University of Groningen

Students with (suspicion of) IG+ASD

Veltmeijer, Agnes Elisabeth Johanna

IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from
it. Please check the document version below.

Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Publication date:
2016

Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database

Citation for published version (APA):

Veltmeijer, A. E. J. (2016). Students with (suspicion of) IG+ASD: A study aimed at understanding the
phenomenon of Intellectual Giftedness in co-occurrence with Autism Spectrum Disorder in relation to
(needs-based) assessment. [Groningen]: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the
author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately
and investigate your claim.

Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the
number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.

Download date: 18-11-2019

 APPENDIX A

A publication that gives insight into the theory development

prior to and leading up to the current thesis

 Appendices

R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
R10
R11
R12
R13
R14
R15
R16
R17
R18
R19
R20
R21
R22
R23
R24
R25
R26
R27
R28
R29
R30
R31
R32
R33
R34
R35
R36
R37
R38
R39

144
 Appendices

Giftedness and autism: R1

From differential diagnosis to needs-based approach1 R2
R3
Introduction R4
Some intellectually gifted children and adolescents are underachieving learners, who R5
behave in a peculiar way and may suffer from social isolation. Despite their intellectual R6
talents, these children do have special educational needs. Some psychologists tend to R7
stigmatize these students quite quickly as autistic. Others warn us not to confuse such R8
gifted characteristics with autistic behaviour. The twice-exceptionality of giftedness R9
(GFT) and autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is a complex phenomenon. Unfortunately, R10
dual and differential misdiagnoses often occur. Diagnostic confusion among R11
psychologists and other professionals is due to the camouflaging effect of some features R12
of intellectual giftedness, which at first glance appear to be similar to symptoms of ASD, R13
and vice versa. How can we avoid this labelling dilemma? R14
A solution lies in assessing the ‘grey zone’ between giftedness wíth and withóut ASD. R15
This grey zone is the key concept of the theory of Dimensional Discrepancies. This R16
model, developed in 2003 and theoretically substantiated later on (6,7,8,9), was recently R17
integrated with the three prevailing cognitive causal theories of autism: Theory of mind R18
(TOM), Executive dysfunction (EDF) and Weak central coherence (WCC). R19
In this paper, Agnes Burger-Veltmeijer introduces another way of thinking in order to R20
help professionals to discriminate between the qualitative differences of gifted-like and R21
autism-like traits. It encourages professionals in education and psychology to refocus R22
from ‘classification diagnosis’ to ‘needs-based approach’. This process will be illustrated R23
by means of the DD-checklist draft design and short film shots. R24
R25
Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) R26
ASD refers to disorders on the autistic continuum, that stretches from the severe diagnosis R27
Autism on one side, to the ‘lesser variants’, like PDD-NOS and Asperger’s Disorder (1) R28
on the other side. We agree with Serra et al (19) that ‘… ‘lesser’ only refers to the severity R29
or the amount of symptoms, and not to the consequences of these symptoms for daily R30
functioning.’ In fact, normal to highly intellectual children and adults may suffer very A R31
much from their autistic impairments, as is clearly expressed by some autistic authors. R32
For example Marc Segar (18), a biochemist, who wrote a survival guide for people with R33
Asperger’s syndrome (AS). Unfortunately, it turned out he himself was unable to cope R34
with life. R35
R36
1
Published as: Burger-Veltmeijer, A. E. J. (2008). Giftedness and autism: From differential R37
diagnosis to needs-based approach. In J.M. Raffan & J. Fořtíková (Eds), Proceedings of 11th
R38
Conference of the European Council for High Ability; selected research papers cd-rom (pp. 3-13).
Prague, Czech Republic: The Centre of Giftedness/ECHA. R39

145
 Appendices

R1 ASD is characterized by the following triad of (mutually related) impairments:

