Gifted Education International 2007 Vol 23, p 122-137

fi2007 A B Academic Publishers

Reuven Bar-On°
University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston TX

the impact of emotional

intelligence on giftedness

Abstract

Although the gifled represent an enormous asset to our society, most societies worldwide neglect
this venj important segment of the population and their potential contribution, relegating it to a
poorly tapped national resource. Tims neglect is manifested by the apparent lack of concern and
effective tools for studying giftedness as well as identifying the gifted and creating special education
programs to help them realize their potential. The disadvantaged gifled are even more dificult to
identify and create educational programs for because of the impact of the disadvantageous
conditions in which thinj live. The result of this neglect open has a negative effect on the gifted
personally as well as extracts an incalculable price for society in general for failing to channel
the most brilliant minds amongst as into the arts, sciences and leadership.

The purpose of this article is to study the
relationship between emotional intelligence
(EI) and giftedness. Hopefully, this will
lead to a greater understanding of giftedness
in general as well as to facilitate
identification of the gifted, and especially
the disadvantaged gifted, as well as to help
create special education programs designed
to encourage them to develop their potential
more efficiently.
Following this introduction, I focus on
(a) the basic characteristics of gifted
individuals,
(b) the way giftedness and emotional
intelligence are defined here, (c) the
methods used to examine the relationship
between these two constructs in the
present article,
(d) the results that surfaced, and (e) a
summary of the major findings with a
122, Gifted Education Inlernotional
discussion of their possible implications,
applications, limitations and the need for
further research.
The space restrictions and specific scope
of the present article preclude a discussion
on improving the disadvantageous
conditions of the disadvantaged gifted such
as eradicating war, poverty, disease,
discrimination and ignorance. Such
suggestions have been conveyed in
numerous other writings over the years, and
there are a number of international
organizations that attempt to directly cope
with these colossal challenges. It will
suffice to say that these conditions hide, if
not bury, many gifted individuals
compounding the human tragedy that they
evoke. It is interesting to ponder, for
example, how
Prof. Reuven Bar-On, 2519 Fair Oak Street,
Pearland, Texas 77584 USA

Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015

 many gifted individuals were buried among
the six million Jews killed during the
Second World War. Have we lost another
Abraham, Jesus, Nostradamus, Spinoza,
Mahler, Kafka, Pissarro, Marx, Freud or
Einstein who may have significantly
contributed to mankind as a whole? It is
logical to assume that the world would have
been altered if they and others had not
perished in this and other atrocities before
and after this most horrific example of
human suffering, such as the cultural and
physical genocide directed against the
American Indians, Armenians, Gypsies,
Tibetans, Tutsi and Southern Sudanese...
just to mention a few of the other well-
known human tragedies of the past two
centuries alone. The recent ban on
cooperation with Jewish academics from
Israel by the British union of teachers
(NATFHE) represents the latest
discriminatory efforts that will serve to hide
potentially gifted scholars; this decision is
even more unfortunate in that it was voted
in by educators and scholars in what has
traditionally been considered one of the
leading western countries in which freedom
of expression and equality have been the
cornerstone of their educational system and
society as a whole.
Characteristics of giftedness
The purpose of this section is to summarize
a number of the key characteristics of gifted
individuals to help create a comprehensive
definition of giftedness.
One of the fundamental characteristics
that is popularly regarded as an integral part
of gifted individuals is that they possess
significantly higher cognitive intelligence
than their peers. The cutoff point on
intelligence tests typically used to identify
the gifted is set at two standard deviations
above the mean, which is an IQ equivalent
to
possibility of underachievement (Reis &
Renzulli, 2004; Swiatek, 1995). Some
scholars are convinced that many gifted
students are at high risk for not receiving
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
130 representing approximately 2% of the
population. Moreover, gifted children
appear older and more intellectually mature
than children their own age (Parker, 1997);
and they tend to enjoy challenging
intellectual assignments, are curious and
prefer complexity to simplicity. As an
extension of their curiosity, they are also
keenly observant, ask questions, and tend to
make inferences and draw conclusions
about the way they view things.
While cognitive intelligence is clearly
part of giftedness, Peterson (1997) cautions
against confusing giftedness with simply
possessing a significantly high IQ, enhanced
potential for academic performance and
high achievement in school. It is important
to point out that many gifted students are
not high academic achievers, and many high
performers at school are not gifted although
most of them are hard workers with higher
than average cognitive capacity. In contrast
to others, the truly gifted students tend to
learn more quickly, profoundly and broadly.
They are ahead of most of their peers in at
least one major academic area, such as
science, art or literature, and they possess
the potential for outstanding leadership
performance after completing their formal
education (Johnsen, 2004).
One of the characteristic problems of
gifted students is that they are often unable
to fulfill their potential within the standard
educational system. They are typically
forced to hide their giftedness and
underachieve in order to be socially
accepted. Social isolation is, thus, one of the
major challenges that the gifted student
faces especially when placed in regular
classes without access to other gifted
children. In addition to quickly getting
bored in this environment, they often try to
hide their “abnormal” giftedness by acting
like “normal” children thus increasing
the
Volu me 23 No 2, 2007, 123
adequate and appropriate education in the
regular classroom setting (Seevers &
Shaughnessy, 2003; Sisk, 2002). To
counteract boredom, feelings of social
isolation and the risk of underachievement,
that creativity plays a very important role in
a number of gifted education professionals
giftedness which is directly associated with
have therefore recommended creating peer
the problem-solving process itself. Being
groups based on common abilities and
creative in problem solving represents a
interests (Robinson, 2002). It has been
specific way of looking for solutions and
argued that these children should be
“bringing something into being that has
identified as early as possible and
newness” (Maker, 1993, p. 69). The gifted
channeled into separate classes or given the
also tend to be extremely flexible
opportunity to be exposed to special
intellectually as well as possess an
enrichment programs together with other
exceptionally enhanced ability to look at
gifted students outside of or possibly in
things in novel ways (Thompson &
addition to the regular classroom sethng. As
Rudolph, 1992). They have a greater
there are special education programs at the
capacity for creatively expressing
other end of the continuum for cognitively
themselves as well. Maree (2006) suggests
impaired children, there should be at least
that creativity plays an important role in
equal attention given to gifted children. If
survival and stresses that this specific
placed in an appropriate school
characteristic is of particular importance for
environment, they will be motivated to do
the disadvantaged gifted. He argues that
their best; and when encouraged, they will
being individualistic, resilient and creative
be more successful in actualizing their
increases their ability to survive. Although
potential.
their abnormally advanced cognitive
abilities, uneven development and
An additional key characteristic of the
underachievement may cause them to face
gifted is that they are better problem solvers
social isolation and emotional problems at
than their peers. Moreover, they appear to
times, it is precisely their higher problem-
have an enhanced ability and keen desire to
solving capability, enhanced personal
solve problems (Thompson & Rudolph,
judgment and decision- making abilities
1992), which they do more quickly and
together with their expanded interests that
effectively than others. They also tend to
may help them to be more resilient and
see familiar things in different ways
successful in dealing with adversity (Maree,
(Parker, 1997); and because they
2006; Reis & Renzulli, 2004). In light of
understand the world differently, they
the fact that some scholars (Ebersohn &
experience it differently than the vast
Maree, 2006) emphasize the need of the
majority of people. They tend to be
disadvantaged gifted to be resilient in order
individualistic and typically try to find
to cope with their disadvantageous
solutions their own way, which often
situation, resiliency and adaptation
appears to be unconventional (Parker,
represent vitally important aspects of their
1997). Additionally, gifted individuals use
giftedness. Ebersohn and Maree (2006)
more innovative and creative methods in
feel, moreover, that emotional intelligence
attempting to find solutions to problems
impacts resiliency and increases their
(Parker, 1997). More succinctly, it is
overall ability to survive and adapt.
assumed

