Evaluación Multidimensional de la Superdotación: Criterios de validez de la Batería de Inteligencia y Creatividad para predecirlos talentos artísticos y académicos
Agencias de apoyo
- Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) and Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal do Ensino Superior (CAPES)
Resumen
Este trabajo tiene por objeto probar la utilidad de la Batería para la Evaluación de la Superdotación (BaSH/S, por sus siglas en portugués) para identificar diferentes grupos de alumnos superdotados en las aéreas de talento académico y artístico. La batería valora cuatro factores latentes: (a) inteligencia fluida, (b) producción de metáforas (creatividad verbal), (c) fluidez figurativa (creatividad figurativa), y (d) calidad del pensamiento divergente figurativo (creatividad figurativa). Se tomó una muestra de 987 alumnos adolescentes, 464 chicos y 523 chicas de edades de 8 a 17 años, que pertenecían a dos grupos: alumnos no superdotados (N=866) y alumnos superdotados (N= 67 habilidades académicas, N=34 habilidades artísticas y N=20 no identificados en un dominio especifico). El grupo de superdotados académicos presento las puntuaciones más altas en razonamiento y podían producir metáforas más originales y remotas, eran figurativamente más fluidos y sus dibujos eran más originales. Las habilidades académicas eran relativamente mayores en los superdotados académicos que en los artísticos (r = .39 vs r =.14). En el grupo de superdotados artísticos la fluidez figurativa y sus puntuaciones en originalidad eran relativamente más importantes que el razonamiento (r = .25 y r = .21 vs .14). El trabajo enfatiza la importancia de evaluar la creatividad en distintos dominios además de la inteligencia para mejorar el entendimiento de la superdotación y el talento.
Descargas
Citas
Baer, J. (1994). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multi-domain training experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 35-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419409534507
Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The Amusement Park Theoretical (APT) Model of Creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158-163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783190509554310
Barros, D.P., Primi, R., Miguel, F.K., Almeida, L., & Oliveira, E.P. (2010). Metaphor creation: a measure of creativity or intelligence? European Journal of Education and Psychology, 3(1), 103-115.
Beghetto, R.A., Plucker, J.A., & MaKinster, J.G. (2001). Who studies creativity and how do we know? Creativity Research Journal, 13(3/4), 351-357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_12
Benedek, M., Mühlmann, C., Jauk, E., & Neubauer, A. C. (2013). Assessment of divergent thinking by means of the subjective top-scoring method: Effects of the number of top-ideas and time-on-task on reliability and validity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(4), 341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0033644
Besjes-de Bock, K.M., & Ruyter, D.J. (2011). Five values of giftedness. Roeper Review, 33, 198-207. DOI: 10.1080/02783193.2011.580502
Borsboom, D., & Mellenbergh, G. J. (2007). Test validity in cognitive assessment. In Leighton, J. P. & Gierl, M. J. (Eds.), Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education: Theory and applications (pp. 85–115). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bracken, B. A., & Brown, E. F. (2006). Behavioral identification and assessment of gifted and talented students. Journal of Psychological Assessment, 24(2), 112-122. doi: 10.1177/0734282905285246
Calero, M. D., & García-Martin, M. B. (2014). Estabilidad temporal del C.I. y potencial de aprendizaje en ninos superdotados: implicaciones diagnósticas [Temporal stability of C.I. and learning potential of gifted children: diagnostic implications]. Anales de Psicologia, 39(2), 512-521. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.2.16380
Callahan, C. M. (2006). Developing a plan for evaluating a program in gifted education. In J. H. Purcell & R. D. Eckert (Eds.), Designing services and programs for high ability learners: A guidebook for gifted education (pp. 195–206). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781483329307.n15
Chart, H., Grigorenko, E. L, & Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Identification: The Aurora Battery. In J. A. Plucker & C. M. Callahan (Eds), Critical issues and practices in gifted education (pp. 345-365). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Chase, C. I. (1985). Review of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. In J.V. Mitchell Jr. (Org.). The ninth mental measurements yearbook (pp.1631-1632). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Chen, C., Kasof, J., Himsel, A.J., Greenberger, E., Dong, Q., & Xue, G. (2002). Creativity in drawings of geometric shapes: a cross-cultural examination with the consensual assessment technique. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(2), 171-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033002004
Chiappe, D. L., & Chiappe, P. (2007). The role of working memory in metaphor production and comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 172-188.
