Author:
Bagheri Sajjad,Farahani Hojjatollah,Watson Peter,Bezdan Timea,Rezaiean Kosar
Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study explores the intricate web of symptoms experienced by academically gifted high school students, focusing on procrastination, rumination, perfectionism, and cognitive flexibility. The well-being of these gifted adolescents remains a pivotal concern, and understanding the dynamics of these symptoms is vital.
Methods
A diverse sample of 207 academically gifted high school students from Mashhad, Iran, participated in this study. Using convenience sampling, participants from grades 10, 11, and 12 were included, with detailed assessments conducted through questionnaires measuring the mentioned symptoms.
Results
Our network analysis uncovers compelling insights into the interplay of these symptoms: Procrastination, though moderately central, exerts significant influence within the network, underscoring its relevance. Cognitive flexibility, while centrally positioned, curiously exhibits a negative influence, potentially serving as a protective factor. Negative perfectionism emerges as the keystone symptom, with both high centrality and a positive influence. Rumination displays substantial centrality and a positive influence, indicating its role in symptom exacerbation. Positive perfectionism, moderately central, lacks direct influence on other symptoms.
Conclusion
This network analysis provides a nuanced understanding of the relationships among procrastination, rumination, perfectionism, and cognitive flexibility in academically gifted adolescents. Negative perfectionism and cognitive flexibility emerge as critical factors deserving attention in interventions aimed at enhancing the well-being of this unique group. Further research should explore causal relationships to refine targeted interventions.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference79 articles.
1. Sternberg RJ, Chowkase A, Desmet O, Karami S, Landy J, Lu J. Beyond transformational giftedness. Educ Sci. 2021;11(5):192. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11050192.
2. Metin S, Aral N. The drawing development characteristics of gifted and children of normal development. Cypriot J Educational Sci. 2020;15(1):73–84. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v15i1.4498.
3. Papadopoulos D, Basel. Switzerland), 8(11), 953. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8110953.
4. Keser SC. The effectiveness of plastic arts education weighted creative drama in the education of gifted/talented children. Contemp Educational Res J. 2019;9(1):32–7. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=967529.
5. Borland JH. The trouble with conceptions of giftedness. In: Sternberg RJ, Ambrose D, editors. Conceptions of giftedness and talent. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan; 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56869-6_3.