124, Gifted Education International

Defining giftedness
In formulating the definition used in this
article to describe giftedness, I relied

Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015

primarily on the above-mentioned
characteristics of gifted individuals.
Perhaps one of the most focused and
compelling definitions of giftedness to date
is the following: [Giftedness is] “the ability
to solve the most complex problems in the
most efficient, effective, or economical
ways” (Maker, 1993, p. 71). Although this
definition strongly emphasizes the
importance of problem solving for
giftedness, the problems that the gifted
attempt to solve are not always the most
complex, and their solutions are not always
the most efficient or economical. With
respect to problem solving per se however,
it is possibly better to describe giftedness as
the ability to look at problems in different
ways and to apply innovative and creative
solutions to solving them. Based on this
specific characteristic of the gifted,
giftedness evidently involves enhanced
levels of cognitive intelligence and a well-
developed problem-solving ability.
Additionally, creativity appears to be
integrally related to this specific type of
problem-solving process as was previously
suggested.
Being gifted also involves more than
just the above-mentioned characteristics.
Individuals who possess all of these
characteristics in great abundance also need
to be sufficiently self-motivated and need a
supportive environment that encourages
them to realize their potential and perform
in a gifted manner.
Based on the above-mentioned
considerations in describing gifted
individuals, the definition of giftedness
used in the present article is as follows:
Giftedness implies possessing
exceptionally high cognitive intelligence,
potential for superior academic and
professional performance, enhanced
capability and drive to do one’s
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
best and realize one’s potential, as well as
an advanced ability to apply a variety of
different approaches to solve problems in
more innovative and creative ways when
compared with others. Furthermore,
disadvantaged gifted are those who posses
these same abilities and potential for gifted
performance together with a well-developed
sense of resiliency that is directed toward
coping with the disadvantageous situations
and conditions with which they are faced.
Defining and measuring emotional
intelligence
There are a number of competing
definitions of emotional intelligence (EI) to
choose from (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso,
2000). In an effort to better understand and
simplify the basic differences between
existing definitions, the Encyclopedia of
Applied Psychology (Spielberger, 2004)
suggests that there are three major
conceptual models of emotional
intelligence: (a) the Salovey-Mayer model
(Mayer & Salovey, 1997); (b) the Goleman
model (1998); and the Bar-On model
(1997b). I have decided to employ the Bar-
On model in the present article because a
mild variation of this conceptualization of
emotional intelligence is used by the
Collaborative for Academic, Social and
Emotional Learning (HYPERLINK
http:/ / www.casel.org; Zins, Weissberg &
Utne O’Brien, in press), it has been
operationalized in the Bar-On Emotional
Quotient Inventory (EQ-i; Bar-On, 1997a)
and has been demonstrated to be a reliable
and valid approach to describing this
construct (Bar-On, 2004, 2006).
The Bar-On model asserts that
emotional-social intelligence is a cross-
section of interrelated emotional and social
competencies, skills and facilitators that
determine how effectively we understand
Volume 23 No 2, 2007, 125
and express ourselves, understand others the inventory’s items is found in the
and relate with them, and cope with daily instrument’s technical manual (Bar-On,
demands. The emotional and social 1997b). The individual’s responses render a
competencies, skills and facilitators total EQ score and scores on the scales
referred to in this conceptualization listed in the Appendix. Raw scores are
include the following five meta-factors: (a) computer- generated, tabulated and
the ability to be aware of and understand converted into standard scores based on a
emotions and to express feelings; (b) the mean of 100 and standard deviations of 15.
ability to understand how others feel and The EQ-i has a built-in correction factor
relate with them; (c) the ability to manage that automatically adjusts the scale scores
and control emotions; (d) the ability to based on scores obtained from two of the
manage change, adapt and solve instrument’s validity indices.
problems of a personal and interpersonal
nature; and (e) the ability to generate
positive affect in order to be sufficiently
self-motivated to accomplish personal
Method used in examining
goals and actualize one’s potential. Each of the relationship between EI
these five meta-factors comprises a and giftedness
number of closely related sub-factors that
Based on the above definition of giftedness,
are operationalized in the EQ-i which are
I examine the relationship between this
briefly described in the Appendix.
construct and emotional intelligence (EI) by
studying the degree of correlation between
In light of the fact that most of the
EI, measured by the EQ-i, and (a) cognitive
findings related to emotional intelligence
intelligence measured by the Standard
presented in this article were generated by
Progressive Matrix (Raven, 1958), (b)
the EQ-i, it is important to briefly describe
academic performance assessed by grade
this instrument. The EQ-i is a self-report
point average, (c) striving to do one’s best
measure of emotionally and socially
and realize one’s potential measured by the
intelligent behavior that provides an
EQ-i Self-Actualization scale, (d) problem
estimate of emotional-social intelligence.
solving measured by the EQ-i’s Problem
The EQ-i was the first measure of its kind
Solving scale, (e) creativity measured by the
to be peer-reviewed in the Buros Mental
Innovation scale on the Jackson Personality
Measurement Yearbook (Plake & Impara,
Inventory (Jackson, 1994), and (f) resiliency
1999), and it is the most widely used
assessed by analyzing the findings of a
measure of emotional intelligence to date
study of adolescent cancer survivors
(Bar-On, 2004). A detailed description of
(Krivoy, Weyl Ben-Arush & Bar-On, 2000)
the psychometric properties of this measure
and a study of disadvantaged gifted students
and how it was developed is found in the
who were forced to cope with HIV&AIDS
Bar-On EQ-i Technical Manual (Bar-On,
(Ebersohn & Maree, 2006). In those studies
1997b) and in Glenn Geher’s book titled
that evaluate the multivariate correlation
Measuring Emotional Intelligence:
between the EQ- i and the EQ-i’s Self-
Common Ground and Controversy (2004).
Actualization and Problem Solving
In brief, the EQ-i contains 133 items in the
subscales to examine the relationship
form of short sentences and employs a 5-
between striving to do one’s best and to
point response scale with a textual format
solve problems respectively, those
ranging from “very seldom or not true of
particular subscales are removed from the
me” (1) to “very often true of me or true of
regression model as independent
me” (5). A list of