R2 1. reciprocal social interaction (like no friends, many conflicts, being bullied),
R3 2. verbal and non-verbal communication (like echolalia, talking but not communicating,
R4 no eye for facial mimicry, body posture, loudness of voice et cetera),
R5 3. imagination (like no fantasy play, no creative thinking, incapability to imagine what
R6 emotions, thoughts or intentions another person might have).
R7 These go together with a marked preference for a rigid, restricted and repetitive pattern
R8 of activities and interests (21), like strictly sticking to routines and rules. Moreover,
R9 several non-specific characteristics may exist. For instance sudden temper tantrums,
R10 fragmented information processing, motor problems or sensory sensitivity.
R11 According to contemporary research the criteria used for an autistic spectrum
R12 disorder diagnosis are dimensional (continuous), not categorical (yes/no) (e.g. 3,4,14,17).
R13 There is no independent biologic or psychological test to either confirm or refute this
R14 diagnosis.
R15
R16 Prevailing cognitive theories
R17 Autism involves cognitive deficits (2), including: Deficits in Theory of Mind (ToM), which
R18 includes the capacity to understand another persons thoughts, feelings and intentions,
R19 and the capacity to act appropriately on this knowledge, in the specific context in
R20 which the interaction takes place. This phenomenon is also called ‘social intelligence’
R21 or ‘empathising’ (2,3). Because ToM doesn’t explain all features of ASD, especially the
R22 stereotyped repetitive behaviours, two more cognitive theories were developed:
R23 Frith and Happé (11) introduced the theory of Weak Central Coherence (WCC).
R24 This refers to deficits in conceptual processing, the extreme focus on details and the
R25 concomitant incapability to overlook the whole picture, in a literal and figurative way
R26 of speaking. This brings about a fragmented way of cognitive and social information
R27 processing.
R28 Last but not least, the theory of Executive Dysfunction (EDF). Executive Function
R29 (EF) is an umbrella term for different interrelated cognitive skills. The mental control
R30 processes, which enable self-control in novel and ambiguous situations (13). EDF helps
R31 to explain the weak social skills, behavioural inflexibility and poor learning strategies of
R32 (gifted) children with ASD. To our experience, executive dysfunction might be one of the
R33 most important (hidden) causes of sudden unexpected underachievement when gifted
R34 children of about 12 years old change from primary to secondary school. Therefore, this
R35 concept will get extra attention:
R36
R37
R38
R39

146
 Appendices

Executive functions R1
The three executive functions strongly associated with ASD (13) are: 1. Cognitive R2
flexibility, the capability to readjust responses and behaviour when the situation alters, R3
and to think of new and adequate strategies. 2. Inhibition, the repression of irrelevant R4
information, in order to prevent these stimuli from interfering with future goals. 3. R5
Working memory enables individuals to keep information in short term memory, in order R6
to be able to deal with intermediate processes in a task. For instance, it allows children R7
to take and retain consecutive steps in solving an arithmetic or communication problem. R8
All these executive functions enable individuals to organize and plan their social as well R9
as their intellectual actions. R10
In education and clinical settings, we see intellectually gifted children with learning R11
problems, caused by failure of these functions. This doesn’t make them necessarily ASD, R12
but it puts the cause of underachievement in another perspective, as will be explained R13
below. R14
R15
Emotional versus neurobiological causes R16
Learning and social problems of gifted children, like underachievement and social R17
isolation, can have different causes, as is shown in table 1. For instance, underachievement R18
at school, of gifted child without ASD, mainly has an emotional cause, like a lack of R19
motivation, due to little intellectual challenge. However, underachievement of a gifted R20
child wíth ASD mainly has a neurobiological cause, like WCC and/or EDF. The same R21
goes for problems of social isolation: in case of a gifted child without ASD, the social R22
problem mainly has an emotional cause, like low tolerance of slow thinkers or shortage R23
of interest peers. However, social isolation in case of giftedness plus ASD mainly has R24
a neurobiological cause, that is lack of empathy, of ToM. These different causes are R25
not always clearly differentiated, every gifted child with symptoms of ASD has his own R26
pattern. But before starting a therapy or special educational programme, it is important R27
to assess what causes lay underneath the problems of underachievement and social R28
interaction, in order to get a clear picture of the special educational and psychological R29
needs of any individual child. This is also shown in table 1. R30
A R31
R32
R33
R34
R35
R36
R37
R38
R39