Clapham, M. M. (1998). Structure of figural forms A and B of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 275-283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164498058002010
Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Bandalos, D., & Zuo, L. (2005). A report on the 40-year follow-up of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Alive and well in the new millennium. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 283–291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001698620504900402
Cropley, A. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review, 23, 72-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783190009554069
Dai, D. Y., Swanson, J.A., & Cheng, H. (2011). State of research on giftedness and gifted education: a survey of empirical studies published during 1998-2010 (April). Gifted Child Quaterly, 55 (2), 126- 138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0016986210397831
David, A. P., Morais, M. D. F., Primi, R., & Miguel, F. K. (2014). Metáforas e pensamento divergente: criatividade, escolaridade e desempenho em Artes e Tecnologias. Avaliação Psicológica, 13(2), 147-156.
Epskamp, S. (2015): semPlot: Unified Visualizations of Structural Equation Models, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, DOI: 10.1080/10705511.2014.937847
Feist, G. (2004). The evolved fluid specificity of human creative talent. In R. Sternberg, E. Grigorenko, & J. Singer (Eds.), Creativity from potential to realization (pp.57-82). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10692-005
Gagné, F. (2005). From gifts to talents: The DMGT as a developmental model. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 98-120), New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455.008
Gallagher, J. J. (2008). Psychology, psychologist, and gifted students. In S. Pfeiffer (Org.). Handbook of giftedness in children: Psycho-educational theory, research and best practices (pp. 1-11). New York: Springer.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Han, K. (2003). Domain specificity of creativity in young children: How quantitative and qualitative data support it. Journal of Creative Behavior, 37, 117-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2003.tb00829.x
Heausler, N. L., & Thompson, B. (1988). Structure of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48, 463-468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164488482021
Heller, K. A. (2013). Findings form Munich Longitudinal Study of Giftedness and their impact on identification, education and counseling. Talent Development & Excellence, 5(1), 51-64.
Hérnandez-Torrano, D., Férrandiz, C., Ferrando, M., Prieto, L., & Férnandez, M. C. (2014). The theory of multiple intelligences in the identification of high abilities students. Anales de Psicologia, 30(1), 192-200.
Jarosewich, T., Pfeiffer, S., & Morris, J. (2002). Identifying gifted students using teacher rating scales: A review of existing instruments. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 322-336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/073428290202000401
Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Agars, M. D., & Loomis, D. (2010). Creativity stereotypes and the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 22(2), 200-205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2010.481529
Kaufman, J. C., Lee, J., Baer, J., & Lee, S. (2007). Captions, consistency, creativity and the consensual assessment technique: new evidence of reliability. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2, 96-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2007.04.002
Kaufman, J. C., Plucker, J. A., & Russell, C. M. (2012). Identifying and assessment creativity as a component of giftedness. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 60-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734282911428196
Kaufman, S. B., & Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Conceptions of giftedness. In S. Pfeiffer (Ed.), Handbook of giftedness in children: Psycho-Educational theory, research and best practices (pp. 71-91). New York: Springer.
Kazmerski, V., Blasko, D., & Dessalegn, B. (2003). ERP and behavioral evidence of individual differences in metaphor comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 31, 673–689.
Kerr, B., & Sodano, S. (2003) Career assessment with intellectually gifted students. Journal of Career Assessment, 11, 168-186.
Kim, K. H. (2006). Can we trust creativity tests? A review of the Torrance tests of creative thinking (TTCT). Creativity Research Journal, 18, 3-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_2
Kogan, N., & Pankove, E. (1974). Long-term predictive validity of divergent-thinking tests: Some negative evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 802-809. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0021521
Lemons, G. (2011). Diverse perspectives of creativity testing: controversial issues when used for inclusion into gifted programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34(5), 742-772. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162353211417221
Li, H., Lee, D., Pfeiffer, S. I., Kamata, A., Kumtepe, A. T., & Rosado, J. (2009) Measurement invariance of the Gifted Rating Scales – school form across five cultural groups. School Psychology Quarterly, 4 (3), 186-198.
Lichtenberger, E. O., Volker, M. A., Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2006). Assessing gifted children with the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children - second edition (KABC·II). Gifted Education International, 21, 99-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026142940602100304
Love, J., Selker, R., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Dropmann, D., Verhagen, A. J., Ly, A., Gronau, Q. F., Smira, M., Epskamp, S., Matzke, D., Wild, A., Knight, P., Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2015). JASP (Version 0.7.1)[Computer software].
Lubisnki, D., Schmidt, D. B., & Benbow, C. P. (1996). A 20-year stability analysis of the study of values for intellectually gifted individuals from adolescence to adulthood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 443-451.
