Developmental characteristics of a 0- to 3-year-old gifted child based on video analysis

Early developmental characteristics of gifted children

Gifted children think and behave differently than their typically developing peers, which can be observed during the early developmental stages (Gross, 2003). However their development may also be asynchronous (Morelock, 1992). In fact, while they may show faster cognitive development (Walsh et al., 2010), they can fall behind their peers in psychomotor development (Alsop, 2003). Gifted children may generally display social and emotional maturity during early childhood, as well as advanced early language skills such as talking and reading. In fact, these children may progress faster than their peers in some developmental domains, while they may follow a similar or slow development in other domains (Dağlıoğlu, 2018). Moreover, each early ability has a significant impact on the other developmental domains, which impacts the child as a whole (Cukierkorn et al., 2008).

Gifted children may display such characteristics as speaking in long and complex sentences, giving quick responses, reading and writing independently, rhythmic counting, adding and subtracting two-digit numbers, telling time, displaying a good understanding of time, memorizing five or six numbers concepts, and focusing on a certain object or an activity for a long time (Bildiren, 2018; Davis & Rimm, 2004; Gross, 1999; Kuo et al., 2010; Manning, 2006; Renzulli et al., 2002; Stainthorp & Hughes, 2004). In literature, these are reported as the signs of giftedness. Some studies also highlight the emergence of some inborn abilities. As an example, a longitudinal study by Vaivre-Douret (2004) indicated that a certain maturity in neuromotor and neurosensory systems leads to early emergence of hand-eye coordination and language acquisition. Similarly, Vaivre-Douret (2011) found that the sensory, locomotor, neuropsychological, and language skills in gifted children start to develop earlier than expected. Morrissey and Brown (2009) video-recorded play sessions of 21 children aged 8–17 months and assessed children’s IQ with Stanford-Binet IV intelligence test when they turned 5. Mutual play was analyzed using the conceptual frameworks of scaffolding and Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The researchers found that toddlers with higher IQs demonstrated more rapid acquisition of pretend play and took on responsibilities earlier (Morrissey & Brown, 2009). Bildiren (2018) interviewed the parents of 112 gifted children with an average IQ of 137.48 and investigated their distinctive characteristics during the ages of 0–2, 2–4, and 4–6 years. The families remarked that their child used a wide variety of words more accurately, had a wider vocabulary, understood speech, and did what was asked when they were between 0 and 2 compared to their non-gifted peers. It was reported that the gifted children of that age tended to walk and speak early, display rapid perception and strong memory, draw, and show curiosity. Moreover, the children also displayed rapid perception as well as drawing, strong memory, mathematics, abstract thinking, and early reading-writing abilities during the ages of 2–4. Raine et al. (2002) reported that 3-year-old curious children achieved higher academic and IQ scores at 11. Another longitudinal study revealed that children identified as gifted at the age of 8 had displayed advanced cognitive development during their first year of life (Gottfried et al., 1994). Taken together, these findings clearly show that gifted children display advanced early developmental characteristics.

The identification of giftedness during preschool is a controversial subject. A review study of 64 different authorities in the field of gifted children indicated that there is no consensus on diagnostic approaches in preschool and identification in this period remains problematic (Pfeiffer, 2003). Due to the lack of clarity in diagnostic approaches, it is important to use multiple selection criteria for giftedness (Lohman et al., 2008). It is suggested to use both formal (e.g., standardized tests) and informal (e.g., teacher opinion) tools (National Association for Gifted Children [NAGC], 2015). In fact, intelligence tests in formal tools play a key role in identifying general intellectual ability. General intellectual ability that is included in Renzulli’s theory sets an important criterion both in traditional understanding of intelligence and in giftedness theories. Therefore, it dominates most of the current giftedness theories as a determining factor (Sak, 2017). Heller and Hany (2004) argues that logical, analytical and abstract thinking, ability to learn, power of combining, and broad knowledge capacity, in other words, general intellectual skill, must be included as a criterion in the identification of gifted children as a determining factor. Many studies have demonstrated that this criterion is clearly observed in gifted children whose characteristics (e.g., questioning, abstract thinking, curiosity, large information capacity, sophisticated thinking skills, and memory) are diagnosed between 0–6 years of life (Bildiren, 2018; Kuo et al., 2010). Thus, it can be assumed that intelligence tests are still used as a criterion for the identification of giftedness.