147
 Appendices

Table 1
R1
© Problem: Problem:
R2
learning(strategies) / reciprocal social interaction /
R3
e.g. underachievement e.g. social isolation
R4
R5 GFT Cause: Cause:
R6 lack of motivation, no intellectual shortage of interest peers; lack of
R7 emotional challen-ge, never learned how to learn tolerance of slow thinkers.
cause or fail.
R8
R9 Need:
Need: provide interest peers / like-minded
R10
intellectual challenge, compacting, friends; train social skills by appeal
R11 enrichment, acceleration, train learning to empathy.
R12 strategies.
R13
ASD Cause: Cause:
R14
fragmented/detailed thinking (WCC), lack of empathy, ToM
R15 attention / organizing disorder (EDF)
neurobio-
R16 logical Need:
R17 Need:
cause help structure: diary planning, special training of social skills, by
R18 appeal to ‘counting costs and
studying, distinguish important and
R19 unimportant details; buddy benefits’
R20
R21
R22 Misdiagnoses of Giftedness plus Autism spectrum disorders (GFT+ASD)
R23 A gifted child with ASD has two exceptionalities. One is giftedness, which is a significant
R24 deviation from normal intelligence. Secondly, ASD is a significant exception to the
R25 average way of (social) functioning. The dual exceptionality ‘GFT plus ASD’ is a
R26 complex phenomenon that is sometimes difficult to diagnose properly because both
R27 exceptionalities have similar behavioural characTeristics, which are summed up in table
R28 2. Correct dual or differentiating diagnoses are also complex because the GFT-features
R29 and ASD-symptoms might mutually camouflage and distort one another. The following
R30 quote of Gallagher and Gallagher (12) illustrates this camouflaging complexity:
R31 ‘Consider combining the social inattention, motor clumsiness, and high verbal skill of
R32 Asperger’s Syndrome with such traits as independent thinking, constant questioning,
R33 and heightened emotional sensitivity (…). It is the perfect formula for a social pariah.’
R34 Moreover, there is no such thing as a clear-cut line between giftedness with ASD and
R35 giftedness without ASD. These two conditions are situated at both ends of a continuum.
R36 This corresponds to the currently accepted notion that the social skills and cognitive
R37 styles of autism appear on a continuum (2,4,14,17). And above all that, correct dual
R38 labelling is also hindered by one-sided knowledge and experience of many professionals
R39 (16).

148
 Appendices

These interrelated mechanisms cause the following multiple types of misdiagnoses: R1

Differential misdiagnoses, like one-sided attribution of deficits to GFT or one-sided R2
attribution of deficits to ASD. And dual misdiagnoses, that is incorrect attribution of R3
deficits to both, ASD ánd GFT. R4
R5
Table 2 R6
© R7
R8
Similar characteristics of GFT and ASD/GFT+ASD
(sources: Cash, 1999; Gallagher & Gallagher, 2002; Little, 2002; Neihart, 2000; Webb et al., 2005) R9
R10
mentioned by all authors mentioned by some authors: R11
(clustered): R12
• sensory sensitivity, hypersensitivity to
• difficulties in social interaction, stimuli (Cash; Neihart; Little; Webb).
• intense need for stimulation (Cash). R13
e.g.: • special sense of humor (Neihart;
• pay no attention to the other’s R14
perspective or viewpoint, Gallagher&Gallagher).
• visual thinking (Cash). R15
• egocentric, • difficulties conforming to the thinking of
• monopolize conversations, others (Cash) R16
• incessantly talking or asking • argumentative (Cash).
questions. R17
• advanced memory and cognition, • stubborn (Cash).
• uncooperative (Cash). R18
extensive knowledge base. • resistant to teacher domination (Cash).
• intensity of focus, absorbing • perfectionist personalities (Cash). R19
interests. • extraordinary levels of performance in a
• social isolation, no friends, R20
tendency towards introversion. certain area, together with average range in
other areas (Neihart). R21
• precocity of language and speech • uneven development, particularly when
patterns, verbal fluency, large cognitive development is compared to social
R22
vocabulary. and affective development at a young age R23
(Neihart; Webb).
• concerned with fairness and justice (Webb). R24
R25
How to avoid the diagnosis dilemma R26
The objective of this paper is to show a solution to this diagnosis dilemma, the decision R27
whether a particular child is Gifted or Autistic or both. The solution is in fact a logical R28
one: Try to unravel the camouflage, by dividing the similar behavioural characteristics R29
into different behavioural manifestations: one that belongs to GFT plus ASD, and one R30
that belongs to GFT without ASD. Because at a closer look, when a psychologist observes A R31
a child not only in a clinical or educational diagnostic room, but also in everyday life R32
situations like at home, at the playground and in the classroom, he will become aware R33
that similar characteristics show different manifestations. This will be further explained R34
in the next three paragraphs, by means of the DD-Model, the extended DD-Model and R35
the concept of the DD-Checklist. R36
R37
R38
R39