126, Gifted Education International

variables and analyzed as dependent Table 1: The relationship between
variables; otherwise, it would have emotional intelligence and cognitive
artificially increased the level of intelligence based on a multiple regression
correlation. In light of the fact that the data analysis of a sample of 18-year old male
in the studies described are multivariate in and female draftees in the Israeli Defense
nature, most of the above-mentioned Forces (n = 3,086); R = .44.
relationships studied EQ-i Factors Beta T p
are examined with multivariate statistics.
Stress Tolerance .285 8.831 .000
r Self-Actualization .191 7.468 .000
e
Assertiveness .123 4.898 .000
l
a Empathy .146 4.754 .000
t Problem Solving .071 2.853 .004
i Optimism .093 2.749 .006
o
Reality-Testing .064 2.298 .022
n
s
h
i
p

b
e
t
w
e
e
n

t
h
e

c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
s
,

m
u
l
t
i
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
v x
a a
r m
i i
a n
t i
e n
g
a
n t
a h
l i
y s
s
i t
s y
p
r e
e
n o
d f
e
r d
s a
t
m a
o
r (
e T
a
a b
c a
c c
u h
r n
a i
t c
e k

r &
e
s F
u i
l d
t e
s l
l
w ,
h
e 2
n 0
0
e 1
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
) r
. o
v
M i
o d
r e
e d

d i
e n
t
a t
i h
l e
s
r
r e
e s
g u
a l
r t
d s
i
n s
g e
c
t t
h i
e o
n
s .
t
u The results are Israeli Defense
d expected to shed Forces was randomly
i light on the selected in order to
e potential usefulness examine the
s and applicability of relationship between
the definition of emotional
p giftedness used in intelligence and
r this article, the cognitive intelligence
e development of a (Bar-On, 2004). They
s scientific method of were equally divided
e identifying the between males and
n gifted and females, and their
t encouraging the average age was 18
e actualization of years. The
d their potential, and participants were
the need for further concomitantly
a research in this area. adminis- tered the
r EQ-i to measure
e iiesults emotional
A sample of 3,086 intelligence and the
p draftees in the Standard Progressive
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
Matrices (Raven, l a
1958) to assess e t
cognitive r i
intelligence. It is interesting a o
Although a to note that the n n
bivariate exam- EQ-i factor that c
ination of the impacts cognitive e O
correlation intelligence the
p
between EI and R t
most is Stress
cognitive e i
Tolerance, which
intelligence a m
suggests that i
originally cognitive l
generated a lower i s
functioning is m
correlation (Bar- strongly t
On, 2004), a influenced by the y
multivariate re- The findings
ability to manage are comprehensible
examination of the one’s emotions. T
same dataset using in that one
e
multiple regression apparently needs to
In another s
analysis revealed a adequately handle
publication t
higher correlation emotions (Stress
(2006), I i
(.44). The Tolerance),
summarized the n
regression model, validate one’s
research of four g
which was feelings and keep
studies things in correct
generated by this demonstrating the P
process, appears in perspective
relationship r
Table 1. (Reality Testing),
between o
solve problems
emotional b
(Problem Solving)
intelligence l and be self-
(measured by the e motivated (Self-
EQ- m Actualization and
i) and academic Optimism) in order
performance S to achieve
(assessed by grade o academically.
point average); l
the multivariate v Vol
correlations i um
e
ranged from .41 to n 23
.45, and the major g No
2,
EQ-i factors that 20
impact this type of S 07,
performance the e 127