The studies on the infancy development of gifted children defined giftedness during infancy and toddlerhood as advanced cognitive and language development as well as high intellectual motivation and sensibility (Dalzell, 1998; Harrison, 2004; Perleth et al., 1993; Robinson, 1993). However, there are only a handful of studies particularly focusing on infant development of these children. Thus, there is still a need for further research on giftedness in infancy as the indicators of giftedness in that period may provide parents and experts with significant information. According to Gottfried et al. (1994), families may discern the potential of their children prior to their identification in primary school. Hence, early developmental characteristics of gifted children may contribute to both early identification and suitable interventions. However, reluctance among teachers is highlighted in the literature in identifying high abilities during early childhood. Sankar-DeLeeuw (2002) suggests that this could be due to beliefs that these children may be labeled or experience difficulties. However, such beliefs may prevent gifted children from receiving early intervention as well as meeting their needs. Furthermore, studies underline the importance of identifying and improving gifted children’s abilities (Bildiren & Kargın, 2019; Kaplan & Hertzog, 2016; Karadağ & Yıldız Demirtaş, 2017; Kettler et al., 2017; Kuo et al., 2010; Peterson, 2006). Literature suggests that gifted children will achieve academic success if their potential is enhanced through training and education tailored on the basis of their needs (Reis & Renzulli, 2010; Subotnik et al., 2011). For this reason, gifted children should be supported throughout developmental stages to achieve their full potential (Subotnik & Rickoff, 2010; VanTassel-Baska et al., 2009). It is important to raise awareness among families who play an important role in supporting gifted children during early childhood. There is a growing consensus in literature that a detailed analysis is needed for the development of a gifted child in infancy as determining the early developmental characteristics of gifted children may contribute to the relevant literature. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to conduct a detailed analysis of the developmental characteristics of a gifted child. For this purpose, analysis was carried out of the psychomotor, cognitive, language, social, and personal characteristics of a gifted child over a 3-year period, from birth to 3 years of age.

Method

This study used a qualitative case study design (Creswell, 2007). Case studies aid the understanding of contextual clues and conditions of every case based on a specific phenomenon (Yin, 2017). Types of qualitative case studies include a single case, more than one case, a group, or a program (Creswell, 2007). A single case was employed in the present study to conduct an analysis of the early developmental characteristics of a gifted child (see Table 1). The study used document analysis, a qualitative data collection method. One of the advantages of document analysis is that it enables the use of visual and auditory materials such as audio, video, and photographs, as well as written sources. Thus, non-verbal behaviors such as facial expressions, body movements, gestures, and auditory emotions can be counted as data (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2013). Psychomotor, language, cognitive, personal, and social early developmental characteristics of the child participant, Sude, were analyzed using parent-recorded videos. The data was reevaluated during the interviews with the family. However, while finalizing the coding, the recording date when the child exhibited the relevant behaviors was taken as the basis. The difference between the recording date and the birth date was determined as the one when the child displayed the behavior. The reason for using the recording was that her family may not have remembered the exact dates the behaviour first occurred due to the length of time that had elapsed. On the other hand, the video recordings provided conclusive evidence for the date.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Comparison of typical developmental children and sude’s developmental characteristics.

Psychomotor	Follows moving and bright objects with eyes up to 180°.	Typically developing children (0–3 months)
		Sude (2 months)
	Raises head for a short time in the prone position (1–2 sec).	Typically developing children (0–3 months)
		Sude (2 months)
	Reaches out and picks up the object in front of him/her while sitting.	Typically developing children (4–6 months)
		Sude (3 months)
	Sits unassisted.	Typically developing children (6–9 months)
		Sude (5 months)
	Holds bottle or glass with both hands.	Typically developing children (7–12 months)
		Sude (1–2 months)
	Crawls.	Typically developing children (7–12 months)
		Sude (9 months)
	Walks alone unaided.	Typically developing children (13–24 months)
		Sude (13 months)
	Runs.	Typically developing children (13–24 months)
		Sude (15 months)
Cognitive and language	Identifies the person speaking or the direction from which a sound is coming.	Typically developing children (0–3 months)
		Sude (1–2 months)
	Reacts to his/her name.	Typically developing children (7–12 months)
		Sude (2–3 months)
	Uses single words.	Typically developing children (7–12 months)
		Sude (8–9 months)
	Says familiar object/animal names correctly.	Typically developing children (13–24 months)
		Sude (11 months)
	Follows two-step instructions.	Typically developing children (13–24 months)
		Sude (11 months)
	Names at least 2 of the body parts.	Typically developing children (13–24 months)
		Sude (10 months)
	Makes sentences of 4 words.	Typically developing children (25–26 months)
		Sude (20 months)
	Says his/her name and surname.	Typically developing children (25–26 months)
		Sude (22 months)
	Sings songs and tongue twisters by heart.	Typically developing children (37–48 months)
		Sude (29 months)
	Does 4-piece puzzle unaided.	Typically developing children (37–48 months)
		Sude (15 months)
Social and personal	Smiles at people known to him/her.	Typically developing children (4–6 months)
		Sude (1 month)
	Waves goodbye.	Typically developing children (7–12 months)
		Sude (7–8 months)
	Puts on and off most clothes unaided.	Typically developing children (49–72 months)
		Sude (18 months)