149
 Appendices

R1 DD-Model I
R2 The preliminary design of the Dimensional Discrepancy Model GFT+ASD was
R3 developed in 2003 and improved and theoretically grounded in 2005 (6,7,8,9). Figure
R4 1 illustrates this DD-Model I, which consists of two continuous lines, which are base
R5 lines of normal curves. At the top the line of the dimension ‘cognitive intelligence’ and
R6 underneath the line of the dimension ‘social intelligence’.
R7 Giftedness in the cognitive area does not imply giftedness in the area of social
R8 intelligence, because it can be assumed that both dimensions are independent of each
R9 other (6).
R10 Our target group of individuals with GFT+ASD is located on the right side of the
R11 line of cognitive intelligence (above 2 sd’s from the middle, IQ > 130, the gifted area) and
R12 at the same time on the left side of the line of social intelligence (below 2sd’s from the
R13 middle, the retarded or ASD area). In case of an individual with IQ=130, the left arrow
R14 accentuates a theoretical discrepancy between the level of cognitive and social intelligence
R15 of 4 sd’s. The right arrow points from the cognitive gifted area to the ‘average level’ of
R16 social intelligence. It shows, in case of another person with IQ=130, a discrepancy of 2
R17 sd’s between level of cognitive and social intelligence. The DD-model illustrates the idea
R18 that gifted individuals, contrary to averagely intelligent individuals, might already have
R19 a disharmonious development (and might suffer from it) if social intelligence resembles
R20 the average of the normal population. Therefore, in this model ASD is not defined as an
R21 absolute standard for everybody. Instead, the definition is a relative one: ASD is defined
R22 in relation to any individual’s level of cognitive intelligence, his IQ.
R23 In between the two arrow points lies the transitional area of the grey zone. In this
R24 grey zone are situated those individuals, who have a cognitive IQ in the gifted area, and
R25 at the same time a social intelligence level less than the average area, but not low enough
R26 to be called ASD, considering the official criteria of the DSM-IV, the Diagnostic and
R27 statistical manual of mental disorders (1).
R28 However, these gifted children and adults may suffer from severe problems because
R29 their social capabilities do not match their cognitive intellectual capabilities. Therefore,
R30 they might be handicapped in their social life. The extent to which a child really suffers
R31 from this handicap depends on its personality and the demands of the social and
R32 occupational environment it lives in. In the next paragraph an extended version of the
R33 model will be introduced, DD Model II.
R34
R35
R36
R37
R38
R39