most are the l

following: f
S -
t A
r c
e t
s u
s a
l
T i
o z
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
 In an earlier study (2001), I examined the
relationship between self-actualization
(measured by the EQ-i Self-Actualization
subscale as the dependent variable) and
emotional intelligence (measured by the EQ-
i after removing the Self-Actualization
subscale from the analysis as an independent
variable). This relationship was examined by
applying multiple regression analysis to
normative samples in North America
(n=3,831), Israel (n=2,702) and the
Netherlands (n=1,639); the degree of
correlation was found to be .80, .75 and .78
respectively. These findings clearly indicate
that EI impacts the ability to do one’s best in
order to realize one’s potential. Based on
these three studies, those EI factors that
impact this ability the most are the following
based on a near 100% overlap of the findings
from the three analyses:
Happiness
Optimism
Self Regard
Emotional Self-Awareness
Independence
Problem Solving
Flexibility
Social Responsibility
Assertiveness
In order to achieve personal goals and
realize one’s potential, the findings
presented here suggest that the one must
first be strongly self-motivated (Optimism
and Happiness). The individual also needs
to know who he /she is and what he /she
wants to accomplish (Self Regard). It also
makes sense that the self-actualization
process is supported by the ability to rely on
oneself to make the right decisions
(Independence) and confidently come up
with the best solutions (Problem Solving)
once one knows what he /she wants; and
this whole process requires flexibility. The
individual also needs to be committed to do
something meaningful in life and to
contribute something of value that benefits
128, Gifted Education International
Optimism .334 55.273 .000
Reality-Testing .152 29.949 .000
Assertiveness .123 27.463 .000
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
others, which is associated with Social
Responsibility as defined in the Bar-On
model and measured by the EQ-i. Finally,
self-actualization is the ultimate act of self-
expression (Assertiveness), which strongly
depends on a deep awareness of oneself in
general as well as one’s feelings (Emotional
Self-Awareness).
To study the relationship between
emotional intelligence and problem solving,
I applied multiple regression analysis to
examine the relationship between the EQ-i
Problem Solving subscale (the dependent
variable) and the EQ-i subscales (after
removing the Problem Solving subscale
from the analysis as an independent
variable) on a randomly-selected sample of
51,623 individuals provided by Multi-
Health Systems in Toronto. The sample
included 26,751 males (52%) and 24,872
females (48%), and the average age was 36.2
years at the time of testing. The results are
revealed in Table 2.
Table 2: The relationship between EI
(measured by the EQ-i after removing the
Problem Solving subscale scores from the
regression model) and Problem Solving
(measured by the EQ-i Problem Solving
subscale) based on a multiple regression
analysis of a North American sample
(n=51,623); R = .74.
EQ-i Factors Beta T p
SocialResponsibility .114 19.802 .000
Impulse Control .111 27.745 .000
Self-Actualization .109 21.287 .000
Empathy .098 16.359 .000
Stress Tolerance .084 15.064 .000

Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015

 The results, once again, make sense. It Table 3: The relationship between EI (as
appears that one needs to be sufficiently measured by EQ-i after removing the
motivated to attempt to solve problems (Self- Problem Solving scale from the regression
Actualization and Optimism), effective-ly model) and the ability to use as many
manage and control emotions (Stress different approaches as possible in problem
Tolerance and Impulse Control), validate solving (as measured by item # 89 in the
one’s feelings and keep things in proper EQ-
perspective (Reality Testing) and i) based on a multiple regression analysis of
constructively express oneself (Assertiveness) a North American sample (n—51,623); R =
after coming up with a reasonable solution. .58.
In an effort to determine which of the EQ-i Factors Beta T p
Optimism .299 42.637 .000
eight items in the Problem Solving subscale
is the most important for the problem- Empathy .110 15.361 .000
solving process, I conducted an item Social Responsibility .102 14.638 .000
analysis of the EQ-i Problem Solving items Self-Actualization .091 14.732 .000
using the
above-mentioned dataset of 51,623 cases. It
was revealed that the item with the highest Reality Testing .090 14.647 .000
item-scale correlation (r = .66) was the Assertiveness .085 15.342 .000
following: “In handling situations that arise,
Stress Tolerance .042 6.230 .000
I try to think of as many approaches as I
can.” This suggests that the most important Impulse Control .037 7.629 .000
component of the problem solving process, Flexibility .035 7.176 .000
as defined and measured by the EQ-i, is the Interpersonal Relationship .021 3.013 .003
ability to use as many approaches as
possible in solving problems; and this
closely follows the description of the
problem-solving component of the It is interesting to note that the EI factor
definition used in this article. Therefore, it is that impacts this aspect of problem solving
logical to assume that it would be important the most is optimism, meaning that one
to focus on this item when studying the needs to be sufficiently optimistic and self-
gifted. To examine the impact of EI (after motivated to apply as many approaches as
removing the Problem Solving subscale possible in solving problems.
from the analysis as an independent
variable) on this specific aspect of problem In order to study the relationship
solving (the above-mentioned Problem between EI and creativity, which is thought
Solving item which was factored into the to play an integral part of the problem-
analysis as the dependent variable), the solving process of gifted individuals, a
relationship between them was examined researcher at York University in Canada
by applying multiple regression analysis to administered the EQ-i together with the
the previously mentioned North American Jackson Personality Inventory (Jackson,
sample (n=51,623). This rendered a fairly 1994) to 60 second-year psychology
high correlation (r = .58) indicating that EI students (Koifman, 1999). The bivariate
significantly impacts this important correlation between the EQ-i and Jackson’s
component of problem solving. The specific Innovation scale was found to be significant
regression model that surfaced appears in (r = .41, p<.001) indicating that a
Table 3. relationship