MacIntosh, R., & Hashim, S. (2003). Variance estimation for converting MIMIC model parameters to IRT parameters in DIF analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27(5), 372-379.
Miller, E. M., & Cohen, L. M. (2012). Engendering talent in others: expanding domains of giftedness and creativity. Roeper Review, 34, 104-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2012.660684
Montero-Linares, J., Navarro-Guzmán, J. I., & Aguilar-Villagrán, M. (2013). Procesos de automatización cognitiva en alumnado con altas capacidades intelectuales [Cognitive processes automation in highly gifted students]. Anales de Psicologia, 29(2), 454-461. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.2.123291
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus User’s Guide. Sixth Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Nakano, T. C., & Primi, R. (2014). Rasch-Master's Partial Credit Model in the Assessment of Children's Creativity in Drawings. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17, 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2014.36
Nakano, T. C., Primi, R., Abreu, I. C. C., Gozzoli, M. Z., Caporossi, D. C., Miliani, A. F. M., & Martins, A. A. (2015). Bateria para avaliação das altas habilidades/superdotação: análise dos itens via Teoria de Resposta ao Item [Battery for Assessment of giftedness: analysis conducted using Item Response Theory]. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 32(4), 725-737. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-166X2015000400016
Nakano, T. C., Wechsler, S. M., Campos, C. R., & Milian, Q. G. (2015). Intelligence and creativity: relationships and their implications for Positive Psychology. Psico-USF, 20(2), 195-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712015200201
Nakano, T. C., Wechsler, S. M., & Primi, R. (2011). Teste de Criatividade Figural Infantil [Test of the Children’s Figural Creativity]. São Paulo: Editora Vetor.
Pfeiffer, S. I. (2015). El modelo tripartido sobre la alta capacidad y las mejores prácticas en la evaluación de los más capaces. Revista de Educación, 368, 66-95.
Pierson, E. E., Kilmer, L. M., Rothlisberg, B. A., & McIntosh, D. E. (2012). Use of brief intelligence tests in the identification of giftedness. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessement, 30(1), 10-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734282911428193
Plucker, J. A. (1999). Is the proof in the pudding? Reanalysis of Torrance’s (1958 to present) longitudinal data. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 103-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1202_3
Plucker, J. A., & Runco, M. A. (1998). The death of creativity measurement has been greatly exaggerated: current issues, recent advances, and future directions in creativity assessment. Roeper Review, 21(1), 36-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783199809553924
Primi, R. (2014). Divergent Productions of Metaphors: Combining Many-Facet Rasch Measurement and Cognitive Psychology in the Assessment of Creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts (online publication). http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0038055
Primi, R., & Almeida, L. S. (2000). Baterias de Provas de Raciocínio (BPR-5): Manual técnico [Battery for Reasoning Tests: technical manual]. São Paulo: Casa do Psicólogo.
Primi, R., Miguel, F.K., Couto, G. & Muniz, M. (2007). Precisão de avaliadores na avaliação da criatividade por meio da produção de metáforas [Inter rater reliability in the creativity assessment using metaphor production]. PsicoUSF, 12 (2), 197-210.
Primi, R., Nakano, T.C., Morais, M.F., Almeida, L.S. & David, A.P.M. (2013). Factorial Structure analysis of the Torrance test in Portuguese students. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 30(1), 19-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-166X2013000100003
Renzulli, J. S. (2005). The three-ring definition of giftedness: A developmental model for promoting creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp.246-280). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455.015
Renzulli, J. S., & Gaesser, A. H. (2015). Un sistema multicriterial para la identificación del alumnado de alto rendimiento y de alta capacidad creativo-productiva. Revista de Educación, 368, 96-131.
Revelle, W. (2015) Psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA, http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych Version = 1.5.8.
Ribeiro, W. J., Nakano, T. C., & Primi, R. (2014). Validade da estrutura fatorial de uma Bateria de Avaliação de Altas Habilidades [Validity of the Factor Structure of a Battery of Assessment of High Abilities]. Psico, 45(1), 100-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2014.1.13636
Robinson, A., & Clinkenbeard, P. R. (2008). History of giftedness: perspectives from the past presage modern scholarship. In S. Pfeiffer (Org.). Handbook of giftedness in children: Psycho-Educational theory, research and best practices (pp. 13-31). New York: Springer.
Roid, G. H. (2003). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. URL http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/
Runco, M. A., Millar, G., Acar, S., & Crammond, B. (2011). Torrance tests of creative thinking as a predictor of personal and public achievement: a fifty-year follow-up. Creativity Research Journal, 22(4), 361-368.