150
 Appendices

Figure 1
R1
©
R2
DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY MODEL GFT+ASD R3
( DD-Model ) R4
R5
R6
Cognitive Intelligence
IQ
R7
- 2sd Ø + 2sd R8
cognitively RET 70 _____________________ 100 ___________________ 130 cognitively GFT R9
R10
R11
R12
R13
R14
socially RET ______________________________________________ socially GFT
ASD - 2sd grey zone Ø + 2sd R15
R16
Social Intelligence
R17
ToM
R18
R19
R20
Extended Dimensional Discrepancy Model GFT+ASD (DD Model II) R21
Figure 2 shows the integration of the concept of the grey zone and the three cognitive R22
causal theories of ASD. At the top you see the model of the previous paragraph, to R23
which the dimensions of Executive functioning and Central coherence are added. In R24
this extended model, DD-Model II, the right light blue arrow on the EF line shows that R25
someone with a very high cognitive intelligence, but whose Executive Functioning is R26
average and therefore relatively low compared to the IQ, has a large discrepancy between R27
his IQ and the level of EF. On the left of the left light blue arrow you see the area of R28
absolute executive dysfunction (EDF). In between the two light blue arrow points lies R29
the area of the grey zone, of relative disability. The same goes for the dimension of R30
Central coherence, it is the grey zone in between the two dark blue arrows. A R31
Each dimension has its own grey zone. These areas are accentuated in the colour grey, R32
shaded from white (the no problem area) to dark grey (the absolute deficit area). Every R33
gifted person, with IQ of 130 or more, can be placed somewhere on these dimensions. R34
R35
R36
R37
R38
R39

151
 Appendices

Figure 2
R1
© DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY MODEL GFT+ASD II
R2
( DD-Model II )
R3
R4
R5 IQ
R6 cognitively RET 70 _____________________ 100 ___________________ 130 cognitively GFT
R7 - 2sd Ø + 2sd

R8
ToM
R9 socially RET ______________________________________________ socially GFT
R10 - 2sd grey zone Ø + 2sd
R11
EF
R12 EDF _______________________________________________ EF GFT
R13 - 2sd grey zone Ø + 2sd
R14
CC
R15
WCC _______________________________________________ CC GFT
R16 - 2sd grey zone Ø + 2sd
R17
R18
R19
R20 The core parts of DD-Model II are the three grey zones. These are the transitional
R21 areas of relative impairments between giftedness with and without ASD. Quite a few
R22 gifted children we saw in educational and clinical practice, those with communication
R23 impairments and/or learning problems, are situated in one or more of these grey zones.
R24 They sometimes face serious handicaps in coping with the demands of education and
R25 everyday life. Their problems are initiated partly by neurobiological causes and partly by
R26 emotional causes. These children are not helped by ‘simply’ joining a special programme
R27 for gifted children. They are also in need of an ASD-like structured educational
R28 programme and psychological treatment (see table 1), adjusted to their individual needs.
R29 So, though they do not (seem to) show enough characteristics of ASD to be diagnosed
R30 as such, they may be in need of ASD-like facilities to some extent.
R31 The question is whether such an intellectually gifted child who is situated in one, two
R32 or three grey zones, is in need of an ASD classification. This will not always be necessary.
R33 For, instead of focusing on the labelling question: ‘Is this gifted child suffering from
R34 ASD or is he not?’, we should pay much more attention to the assessment question:
R35 ‘What are the special educational and psychological needs of this gifted child with
R36 ASD-like symptoms?’, or vice versa: ‘What are the needs of this ASD-child with gifted
R37 features?’ In other words, a shift has to take place from ‘labelling diagnosis’ to ‘needs-
R38 based assessment’. To be able to do so, the specific symptoms and characteristics of
R39