Volume 23 to 2, 2007, 129

between EI and creativity does exist.
In that some scholars (Ebersohn &
Maree, 2006) suggest that resiliency plays
an important role in the ability of the
disadvantaged gifted to effectively cope
with the situation and conditions in which
they live (such as abject poverty, life-
threatening health conditions and daily
threats to their physical and emotional
existence), this characteristic could very
well represent an additional aspect of their
giftedness as was previously stated. A study
conducted by the scholars involved
confirms this interesting approach to
survival and giftedness. They found that
disadvantaged gifted children rely on the
following factors to cope with the impact of
HIV&AIDS on their lives: enhanced self
regard, independence, stress tolerance,
flexibility and optimism. These findings
confirm those of an earlier study (Krivoy et
al., 2000) that indicate that the most
important EI competencies and skills that
distinguish adolescent cancer survivors
from others are assertiveness (the ability to
express feelings), independence (the ability
to be emotionally self-reliant), stress
tolerance (the ability to manage emotions),
reality testing (the ability to validate
feelings and keep things in correct
perspective), problem solving (the ability to
find effective solutions to personal and
interpersonal problems) and optimism (the
ability to generate positive affect to
motivate oneself even in the face of
adversity). A 50% overlap between the
findings of these two studies, that examined
the relationship between emotional
intelligence and resiliency in children
coping with life-threatening conditions,
strongly suggests that emotional
intelligence plays an important role in
survival, resiliency and, perhaps,
giftedness.
To summarize the results presented in
this section, it has been shown that
130, Gifled Eds cation International
emotional intelligence does impact cognitive
intelligence and the potential to perform
academically as well as to do one’s best,
solve problems and be resilient. In that
giftedness is defined in the present article as
comprising these specific components, the
results indicate that the key emotional
intelligence factors that impact these
components of this definition are the ability
to (a) solve problems (Problem Solving), (b)
validate feelings and keep things in correct
perspective (Reality Testing), (c) manage
emotions (Stress Tolerance), (d) express one’s
feelings (Assertiveness) as well as to (e) be
optimistic (Optimism) and (I) motivate
oneself to do one’s best and actualize one’s
potential (Self-Actualization). In summary,
these particular EI factors appear to be
integrally associated with giftedness. In that
cancer and HIV&AIDS represent severe and
life-threatening medical conditions to deal
with moreover, individuals who cope with
these conditions effectively and survive can
be considered to be more resilient and
perhaps more gifted, in this respect, than
their peers (i.e., survival of the fittest). In
addition to the above-mentioned EI factors,
independence appears to be a key factor in
being resilient, surviving and gifted in
dealing with very serious and life-
threatening situations.
To the extent that the definition used in the
present article has succeeded in capturing
the key characteristics of gifted individuals,
emotional intelligence (EI) is indeed
associated with giftedness based on the
findings that surfaced. More succinctly, EI
has demonstrated a moderate yet significant
correlation with the cognitive component of
giftedness and the ability to perform
academically. Additionally, EI is highly
associated with being motivated to do one’s
best and to realize one’s potential. EI has
also proved to be highly associated with
problem solving in general and specifically
with one’s ability to explore many different
approaches in finding effective solutions in
solving problems but moderately associated
with creativity based on the findings. Last,
the findings suggest that EI is also
associated with resiliency representing an
important characteristic of the
disadvantaged gifted in particular. Cutting
across the key components of the definition
used in the present article (cognitive
intelligence and the potential for academic
performance, striving to do one’s best and
to actualize one’s potential, problem
solving, creativity and resiliency), the
findings reveal that the following EI
competencies and skills have the strongest
impact on giftedness:
Problem Solving
Reality Testing
Assertiveness
Stress Tolerance
Optimism
Self-Actualization
Based on these findings moreover, the
gifted are evidently more adept than their
peers at solving problems (Problem
Solving), validating their feelings and
keeping things in correct perspective
(Reality-Testing), expressing themselves
(Assertiveness), managing emotions (Stress
Tolerance), and being sufficiently self-
motivated (Optimism) in actualizing their
potential (Self- Actualization).
In examining the findings, it is
important to bear in mind that the definition
of giftedness used in the present article was
based on the specific way that I defined it
and chose to examine its relationship with
emotional intelligence. In spite of the fact
that this definition appears to have captured
the key characteristics of giftedness in the
literature, this approach has generated a
specific picture of the relationship between
emotional intelligence and giftedness. It is,
therefore, important to replicate these
studies on more diverse samples using
additional measures of emotional
intelligence, cognitive intelligence, problem
solving, creativity and resiliency. This will
hopefully shed more light on the
relationship between emotional intelligence
and giftedness, clarify the nature of that
relationship and determine the relative
strength of each of the relevant EI factors
that impact giftedness.
The literature expresses a compelling
need to create better ways of identifying the
gifted; and rather than using a single
measure of giftedness, most professionals in
this field agree that a variety of measures
should be used (Johnsen, 2004). Thus, a
battery of measures appears to be the
approach of choice.
In light of the fact that nonverbal
instruments are successful in assessing
cognitive intelligence (Ford & Harmon,
2001), this approach should be applied in
assessing not only the cognitive potential of
gifted children but also the other key
characteristics that they are thought to
possess. Nonverbal methods are especially
important for the disadvantaged, because
many of them often do not possess high
verbal skills and are at times compelled to
study in a second language which is the case
in many multicultural societies (van der
Westhuizen & Maree, 2006). A nonverbal
assessment approach will provide them with
the opportunity to be evaluated in a fair and
less biased way than is the case with verbal
instruments.
What is needed to effectively identify
gifted children is thus a comprehensive
assessment approach, or giftedness
assessment battery (GAB), comprising a
Volume 23 No 2, 2007, 131
combination of nonverbal cognitive,
aptitude, vocational and EI measures as
well as classroom observations (Zorman,
1991) and structured interviews with the
students themselves, their family, teachers