Runco, M. A., & Mraz, W. (1992). Scoring divergent thinking tests using total ideational output and a creativity index. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 213-221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001316449205200126
Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In, D. Flanagan & P. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed.) (pp. 99-144). New York: Guilford.
Schraw, G. (2005). Review of the Khatena-Torrance Creative Perception Inventory. In R. Spies & B. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 542-543). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001316449205200126
Silvia, P. J. (2007). An introduction to multilevel modeling for research on the psychology of art and creativity. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 25(1), 1/20. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/6780-361T-3J83-04L1
Silvia, P. J. (2011). Subjective scoring of divergent thinking: examining the reliability of unusual uses, instances and consequences tasks. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6, 24-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2010.06.001
Silvia, P. J. (2015). Intelligence and creativity are pretty similar after all. Educational Psychological Review (online publication). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9299-1
Silvia, P. J., & Beaty, R. E. (2012). Making creative metaphors: the importance of fluid intelligence for creative thought. Intelligence, 40, 343-351.
Silvia, P. J., Martin, C., & Nusbaum, E. C. (2009). A snapshot of creativity: evaluating a quick and simple method for assessing divergent thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4, 79-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.06.005
Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., & Willse, J. T. (2008). The madness to our method: some thoughts on divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 2(2), 109-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.109
Sternberg, R. J. (1981). A componential theory of intellectual giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 86–93.
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). WICS: Wisdom, Intelligence, and Creativity, Synthesized. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511509612
Sternberg, R. J. (2010). Assessment of gifted students for identification purposes: new techniques for a new millennium. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 327-336. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2009.08.003
Subotnik, R. F., Olszeski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: a proposed direction forward based on Psychological Science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056
Torrance, E. P. (1969). Curiosity of gifted children and performances on timed and untimed tests of creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 13, 155-158.
Torrance, E. P. (1972). Predictive validity of the Torrance tests of creative thinking. Journal of Creative Behaviour, 6, 236-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1972.tb00936.x
Torrance, E. P. (1987). Future career image as a predictor of creative achievement in the 22-year longitudinal study. Psychology Reports, 60, 574. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1987.60.2.574
Torrance, E. P. (2002). The manifest: A guide to developing a creative career. Westport, CT: Ablex.
Torrance, E. P., & Wu, T. H. (1981). A comparative longitudinal study of adult creative achievements of elementary school children identified as high intelligence and highly creative. Creativity Child Adult Quarterly, 6, 71-76.
Van Tassel-Baska, J., Feng, A. X., & Evans, B. L. (2007). Patterns of identification and performance among gifted students identified through performance tasks. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 218-231. Doi: 10.1177/0016986207302717.
Virgolim, A. M. R. (1997). O indivíduo superdotado: história, concepção e identificação [The gifted Individual: history, conception and identification]. Psicologia Teoria e Pesquisa, 13(1), 173-183.
Volker, M. A., & Phelps, L. (2004). Identification of gifted students with the WISC–IV. In D. P. Flanagan & A. S. Kaufman (Eds.), Essentials of WISC–IV assessment (pp. 216–224). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Wilson, R. C., Guilford, J. P., & Christesen, P. R. (1953). The measurement of individual differences in originality. Psychological Bulletin, 50(5), 362-370. doi: 10.1037/h0060857
Zeng, L., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (2011). Can traditional divergent thinking tests be trusted in measuring and predicting real-world creativity? Creativity Research Journal, 23(1), 24-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.545713.
Las obras que se publican en esta revista están sujetas a los siguientes términos:
1. El Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia (la editorial) conserva los derechos patrimoniales (copyright) de las obras publicadas, y favorece y permite la reutilización de las mismas bajo la licencia de uso indicada en el punto 2.
© Servicio de Publicaciones, Universidad de Murcia, 2024
2. Las obras se publican en la edición electrónica de la revista bajo una licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (texto legal). Se pueden copiar, usar, difundir, transmitir y exponer públicamente, siempre que: i) se cite la autoría y la fuente original de su publicación (revista, editorial y URL de la obra); ii) no se usen para fines comerciales; iii) se mencione la existencia y especificaciones de esta licencia de uso.
3. Condiciones de auto-archivo. Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir electrónicamente las versiones pre-print (versión antes de ser evaluada y enviada a la revista) y/o post-print (versión evaluada y aceptada para su publicación) de sus obras antes de su publicación, ya que favorece su circulación y difusión más temprana y con ello un posible aumento en su citación y alcance entre la comunidad académica. Color RoMEO: verde.