152
 Appendices

children in the grey zone have to become explicit. In other words, the ‘grey zone’ area has R1
to be made operational. This is done by means of the so called ‘DD-checklist’, a draft R2
design that is illustrated in figure 3. R3
R4
DD checklist R5
The idea of the DD-checklist helps to unravel the above mentioned similar and R6
camouflaged characteristics into an observable gifted-like manifestation versus an ASD- R7
like manifestation. R8
The DD-checklist can be filled in after integral assessment, including an IQ-test, R9
learning tests and (neuro)psychological tests. Moreover, to be able to fill it in properly, it is R10
a prerequisite that the psychologist observes the child in everyday situations, for instance R11
at school, in the playground and at home with the family. This is important, because the R12
ASD symptoms, such as inadequate social interaction, cannot be properly observed in a R13
one-to-one testing situation, in case of people with normal to high intelligences. This is, R14
because these children do indeed have knowledge about emotions, but they do not know R15
how to apply them in less structured everyday real life situations, which are much more R16
difficult to control by cognition (5). R17
The observation data, together with quantitative and qualitative data from the R18
integral individual assessment, including parental and teacher’s interviews, are all needed R19
to be able to fill in the DD-Checklist. This goes as follows. R20
Based on the above mentioned information, the psychologist decides per similarity R21
(that is, per item) whether the child’s behaviour tends towards the manifestation of R22
giftedness without ASD (GFT-ASD, in column 5), or more towards the manifestation R23
of giftedness plus ASD (GFT+ASD, column 1). Both manifestations are ends of a R24
dimensional continuum. Then he decides to what extent the behaviour is similar to the R25
chosen manifestation: column 1 and 5 mean ‘very much’, column 2 and 4 mean ‘obvious R26
but not extreme’, column 3 means that the behaviour has traits of both manifestation R27
sides. Then the psychologist ticks the proper column and moves on to the next item. R28
In column 7, the psychologist can put advice remarks per item. For instance, when a R29
child has a fragmented learning strategy of merely memorizing details (see 5th item), the R30
advice might be to teach him how to discriminate between important and unimportant A R31
details and how to see the wood for the trees. Because, although it is nice to have a good R32
memory for details, it might become a handicap if a child’s whole life is dedicated to that. R33
If for a specific item no decision can be made yet, more information has to be R34
collected. In that case, column 6 can be ticked off. After the complete list is filled in, a R35
profile can be made, which can be integrated in the total needs-based approach. R36
The items are, more or less, divided into their dominant causes ToM, EDF or WCC. R37
The text colours correspond to the colours of the arrows in DD model II (figure 2). Per R38
R39

153
 Appendices

R1 individual child, different profiles are possible. If a child scores mainly in column 1, an
R2 ASD-diagnosis might be necessary.
R3 Although the DD list is still under construction, its main idea can already be used by
R4 psychologists (in collaboration with teachers). The idea of the DD-checklist might help
R5 us to change our way of thinking from focus on diagnosis to focus on educational and
R6 psychological needs.
R7
R8 Figure 3
© DRAFT DESIGN-DD-CHECKLIST
R9 (5 example items)

R10 similar manifestation in case of grey zone manifestation in case of > needs –
based
characteristics GFT plus ASD GFT without ASD Info
R11 advice
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
R12 social interaction and
communication :
R13
social isolation, ToM lack of Theory of Mind, shortage of ‘interest peers’ or
R14 no friends socially inept; ‘like-minded’ friends;
interactionproblems lack of empathy; lack of tolerance;
R15 with peers
unskilled with Age Mates, independent of Age Mates,
R16 and unaware of how to make friends but knows how to make friends
aware of being different ToM know they are different, know they are different,
R17 poor awareness of why; can reason why;

R18 unaware of another’s perspective and aware of another’s perspective and

viewpoint viewpoint
R19 precocious language, ToM delayed echolalia, original, creative speech,
speech patterns highly
R20 verbal, monotonous, repetitive, pedantic, normal, but may have language of
fluent speech seamless speech older child
R21 restricted, repetitive
behaviour, and
R22 interests :

R23 absorbing interests EF one topic of interest, interested in many things,

passionate fascination,
R24 cannot shift attention to other things can be distracted from it
R25 advanced memory and CC advanced memorization, advanced understanding,
knowledge
R26 fragmented learning, preoccupation holistic meaningful learning;
with details;
R27 enjoys ‘rote’ exercises,
(obsessively) memorize everything,
more selective, filter out,
discard certain sources of information
R28 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

R29
R30
R31
R32 Conclusion
R33
R34 In this paper the theory of the DD-Model and the ‘grey zone’ have been integrated with
R35 the three predominantly cognitive causal theories of autism: The dimensions Theory of
R36 mind, Executive dysfunction and Weak central coherence. By means of this theory of
R37 Dimensional Discrepancies, the dilemma of dual and differential misdiagnoses, in case
R38 of the combination of giftedness and autism spectrum disorders, can be tackled.
R39