and peers. For example, measures such as
the Standard Progressive Matrices (Raven,
1958) should be considered as the
nonverbal cognitive component of the
GAB, and cutoff points of two standard
deviations above the mean (or a stanine of
9) could be used to identify gifted children
from this perspective. Although such
measures do not yet exist, we will need to
develop cross-culturally valid nonverbal
measures of emotional intelligence; and
these measures need to assess those EI
competencies and skills that impact
giftedness the most such as the ones
identified in the present study. The GAB
would also need to accurately and
effectively pinpoint the individual’s
specific type of giftedness in areas such as
art, literature, science, sport, leadership,
and so forth; and an effort should also be
made to find or develop nonverbal aptitude
and vocational measures that are cross-
culturally valid.
After selecting the most valid nonverbal
measures available, this particular
assessment approach needs to be normed on
large normative samples worldwide and
validated across cultures. Until valid
nonverbal measures of each of the key
components of giftedness are found or
developed, psychometrically valid verbal
instruments need to be incorporated into the
GAB. A scoring algorithm would obviously
need to take into consideration gender, age,
ethnic and socio-economic differences that
most likely exist. The final product will
need to be re-normed and re-validated from
time to time and especially after replacing
presently available verbal components with
nonverbal ones when they are found or
developed.
132, Gifted Education International
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
As soon as gifted children can be effectively
identified, they should be channeled into
special education programs as is suggested
in the literature and previously mentioned.
Gifted education should be thought of as
special education which it is (van der
Westhuizen & Maree, 2006). These
programs should begin as early as possible
so that the gifted can learn and develop
together without running the risk of
experiencing feelings of social isolation,
boredom and low self-esteem that often lead
to underachievement. In addition to being
taught what they need to eventually
complete secondary school, but on their
level and at their own pace, it is important to
provide them with more intellectually
challenging assignments focusing on
national and international concerns. More
specifically, Passow and Schiff suggest that
“we must sensitize gifted children and youth
to the major problems of our world” (1989,
p. 5), which is one of the important
foundation stones of gifted education in my
opinion. Maree (2006) suggests that “the
gifted disadvantaged, on account of their
first- hand experience with ‘major
problems’ are particularly well-suited” to
understand this aspect of their education.
Moreover, gifted students need to receive
enriched courses in those areas in which
they show a keen interest, talent and
potential for further development. They will
need to be provided with adequate guidance,
resources and encouragement to develop
their personal interests and to ponder special
assignments, to research them in depth and
to attempt to come up with creative ways of
addressing them. Passow and Schiff (1989)
suggest that in order to encourage the gifted
to meet these ends, networking
opportunities will need to be established
both nationally and internationally; and this
could be in the form of an Intranet for the
gifted together with the possibility of
meeting with other gifted children in other
geographical locations
 from time to time. We could use this
specific aspect of gifted education to create
and continuously develop think tanks of
gifted individuals. They should also be
provided with coaching designed to enhance
those EI factors that were found to impact
cognitive skills, problem solving, creativity
and self- actualization in order to facilitate
their continued development. Last, it would
be important to recruit a certain percentage
of the graduates from these programs, who
exhibit giftedness in the area of teaching, to
continue on as facilitators. Additionally,
graduates should be channeled into
university studies similar to the Limpopo
Project currently being conducted at the
University of Pretoria in South Africa
(Maree, 2005). Such programs will need to
be substantially funded by the government,
university and private organizations; they
should be made top priority concerns by
education ministries and departments as
well as private organizations in those
countries that truly see the importance and
value of this type of human capital which
represents a critical component of national
assets as they indeed are.
There is a known lack of adequate
training for teachers who are involved with
teaching the gifted (van der Westhuizen &
Maree, 2006), and teachers must be
properly trained to work with them (Bonner,
2000). In general, there needs to be
compulsory courses in gifted education for
all undergraduate teachers in training
(Grove, 1990); and teachers should be
taught how to specifically meet the needs of
gifted students since such students “spend
most of their class-time in regular
classrooms” (Davison, 1996, p. 42). Teacher
training institutions and programs must
offer specific programs and courses on
gifted education (van der Westhuizen &
Maree, 2006), and teachers who are already
working in their profession should be
encouraged to attend workshops
Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 3, 2015
and seminars on this topic (Feldhusen,
1985). The literature emphasizes the
importance of specifically preparing
teachers to identify and accommodate the
gifted (Begoray & Slovinsky, 1997), and
pre-service and in- service training is of
particular importance (van der Westhuizen
& Maree, 2006). Van der Westhuizen and
Maree argue that specialist training is
essential before teachers should be allowed
to teach gifted children (2006); and
Sherman (1997) stresses that this should be
part of the training for general-education
teachers as well.
We need to identify and recruit gifted
teachers and highly motivated individuals to
be directly involved in special education
programs. In addition to recruiting a certain
percentage of them from the graduates of
these programs as was suggested, a similar
assessment approach previously described
for identifying gifted children (i.e., the
GAB) could also be applied to identify this
type of specialized teacher.
Teachers should act as role models,
mentors and facilitators in addition to being
excellent educators. Other important
qualities required for teaching the gifted
include a passion for teaching, a desire to be
a lifelong learner as well as to understand
and respect the gifted (Rizza & Gentry,
2001). Others suggest that they must be
personal, professional, energetic and
creative as well as model a passion for
learning (Baldwin, 1993).
As with gifted students, it would be
important to establish and encourage
international networking between
facilitators. This would allow them to share
experiences, discuss various problems that
arise and ways of approaching them.
Those directly involved in these special
education programs for the gifted should
Volu me 23 No 2, 2007, 733