Participant

10 families of children showing above 130 IQ were interviewed in the Child Psychiatry Department at Ege university. 6 families had a video archive of their child between 0-3 years of age. However, only one family gave their permission to the use their videos for analysis. The family approved the use of the child’s own name or a pseudonym in the research. Next, the researchers interviewed the child who also consented to participate. The child, Sude, is currently 15 years old. She was born by natural birth. At birth, she weighed 3500 g and was 49 cm long. Her early developmental characteristics attracted the attention of her parents and the people around them from the time of her birth. Sude’s IQ was assessed with a Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Revised (WISC-R) test at the age of 7 at Ege University Pediatric Psychiatry Department and she was identified as gifted. Based on the intelligence test scores, Verbal, Performance, and Total IQ scores were 132, 140, and 140 respectively. Sude demonstrated high academic performance in secondary school. She had no wrong answers in the nationwide mock exam and ranked first in Turkey. In high school, she managed to be among the top 50,000 out of the 1,472,088 test-takers in a nationwide mock exam, thereby ranking in the top 3 percentile.

Data collection and instruments

Procedure

In the first stage, the research team decoded all video recordings of which the accuracy and completeness were verified. Following the verification of the accuracy and completeness of the decoded material, codes were identified regarding each developmental domain. The codes identified by the researchers were based on the theoretical explanations for giftedness and child development (Clark, 2002; Harrison, 2003; Navas-Sánchez et al., 2016; Vaivre-Douret, 2011). In addition, gifted education experts gifted education field in Turkey provided their opinions regarding the categorization of video analyses. In the second stage, the research team checked the overlap between codes and categories, as well as the links between video recordings and categories. After completing the arrangements related to the codes and categories, one of the researchers coded the study data after a 4-week break. The intercoder reliability coefficient was calculated by using the following quotient: Agreement Percentage = [The number of total agreements/(The number of total agreements + The number of total disagreements)] x 100) (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The inter-coder reliability coefficient ranged from 95% to 100%, averaging 97%. The researchers compared the coding and the findings from the semi-structured interview form after finalizing the coding developed through video analysis. The codes were re-evaluated together with the data obtained during the family interview. As a result, the coding was finalized (see Table 2)

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

An example of the analysis of sude’s early developmental characteristics in the psychomotor domain.

Video analysis	Parents’ interview	Final coding
Grasping objects	‘….She could hold the bottle herself from 1-2 months of age. She could hold and sort the cubes by herself from 9-10 months of age…’	Grasping objects
Catching the ball	‘….When we threw the ball or other objects to her, she could catch them during 9–10 months of age….’	Catching
Throwing the ball at the target	‘….She could throw balls at the target from the age of 10 months. In a small bowling game, she could throw the ball at the target. The balls were going in the right direction, even if the bottles could not be dropped….’	Throwing to the target
Grasping objects	‘….From the age of 9–10 months, she could hold and grasp small fruits or mall toys with her fingers….’	Grasping

Results

Psychomotor

Video analysis findings on developmental characteristics in the psychomotor domain (Vaivre-Douret, 2011; Walsh et al., 2010; Wright & Ford, 2017) indicated that Sude displayed fine motor skills and could raise her head better than expected but otherwise followed similar development to her age peers in gross motor skills (e.g., crawling and walking). Figure 1 presents the early development themes identified in the psychomotor domain.OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Sude’s psychomotor early developmental characteristics.

The findings showed that Sude raised her head and kept it up at 1 month, held her own bottle at 1–2 months (see Figure 2), raised her head 90° at 2 months, tracked the moving object up to 180° at 2 months, and reached towards objects at 3 months. She was able to sit unaided at 5 months (see Figure 3) and she was interested in people and events around her after the 7^th month. Sude could grasp an object extended towards her, switch it from one hand to the other, turn it upside down and direct attention at the object. Starting from the 9^th month, she could pick up small objects using her thumb and index finger and looked in the right direction for the object if dropped. Sude was able to crawl at 9 months, cruise around at 11 months, walk at 13 months, and run at 15 months. She was able to throw a ball at a target at 10–11 months and put 4 different boxes in order. She could build a tower at 14 months with 8 concentric pieces.OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Sude holds her own bottle at 1–2 months.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Sude sits unaided at 5 months.

