. Finally, because Kames and Wherry dealt only with gifted children, their suggestion that the intellectual characteristics of gifted children may account for their more altruistic wishes requires substantiation by comparative data. In the present investigation, developed from Kames and Wherry’s methodology, we studied the wishes of both gifted and nongifted adolescents. Three assumptions guided us. First, as an expression of personal feelings, attitudes, or desires (Guamaccia & Vane, 1979), wishes should range from self-oriented interests to concerns for society or humankind as a whole; hence, if better cognitive ability heightens the awareness of and concern for other people, gifted adolescents ought to make more altruistic wishes than nongifted adolescents. Second, because adolescence is especially critical for the establishment of sex-appropriate roles (Adams & Looft, 1977), sex differences ought to be reflected in the wish choices of adolescents in the materialistic, goal, altruistic, and personal categories. If gifted girls and boys are equally goal oriented, however, sex differences with regard to goal wishes ought not to appear in the gifted group. Third, if the content of a wish is valued highly by the wisher (Milgram & Riedel, 1969), then the frequencies of wishes in each category ought to reflect the particular concerns of male and female, gifted and nongifted, adolescents.
Chiu & Nevius
135
Method
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
Subjects
The sample consisted of 135 adolescents, 69 gifted (34 boys and 35 girls) and 66 nongifted (31 boys and 35 girls). The 69 gifted adolescents were randomly selected from a pool of 108 gifted students (12 to 14 years old) attending a special summer program at a university in the southwestern United States. Each gifted student enrolled in this program was required to meet at least two of the following criteria: (a) be accelerated one or more grade levels above the average age or grade placement, (b) have achievement test scores at least two grades higher than the student’s present grade, (c) have demonstrated leadership ability, (d) have unusual creative or productive thinking ability, (e) have standard test scores of above average intelligence, and (f) have excep tional skill in the visual or performing arts. The 69 gifted subjects were between 12.2 and 13.9 years old (M = 12.8, SD = S 2 ) . The 66 nongifted subjects, randomly selected from a public junior high school, ranged in age from 12.2 to 14 years old (M = 13,
SD
= .41).
Procedure
The wishes of gifted adolescents were obtained by program counselors in a regularly scheduled group meeting. The wishes of nongifted adolescents were collected by teachers in a school classroom situation. The counselors and teachers first informed the students that they had been selected as respondents to a university research project studying the wishes of children and adolescents and that the information they provided would be confidential. Then, each student was issued a “My Three Wishes” questionnaire, which consisted of a number of questions on one side (concerning the student’s birthday, sex, grade, parents’ occupations, and so on) and three columns (labelled A, B, and C) on the other. After students completed the background information section, they were asked to wiite their three wishes in Column A following this statement: “If you could have three wishes, any three wishes in the whole world, what would you wish for?’. When the students finished recording their wishes, they were asked to respond in Column B to the following: “If all of your three wishes could come true, which wish would you like to happen first, which one second, and which one third? Use numbers 1, 2, and 3 to indicate the order-number 1 for the first wish, number 2 for the second wish, and number 3 for the third wish.” Finally, the students were asked to respond in Column C to the following: “Give a true reason for each of your wishes. If you do not have a reason, you can leave the space blank.”
136
The Journal of Generic Psychology
Categories of Wishes
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
The predetermined wish categories (Chiu & Nevius, 1983) were 1. Materialistic Wishes-wishes that express personal desire to have or to possess specific material objects, pleasant activities, and tangible inclusive material gains. 2. Altruistic Wishes-wishes that express concern for specific individuals or for other people, society, and humankind as a whole. 3. Personal Wishes-wishes that express personal desires or needs for general intangible happiness, for change of personal physical or psychological characteristics, and for improvement of personal social relations or family relations. 4. Goal Wishes-wishes that reflect personal goals and aspirations for educational or vocational careers or that express needs for opportunities to accomplish something. Data Analysis
Two raters (interreliability = 82) categorized the wish choices. Both raters were graduate students and did not know the purpose of the study. They separately categorized each wish into one of the four categories on the basis of the central idea of the wish. The raters disagreed on 16 out of 399 (4%) wishes. These 16 were reanalyzed, using both the wish content and the reasons for the wishes as provided by the students. After reanalysis, 2 wishes remained uncategorized. Consequently, a third rater (Chiu) analyzed the wishes. The category of the final two wishes was then mutually agreed on by the three raters. The categorical and nominal nature of the data required analysis hy nonparametric means. Chi square was the chosen statistic of measurement. Frequencies of the first, second, and third wishes were tabulated separately, using the four wish categories. One-sample chi-square values were computed to determine the nature of the distribution, and 2 x 4 (Group X Category) contingency tables were calculated to detect the difference between sexes and between gifted and nongifted adolescents. The alpha level was set at .05.
Results When gifted and nongifted adolescents were compared, a significant difference was indicated in their first-choice wishes, x2(3, N = 135) = 8.48, p < .05. The gifted group made more personal (33%) wishes, followed by altruistic (30%) wishes; the nongifted group made more goal (32%) wishes, followed by materialistic (29%) wishes.
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 22:52 07 November 2015
Chiu & Nevius
137
When analyzed separately, the data for each wish choice revealed that both gifted and nongifted groups deviated significantly from random expectations. For their first choices, gifted adolescents made more personal and altruistic wishes, f(3, N = 44) = 9.64,p < .05, whereas nongifted adolescents made more goal and materialistic wishes, x2(3, N = 40) = 8.98, p < .05. For second choices, the gifted group made more personal and altruistic choices, ~ ~ ( N3 ,= 44) = 8.94, p < .05, and the nongifted group made more personal, materialistic, and goal-oriented selections, x2(3, N = 57) = 11.38, p < .01. The third choices for both the gifted, ~ ~ ( 3 , N = 4 9 ) = 15.88,p