receive top salaries equivalent to senior
government employees. Ministries and
departments of education worldwide should
be as much concerned about special
education for the gifted as they are with
addressing the needs of children with
cognitive, developmental and emotional
problems. Special education programs for
the gifted should receive top priority for
funding from governmental as well as
private organizations that are truly
concerned about the future of their country.
In order to recruit the needed resources to
establish and maintain these programs, it
would help to promote the need for
educating the gifted by suggesting that
these children should be viewed as valuable
intellectual capital for the countries in
which they live and are educated. The
stakeholders must clearly understand that
these children possess intellectual assets
equally as important as natural assets and
commodities such as oil, iron, precious
metals, lumber, agricultural lands and the
like. If the right combination of resources is
provided, gifted students will develop into
leading national figures in the arts and
sciences as well as in leadership at all
levels. To neglect such a national asset
would be foolish and self- defeating for any
country, and governments worldwide need
to be made much more aware of this. The
potential sources that are targeted to fund
education for the gifted need to be
convinced of this “asset-based” importance
(Hernandez, 1998; McDonald, 1997) in
creating special education programs. It is
reasonable to assume that such efforts will
be met with resistance from those who are
involved in regular education, be they
teachers, students or parents. Although all
children certainly deserve to receive the
best education possible, the importance of
gifted education needs to be clearly
explained in order to avoid being
misunderstood and sabotaged.
134, Cifted Education International
I think it is appropriate to end this
article with what Parker concluded from his
study of the gifted (1997, p. 89):
“Identifying and enriching our top thinkers
must continue to be a priority at all levels of
education.” It is my hope that this article
will contribute something towards
achieving that goal and help encourage
others to advance this priority as well as to
act as an impetus for those involved to take
appropriate action in addition to continue to
empirically study various aspects of this
field.
The gifted represent a resource that is
possibly greater than other natural
resources, because gifted individuals were
here long before we knew how to efficiently
extract these resources from the earth; and
there will be gifted human beings on this
planet long after a number of these other
resources are depleted, and it will be the
gifted who will help solve the problem of
depleted natural resources and create
alternatives only if they are allowed and
encouraged to do so.
References
Baldwin, A. Y. (1993). Teachers of the gifted.
In A. Heller, F. J. Monks & H. Passow (Eds.),
International handbook for research and development
of gi edness. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
Bar-On, R. (1997a). The Emotional Quotient
Inventory (EQ-i): A test o/ emotional
intelligence. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health
Systems, Inc.
Bar-On, R. (1997b). The Emotional Quotient
Inventory (E Q-i).’ Technical manual. Toronto,
Canada: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.
Bar-On, R. (2000). Emotional and social
intelligence: Insights from the Emotional
Quotient Inventory (EQ-i). In R. Bar-On and J.
D.
A. Parker (Eds.), Handbook of emotional intelligence.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 363-388.
Bar-On, R. (2001). Emotional intelligence and
Grove, H. (1990). A didactical analysis of
self- actualization. In Joseph Ciarrochi, Joe Forgas,
teaching- learning models for gifted education.
and John D. Mayer (Eds.), Emotional intelligence
Unpublished Med mini-dissertation. Port Elizabeth,
ix everyday like: A sciettfi c inquiry. New York:
SA: University of Port Elizabeth.
Psychology Press, pp. 82-97.
Hernandez, E. (1998). Assets and obstacles in
Bar-On, R. (2004). The Bar-On Emotional
community leadership. Journal of Comm unit y
Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): Rationale, description,
Psychology, 26 (3), 269-280.
and summary of psychometric properties. In Glenn
Geher (Ed.), Measuring emotional intelligence:
Jackson, D. N. (1994). Jackson Personality Inventory
Common ground and controversy. Hauppauge,
— Revised. Port Huron, Michigan: Sigma
NY: Nova Science Publishers, pp. 111-142.
Assessment Systems.
Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of
Johnsen, S. K. (2004). Identififing gifted students:
emotional-social intelligence (ESI). In P.
A practical Guide. Waco, Texas: Prufrock Press,
Fernandez-Berrocal and N. Extremera (Guest
Inc.
Editors), Special Issue on Emotional
Intelligence. Psicotñemd, 18 (3) [to be published
Koifman, R. (1999). Unpublished findings
in August].
describing the relationship between emotional
intelligence and creativity generated from a
Begoray, D., & Slovinsky, K. (1997). Pearls in
study conducted at York University (Toronto,
shells. Roeper Review, 20 (1), 45-49.
Canada).
Bonner, F. A. (2000). African American
Krivoy, Weyl Ben-Arush, & Bar-On (2000).
giftedness: Our nation’s deferred dream. Journal of
Comparing the emotional intelligence of
Black Studies, 30 (5), 643-663.
adolescent cancer survivors with a matched
sample from the normative population. Medical fr
Davison, J. (1996). Meeting state mandates for
Pediatric Oncology, 35 (3), 382.
gifted and talented: Iowa teacher preparation
programs. Roeper Review, 19 (1), 41-43.
Maker, J. (1993). Creativity, intelligence, and
problem-solving: A definition and design for
Ebersohn, L. E., & Maree, J. G. (2006).
cross-cultural research and measurement related
Demonstrating resilience in an HIV&AIDS
to giftedness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
context: An emotional intelligence perspective.
Pretoria: University of Pretoria.
Gi/ted £ duration International, 21 (2) [to be
published in August].
Maree, J. G. (2005). The torn learning sprockets:
Stars in the ascendant. lifted Education
Feldhusen, J. F. (1985). The teacher of gifted
International, 20 (2), 112-122.
students. Gifted Education /xfernofi0oal, 3 (2), 87-
93.
Maree, J. G. (2006). Diversity and the gifted
disadvantaged in South Africa. In B. Wallace & G.
Ford, D. Y., & Harmon, D. A. (2001). Equity and
Erikson (Eds.), Dirrrsify in gifted edu cation:
excellence: Providing access to gifted education
International perspectives on the global issues.
for culturally diverse students. Journal of
London: Routledge.
Secondary Gifted Education, 12 (3), 141.
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is
Geher, G. (Ed.) (2004). Meas uring emotional
emotional intelligence: In P. Salovey, & D. Sluyter
intelligence: Common ground and controversy.
(Eds.), Emotional development and emotional
Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers
intelligence: Implications for educators. New York:
Basic Books, pp. 3-31.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional
intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2000).
Models of emotional intelligence. In R. J.