Discussion

Evaluating the parental observations is of significance for identifying giftedness due to the difficulties in evaluating infancy- or preschool-aged gifted children through quantitative measures for the age below 6 (Goodwin & Goodwin, 1982; Tannenbaum, 1992; Willerman & Fiedler, 1977). In literature, it is still controversial to identify giftedness at an early age. One reason for this is the concerns regarding the reliability of parental observations of their gifted child during the nomination process (Walsh et al., 2010). However, the video analysis validated the observations of Sude by her parents indicating that certain early developmental characteristics are likely to provide clues for early identification.

It is notable that Sude’s performance especially in fine motor skills was remarkable. She was able to hold her bottle at 1–2 months, throw a ball at a target, and arrange 4 different boxes in order at 10–11 months. Campos et al. (2000) emphasized the importance of locomotor movement for social development and the association between motor and cognitive development domains. Similarly, Alkan and Mutlu (2020) found a correlation between physical competence and cognitive performance. The correlation between motor and cognitive development domains has been supported by fundamental child development theories. According to Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory, motor and cognitive developmental domains are associated with “thinking with physical activities” (Veldman et al., 2019). In fact, Sude’s fine motor skills could well be related to her cognitive performance. Van der Fels et al. (2015) conducted a systematic review study to determine the relationship between motor skills and cognitive skills of children aged between 4–16 years and found that fine motor skills had the strongest correlation with cognitive ability. According to Adolph and Berger (2006), adjusting motor behaviors to body and environment requires perception, planning, decision-making, learning, as well as new strategies. Similarly, understanding how to hold a bottle, throwing balls at a target, and ordering boxes demonstrate the association between cognitive performance and fine motor skills. This can be explained the first motor skill group (i.e., fine motor skills, bilateral coordination, and the time-based performance of movement) having higher cognitive demands (Van der Fels et al., 2015). Motor skills that display stronger relations with cognitive skills can be interpreted as complex motor skills and may require advanced cognitive skills.

Gross (1993) monitored 40 gifted children longitudinally and identified that a gifted baby generally started crawling earlier and sit unaided at 6 months, 1 or 2 months before typically developing babies, based on parental observations. Similarly, we found that Sude started sitting unaided from the 5th month onwards. Contrary to fine motor skills, Sude’s gross motor skill development (e.g., walking, crawling) was at the level of her age peers (Yalaz et al., 2009), which indicates that her psychomotor development speed rate was different. Previous research indicated the varying speed rate in developmental domains among gifted children and those with typical development (Neihart et al., 2021). Although cognitive development in gifted children is faster than that of typically developing children (Walsh et al., 2010), the development in psychomotor domain may remain slower (Alsop, 2003). However, Sude’s psychomotor development was more advanced than her age peers.

We found that Sude’s characteristics were mainly strong memory, curiosity, attention, and perception in the cognitive domain, which is consistent with the findings in previous studies on giftedness (Bildiren, 2018; Callahan, 2011; Clark, 2013; Davis & Rimm, 2004; Gross, 1999, 2006; Harrison, 2003; Kuo et al., 2010; McGee & Hughes, 2011; Navas-Sánchez et al., 2016; Robinson, 2008; Vaivre-Douret, 2011; Walsh et al., 2010; Wright & Ford, 2017). The characteristics in the cognitive domain were obtained through video analyses, while the themes related to early developmental characteristics were based on the video recording dates. The behaviors in the cognitive domain may be the indicators of early developmental characteristics of Sude’s 140 IQ as measured at the age of 7. Furthermore, significant differences may appear between Verbal IQ and performance IQ in gifted children (Bessou et al., 2005; Hollinger & Kosek, 1986). However, according to Vaivre-Douret (2002, 2004), this should not be counted as a difference specific to gifted children. A significant difference in favor of verbal IQ may emerge in gifted children if they have difficulties with performance tests (Vaivre-Douret, 2011). Sude’s performance IQ score, however, was higher than her verbal IQ score. She displayed high performance especially in block design, object assembly, and the coding subtests. Parental attention may have had a positive impact on her performance. It was evident in video recordings that Sude and her parents frequently played games together. In these videos, Sude and her parents played classification, similarity, matching, puzzles, and memory games, which may have supported her cognitive development. Indeed, Morrissey (2011) found that mothers of children with high IQs provided their children with more quality play experiences starting from an early age.

