The study of giftedness and evolution toward talent development models have been approached mostly from an educational perspective. Talent potential development cannot be understood without comprehensively looking at all individuals’ facets. This work proposes a theory by which talent potential, considered by the conjunction of cognitive and non cognitive individual traits, is evolutionary and dynamical, and can be manifested into three different talent dimensions that represent contributions to social development, knowledge and individuals' psychological balance. The holistic approach allows for cross-cultural conceptions of talent, and more flexible and dynamic organizations of education, which entail the recovery of individuals' potential and provides opportunities in any development stage. The paper provides a framework with quasimathematical notation for its empirical application in research and talent management.
BanduraA.BarbaranelliC.CapraraG. V.,PastorelliC. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67(3), 1206–1222. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131888
2.
BernardC. (1927). An introduction to the study of experimental medicine. Macmillan.
3.
BernardC. (1978). Lecons sur les Phenomenes de la vie Communs aux Animauxand aux Vegetaux. Bailliere.
4.
BotellaM.FurstG.MyszkowskiN.StormeM.Pereira Da CostaM.,LuminetO. (2015). French validation of the Overexcitability Questionnaire 2: Properties and factorial structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 97(2): 209–220. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2014.938750
5.
CastilloE.CoboA.JubeteF.,PrunedaR. E. (1999). Orthogonal sets and polar methods in linear algebra: Applications to matrix calculations, systems of equations, inequalities, and linear programming. John Wiley & Sons.
6.
Cortés-RodríguezM.Galindo-VillardónP.Sánchez-BarbaM.Jarauta-BragulatE.,Urchaga-LitagoJ. D. (2023). Analysis of psychological well-being from a compositional data analysis perspective: A new approach. Behavioral Sciences, 13(11), 926. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13110926
DaiD. Y. (2017). Envisioning a new foundation for gifted education: Evolving Complexity Theory (ECT) of talent development. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(3): 172–182. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217701837
9.
DaiD. Y. (2018a). A century of quest for identity: A history of giftedness. In PfeifferS. (Ed.), The APA handbook on giftedness and talent (pp. 3–23). American Psychological Association Press.
10.
DaiD. Y. (2018b). A history of giftedness: Paradigms and paradoxes. In PfeifferS. (Ed.), Handbook of giftedness and gifted education: Psychoeducational theory, research, and best practices (2nd ed., pp. 1–14). Springer.
11.
DaiD. Y. (2021). Evolving complexity theory (ECT) of talent development: A new vision for gifted and talented education. In SternbergR. J.AmbroseD. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness and talent (pp. 99–121). Palgrave.
12.
DamasioA. (2003). Looking for Spinoza. Random House.
DweckC. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Psychology Press.
15.
FeinsteinL. (2003). Inequality in the early cognitive development of British children in the 1970 cohort. Economica, 70(277): 73–98. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0335.t01-1-00272
16.
GagnéF. (2005). From gifts to talents: The DMGT as a developmental model. In SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 98–119). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455.008
GeakeJ. G. (2009). Neuropsychological characteristics of academic and creative giftedness. In ShavininaL. V. (Ed.), International handbook of giftedness (pp. 261–273). Springer.
19.
GoldbergerA. L. (1996). Non-linear dynamics for clinicians: Chaos theory, fractals, and complexity at the bedside. Lancet, 347(9011), 1312–1314. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(96)90948-4
20.
JacobiM. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 61(4): 505–532. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543061004505
21.
LloydD.AonM. A.CortassaS. (2001). Why homeodynamics, not homeostasis?The Scientific World Journal, 4(1), 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1100/tsw.2001.20
22.
MakerC. J.PeaseR.,ZimmermanR. H. (2023). Developing scientific, transformational, eloquent, artistic, mathematical, mechanical, emotional, relational, and social talents through problem solving: A conceptual, practical, evidence-based analysis. Gifted Education International, 39(2), 104–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294231153519
23.
MendaglioS.KettlerT.,RinnA. N. (2019). Psychology of giftedness and the theory of positive disintegration: A conversation with sal Mendaglio. Journal of Advanced Academics, 30(4), 500–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X19869010
24.