Volume 23 No 2, 2007, 135

Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence.
Seevers, R., & Shaughnessy, M. (2003). Reflective
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. conversation with Dorothy Sisk. Gt ed Education
396-420. International, 17 (1), 16-41.
McDonald, L. (1997). Building on the strengths
Sherman, L. (1997). Curiouser and curiouser.
and assets of families and communities. families Northwest Education. Fall.
and Societies, 78 (2), 115-116.
Sisk, D. (2002). Spiritual intelligence: The tenth
Parker, J. R. (1997). Who are the gifted? Gifted
intelligence that integrates all other intelligences.
Education International, 12, 85-90.
Gifted Education International, 16 (3), 208.
Passow, A. H., & Schiff, J. H. (1989). Educating Spielberger, C. (Ed.) (2004). Encyclopedia of
gifted persons who are caring and concerned. Applied Psychology. Academic Press.
Gifted Education International, b, 5-7.
Swiatek, M. A. (1995). An empirical investigation
Peterson, J. S. (1997). Bright, tough, and resilient
of the social coping strategies used by gifted
— and not in a gifted program. Journal of
adolescents. Gifled Child Quarterly, 39, 154-160.
Secondary Cifted Ed//cation, 97 (8), 121.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). tfsixg
Plake, B. S., & Impara, J. C. (Eds.). (1999).
multivariate sfotistics (4th Edition). Boston: Allyn
Supplement to the thirteenth mental measurement
and Bacon.
yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute for Mental
Measurement.
Thompson, C. L., & Rudolph, L. B. (1992).
Counseling children. Pacific Grove, California:
Raven, J.C. (1958). Standard Progressive Matrices.
Brooks / Cole Publishing Company.
London: H.K. Lewis & Co. Ltd.
Van der Westhuizen, C., & Maree, J. G. (2006).
Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Current Some thoughts on the training of teachers of
research on the social and emotional development gifted learners. Cifled Education International, 21
of gifted and talented students: Good news and (2) [to be published shortly].
future possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41,
published online in Wiley InterScience
Zins, J. E., Weissberg, R. P., & Utne O’Brien, M.
(HYPERLINK http:/ /www.interscience.wiley.com
(in press). Building success in school and life on
http: / /www.interscience.wiley.com).
social and emotional learning. In G. Matthews, M.
Zeidner, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), £ motional
Rizza, M., & Gentry, M. (2001). A legacy of
intelligence: Exons «od unknowns. New York:
promise: Reflections, suggestions and directions
Oxford University Press.
from contemporary leaders in the field of gifted
education. The Teacher Educator, 36 (3), 167-184.
Zorman, R. (1991). Identification and nurturance
of young disadvantaged gifted children. In R. M.
Robinson, N. M. (2002). Introduction. In M.
Milgram (Ed.), Counsel ing gifted and talented
Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson, & S. M.
children: A guide for teachers, coun5elors and
Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development
parents. Norwood: Ablex 161.
of gifted children. Waco, Texas: Prufrock Press
Inc.

136, Gifted Eds cation Internalional

 Appendix

The EQ-i Scales and What They Assess

EQ-i Scales The EI Competencies and Skills Assessed by Each Scale

Intrapersonal
Self-awareness and self-expression:
Self Regard
To accurately perceive, understand and accept
Emotional Self-Awareness
oneself. To be aware of and understand one’s
Assertiveness
emotions.
Independence To effectively and constructively express one’s emotions and onesrf/.
Self-Actualization
To be emotionally self-reliant and free of dependency on others.
To strive to achieve personal goals and actualize one’s potential.
Interpersonal
Empathy
Social awareness and interpersonal relationship:
Social Responsibility
To be aware of and understand how others feel.
Interpersonal Relationship
To identify with one’s social group and cooperate north others.
To establish tnutually satisJ/ng relationsh ips and relate well with others.
Stress Management
Stress Tolerance
Emotional management and control:
Impulse Control
To effectively and consfructiuely manage
emotions. To effectively and constructively control
Adaptability
emotions.
Reality Testing
Flexibility
Change management:
Problem
To objectively validate one's feelings and thinking with external reality.
Solving
To adapt and adjust one’s feelings and thinking to new situations.
To effectively some problems of a personal and interpersonal nature.
General Mood
Optimism
Self-motivation:
Happiness
To be positive and look at the brighter side of life.
TO feel conten I with oneself, othere and life in general.

Volume 23 to 2, 2007, 137