Gifted children display strong language development earlier than typically developing children. Gross (1993) identified that gifted children say their first words when they are 9 months old on average. In addition, the average decreased to 8.6 months when two outliner siblings who spoke at 18 and 20 months were excluded from the study group. The researcher also found that gifted children spoke fluently using complex sentences and tended to make up word games thanks to their advanced language development and early cognitive skills. In addition to early language development, Clark (2002) suggests that a sense of humor is apparent in these children because of their high interest in word games. Hoh (2005) conducted a study on the language development of a bilingual gifted child from birth to 7 years of age. She found that the child displayed early language developmental characteristics. In the current study, we also observed early language development in Sude’s language performance. Early language developmental characteristics may predict the future IQ results of a gifted child, which was validated in a previous study. Peyre et al. (2017) investigated whether developmental milestones at 4, 8, 12, and 24 months predicted IQ during 5 and 6 years of age. They found that early language skills predicted later IQ more reliably than the other cognitive domains. Before Sude’s age peers, she says her name and surname, makes sentences of 4 words, sings songs and tongue twisters by heart etc. (see Table 1) shows that she has gained her language skills early.

Many previous studies suggest that social and emotional characteristics of gifted children show similarity or superiority compared to their age peers (Eklund et al., 2015; Francis et al., 2016; França-Freitas et al., 2014; Kroesbergen et al., 2016; Vialle et al., 2007; Çitil & Özkubat, 2020). In the current study, Sude displayed strong social and personal characteristics, which may be due to Dabrowski’s (1972) overexcitability. Dabrowski’s (1972) Theory of Positive Disintegration suggests that the characteristics of overexcitability can be observed in advanced personality development (Daniels & Piechowski, 2009; Tillier, 2002; Çitil, 2020). Individuals with overexcitability generally live with intensity (Daniels & Piechowski, 2009). Intellectual overexcitability is defined as excessive sensibility, intensive knowledge, inquiry-based thinking, critical thinking, and effective problem solving (Ackerman, 2009; Daniels & Piechowski, 2009; Çitil, 2020). Individuals with intellectual overexcitability have a strong desire for novel knowledge and they enjoy solving complex problems (Ackerman, 2009; Daniels & Piechowski, 2009). They display a significant ability to focus on difficult tasks for long periods (Ackerman, 2009; Daniels & Piechowski, 2009). Hafenstein and &Tucker (1995) examined the characteristics of Dabrowski’s overexcitability theory to assess behavioral characteristics of young gifted children. They found that gifted children display behaviors reflective of overexcitability. Singh and Kaur (2012) found that gifted children had higher scores in emotion, motivation, empathy, and relationship management than non-gifted children. Furthermore, Riaz et al. (2013) found that gifted children had high level of psychological adaptation. Given that higher intellectual capacity can be related to high levels of psychological adaptation, gifted individuals can display such social and personal characteristics at early ages (Riaz et al., 2013). Social and emotional development in gifted children is faster than their non-gifted peers (Plucker & Callahan, 2008). Before Sude’s age peers, she started laughing, clapping, waving, dressing, dancing to music, etc shows that social and emotional development is faster than their age peers.

Conclusions

It has been argued that gifted children display advanced developmental characteristics during the ages of 0–3 years. These characteristics may contribute to early identification of giftedness through parental observations, and parent nomination of giftedness is more than those of teachers as they are more aware of their children’s continuous development (Gross, 1999). While parents can provide evidence through portfolios teachers have little or no knowledge about children’s previous development and abilities (Matthews & Rhodes, 2020). The results of the current study (i.e., early developmental characteristics of giftedness) can be taken as a basis by the parents, having demonstrated that the observations of early gifted characteristics can contribute to the identification of giftedness.

Limitations and implications

The purpose of the current study was to conduct a detailed analysis of the developmental characteristics of a gifted child from birth to 3 years. The nature of the single case is the most important limitation of the study. There is a need for further studies with larger populations of gifted children. This study was also limited to the parent-recorded videos during the child’s first 3 years of life. Furthermore, it should be noted that Sude might have started exhibiting identified behaviors before the exact date of the recordings. Thus, natural observations and the use of various tools during this period could provide reliable data regarding the early developmental characteristics.