Journal article
Trent N. Cash, Tzu-Jung Lin
Gifted Child Quarterly, vol. 66(3), 2022, pp. 188-207
Gifted Child Quarterly, vol. 66(3), 2022, pp. 188-207
View PDF
Cite
Cite
APA
Click to copy
Cash, T. N., & Lin, T.-J. (2022). Psychological well-being of intellectually and academically gifted students in self-contained and pull-out gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 66(3), 188–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862211032987
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Cash, Trent N., and Tzu-Jung Lin. “Psychological Well-Being of Intellectually and Academically Gifted Students in Self-Contained and Pull-out Gifted Programs.” Gifted Child Quarterly 66, no. 3 (2022): 188–207.
MLA
Click to copy
Cash, Trent N., and Tzu-Jung Lin. “Psychological Well-Being of Intellectually and Academically Gifted Students in Self-Contained and Pull-out Gifted Programs.” Gifted Child Quarterly, vol. 66, no. 3, 2022, pp. 188–207, doi:10.1177/00169862211032987.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{trent2022a,
title = {Psychological well-being of intellectually and academically gifted students in self-contained and pull-out gifted programs},
year = {2022},
issue = {3},
journal = {Gifted Child Quarterly},
pages = {188-207},
volume = {66},
doi = {10.1177/00169862211032987},
author = {Cash, Trent N. and Lin, Tzu-Jung}
}
🏆️
This paper was awarded the Mensa Foundation's Award for Excellence in Research (2021-2022)
Abstract
This study examined the psychological well-being of students enrolled in two gifted programs with different service delivery models. Participants were 292 fifth- and sixth-grade students (Mage = 11.70, SDage = 0.65) enrolled in a gifted math pull-out program (n = 103), a self-contained gifted program (n = 90), or a program providing no gifted services, which served as a control group (n = 99). Multiple differences in psychological well-being across programs were revealed in Hierarchical Linear Models, particularly in terms of math self-concept, loneliness, and maladaptive perfectionism. Students in the two gifted programs reported different patterns of psychological well-being when compared to students in the no gifted services control group. These differences suggest distinct social phenomena underlying the two different service delivery models.