MendaglioS.,TillierW. (2006). Dabrowski’s theory of positive disintegration and giftedness: Overexcitability research findings. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(1), 68–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320603000104
Olszewski-KubiliusP.SubotnikR. F.DavisL. C.,WorrellF. C. (2019). Benchmarking psychosocial skills important for talent development. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2019(168): 161–176. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20318
27.
PiechowskiM. M. (1975). A theoretical and empirical approach to the study of development. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 92(Second Half): 231–297.
28.
PreckelF.GolleJ.GrabnerR.JarvinL.KozbeltA.MüllensiefenD.Olszewski-KubiliusP.SchneiderW.SubotnikR.VockM.,WorrellF. C. (2020). Talent development in achievement domains: A psychological framework for within- and cross-domain research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(3), 691–722. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619895030
29.
RyffC. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069
30.
RyffC. D.,KeyesC. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719
SauceB.MatzelL. (2018). The Paradox of Intelligence: Heredability and malleability coexist in hidden gene-environment interplay. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1): 27–47. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000131
33.
SilvermanL. K. (1992). Counseling the gifted individual. Counseling and Human Development, 25(4): 1–16.
34.
SilvermanL. K. (2017). The construct of asynchronous development. Charting a new course in gifted education: Parts I and II. Peabody Journal of Education, 72(3-4), 36–58. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203765098-4
35.
SimontonD. K. (1988). Scientific genius: A psychology of science. Cambridge University Press.
36.
SimontonD. K. (2001). Talent development as a multidimensional, multiplicative, and dynamic process. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00110
37.
SternbergR. J. (2011). The theory of successful intelligence. In SternbergR. J.KaufmanS. B. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 504–527). Cambridge University Press.
38.
SternbergR. J. (2024a). A new model of giftedness for transformational active concerned citizenship and ethical leadership. Gifted Education International, 40(2): 166–195. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294241246497
39.
SternbergR. J. (2024b). Individual, collective, and contextual aspects in the identification of giftedness. Gifted Education International, 40(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294231156986
40.
SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE. L.,BundyD. A. (2001). The predictive value of IQ. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 47(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2001.0005
SubotnikR. F.Olszewski-KubiliusP.KhalidM.,FinsterH. (2021). A developmental view of mentoring talented students in academic and nonacademic domains. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1483(1), 199–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.14286
43.
SubotnikR. F.Olszewski-KubiliusP.,WorrellF. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement, 12(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056
44.
TalebN. N. (2007). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. Random House.
45.
TannenbaumA. J. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives. Macmillan.
46.
TermanL. M. (1925). Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children. Genetic studies of genius (Vol. 1). Stanford University Press.
47.
ThomasM. S. C. (2018). A neurocomputational model of developmental trajectories of gifted children under a polygenic model: When are gifted children held back poor environments?Intelligence, 69(July-August): 200–212. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2018.06.008
48.
Trudel-FitzgeraldC.SavardJ.,IversH. (2013). Which symptoms come first? Exploration of temporal relationships between cancer-related symptoms over an 18-month period. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 45(3), 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-012-9459-1
49.
Tucker-DrobE. M. (2018). Theoretical concepts in the genetics of expertise. In HambrickD. Z.CampitelliG.MacnamaraB. N. (Eds.), The science of expertise: Behavioral, neural, and genetic approaches to complex skill (pp. 241–252). Routledge.
VuykM. A.KrieshokT. S.,KerrB. A. (2016). Openness to experience rather than overexcitabilities: Call it like it is. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(3): 192–211. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216645407
52.
YurkevichV. S. (2011). Gifted children: today’s tendencies and tomorrow’s challenges. Psychological Science and Education, 16(4), 99–108. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.).
53.
ZieglerA. (2005). The actiotope model of giftedness. In SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 411–436). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455.024
54.
ZieglerA.ChandlerK. L.VialleW.,StoegerH. (2017). Exogenous and endogenous learning resources in the actiotope model of giftedness and its significance for gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40(4), 310–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353217734376
55.
ZieglerA.,HellerK. A. (2000). Conceptions of giftedness from a meta-theoretical perspective. In HellerK. A.MonksF. J.StembergR. J.SubotnikR. F. (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 3–21). Elsevier.
ZieglerA.StoegerH.,VialleW. (2012). Giftedness and gifted education: The need for a paradigm change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56(4), 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212456070