154
 Appendices

That is, if the psychologist, the diagnostician, is prepared to do integral assessment, R1

including appropriate (neuro)psychological tests, an IQ-test, learning tests and R2
observations in everyday life situations, while focusing on the following two principles: R3
1. Decide per learning- or social behavioural problem, whether the underlying cause R4
is merely emotional or merely neuropsychological by nature. 2. Do not just focus on R5
differential or dual questions like ‘gifted, or ASD or both?’, but try to focus on the R6
individual educational and psychological needs of the particular child. The principle of R7
the grey zones in DD-Model II and in the DD-Checklist may be of help. In these grey R8
zones are situated those gifted children who may be in need of ASD-like facilities to R9
some extent, although they do not (seem to) show enough characteristics of ASD to be R10
diagnosed as such. R11
R12
R13
References R14
R15
1. APA (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition, text
revision. (DSM-IV-TR®). Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Association. R16
2. Baron-Cohen, S., Ring, H.A., Wheelwright, S., Bullmore, E.T., Brammer, M.J., Simmons, R17
A., Williams, S.C.R. (1999). Social intelligence in the normal and autistic brain: an fMRI R18
study. European Journal of Neuroscience, 11(6), 1891-1898.
3. Baron-Cohen, S. (2002). The extreme mail brain theory of autism. Trends in Cognitive R19
Sciences, 6(6), 248254. R20
4. Baron-Cohen, S., Hammer, J. (1997). Is autism an extreme form of the ‘male brain’?
Advances in Infancy Research 11, 193-217. R21
5. Begeer, S.M. (2005). Social and emotional skills and understanding of children with autism R22
spectrum disorders. Amsterdam: PI Research. R23
6. Burger-Veltmeijer, A.E.J. (2007). Gifted or autistic? The ‘grey zone’: A plea to bridge the gap
between general theory and individual practice. In K. Tirri & M. Ubani (Eds.), Policies and R24
programs in gifted education. Helsinki: University of Helsinki. R25
7. Burger-Veltmeijer, A.E.J. (2006a). Hoogbegaafdheid plus autismespectrumstoornissen
(HB+ASS): een verwarrende combinatie (1). Tijdschrift voor Orthopedagogiek, 45(6), 276- R26
286. R27
8. Burger-Veltmeijer, A.E.J. (2006b). Hoogbegaafdheid plus autismespectrumstoornissen R28
(HB+ASS): een verwarrende combinatie (2). Tijdschrift voor Orthopedagogiek, 45(9), 414-
424. R29
9. Burger-Veltmeijer, A.E.J., Peters, W. (2004). Giftedness plus autism spectrum disorders R30
(GFT+ASD): A confusing combination. ECHA Conference cd-rom, Pamplona.
10. Cash, A.B. (1999). A Profile of Gifted Individuals with Autism: The Twice-Exeptional A R31
Learner. Roeper Review, 22(1), 22-27. R32
11. Frith, U., Happé, F. (1994). Autism: beyond ‘theory of mind’. Cognition, 50, 115-132. R33
12. Gallagher, S.A., Gallagher, J.J. (2002). Giftedness and Asperger’s syndrome: A new agenda
for education. Understanding Our Gifted, 14(2), 7-12. R34
13. Geurts, H. (2003). Executive functioning profiles in ADHD and HFA. Amsterdam: Print R35
Partner Ipskamp.
14. Happé, F. (1999). Autism: cognitive deficit or cognitive style? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, R36
3(6), 216-222. R37
15. Little, C. (2002). Which is it? Asperger’s syndrome or giftedness? Defining the difference. R38
Gifted Child Today Magazine, 25(1), 58-63.
R39

155
 Appendices

16. Neihart, M. (2000). Gifted Children with Asperger’s Syndrome. Gifted Child Quarterly,
R1 44(4), 222-230.
R2 17. Rapin, I. (2002) Diagnostic dilemmas in developmental disabilities. Fuzzy margins at
R3 the edges of normality. An essay prompted by Thomas Sowell’s new book: The Einstein
Syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32(1), 49-57.
R4 18. Segar, M. (2002). Coping: A survival guide for people with Asperger Syndrome. Ravenshead,
R5 Nottinghamshire: Early Years Diagnostic Centre.
19. Serra, M., Minderaa, R.B., Geert, P.L.C. van., Jackson, A.E. (1999). Social cognitive
R6 abilities in children with lesser variants of autism: skill deficits or failure to apply skills?
R7 European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 8(4), 301-311.
R8 20. Webb, J.T., Amend, E.R., Webb, N.E., Goerss, J., Beljan, P., Richard Olenchak, F. (2005).
Misdiagnosis and dual diagnoses of gifted children and adults. Scottsdale: Great Potential
R9 Press.
R10 21. Wing, L. (1992). Manifestations of social problems in high-functioning autistic people. In
E. Schopler and B.B. Mesibov (Ed.), High-functioning individuals with autism. (pp. 129-142).
R11 New York and London: Plenum Press.
R12
R13
R14
R15
R16
R17
R18
R19
R20
R21
R22
R23
R24
R25
R26
R27
R28
R29
R30
R31
R32
R33
R34
R35
R36
R37
R38
R39

156
 APPENDIX B

Practice version of S&W Heuristic

 R39
R38
R37
R36
R35
R34
R33
R32
R31
R30
R29
R28
R27
R26
R25
R24
R23
R22
R21
R20
R19
R18
R17
R16
R15
R14
R13
R12
R11
R10
R9
R8
R7
R6
R5
R4
R3
R2
R1
VERTALING Profiel relatieve Sterktes en Zwaktes, versie voor praktijk V Needs-based info

158
Intake E
fase Strategie fase Onderzoek fase R
Indicatie fase Advies fase
T
Appendices

Z-- Z- S/Z +/- S+ S ++ S +++ A

Hypothesen / Dimensies / (zeer) laag beneden- gemiddeld boven- hoog zeer hoog L
Onderzoeks- functies (≤ -2 sd) gemiddeld gemiddeld (≥ 2sd) (≥ 3sd) I
N of fit

Actuele
vragen (≤ -1 sd) (≥ 1sd)

(SPENs)
Goodness
Integratie

Behoeften
Interventies

Instrument
/ methode
aanpassingen
G

COGNI- TIQ
TIEF
VIQ

PIQ

VBF

POF

VSF

Subtests

Subtests

………………..
SOCIAAL School /bron lk.

Aanpas- Thuis /bron ouders

sing
Aansluit- testsituatie
ing
Bewustzijn ……………….

MOTO- Fijne / visuo -

RIEK motoriek
grove

……………….
DIDAC- Begrijpend Lezen
TISCH
Technisch Lezen
 VERTALING Profiel relatieve Sterktes en Zwaktes, versie voor praktijk V Needs-based info
Intake E
fase Strategie fase Onderzoek fase R
Indicatie fase Advies fase
T
Z-- Z- S/Z +/- S+ S ++ S +++ A
Hypothesen / Dimensies / (zeer) laag beneden- gemiddeld boven- hoog zeer hoog L
Onderzoeks- functies (≤ -2 sd) gemiddeld gemiddeld (≥ 2sd) (≥ 3sd) I
N of fit

Actuele
vragen (≤ -1 sd) (≥ 1sd)

(SPENs)
Goodness
Integratie

Behoeften
Interventies

Instrument
/ methode
aanpassingen
G
Spelling

Rekenen Inzicht

Rekenen geautom.

WO

………………
EF School /bron lk.

Thuis / bron ouders

Testsituatie

………………

CC Visueel (motorisch)

Detail- Auditief (verbaal)

gericht
Perfectio- Sociaal
nisme (communicatief)
………………
OVERIG Computer, natuurk.
techniek, wiskunde
Creatief denken

Fluïde redeneren

Hypergevoeligheid

………………

159
Appendices

A
R9
R8
R7
R6
R5
R4
R3
R2
R1

R39
R38
R37
R36
R35
R34
R33
R32
R31
R30
R29
R28
R27
R26
R25
R24
R23
R22
R21
R20
R19
R18
R17
R16
R15
R14
R13
R12
R11
R10