Early adolescence, between the age of 10 to 13, is characterized by gaining more autonomy and an increase in complex social relationships. To engage in these social relations, prosocial giving...Show moreEarly adolescence, between the age of 10 to 13, is characterized by gaining more autonomy and an increase in complex social relationships. To engage in these social relations, prosocial giving behaviour and self-concept play an important role. Within gifted adolescents the social development is different from non-gifted adolescents, which might affect the development of prosocial giving behaviour and self-concept. In the current research we were interested in prosocial giving behaviour towards different targets and academic/non-academic self-concept within and between non-gifted and gifted adolescents. We recruited 112 children in the 7th and 8th grade from schools with regular and full-time gifted education. The Standard Progressive Raven Matrices was used to assess IQ, the Prosocial Giving Task to measure giving behaviour towards different targets and the Competentiebelevingsschaal voor Kinderen to measure self-concept on six areas. The results showed that adolescents gave more to in-group targets than to out-group targets. We also found that within non-gifted adolescents the academic self-concept was lower than the non-academic self-concept. Within gifted adolescents, there was no difference between the academic and non-academic self-concept. For both prosocial giving behaviour and self-concept, we did not find a difference between non-gifted and gifted adolescents. Furthermore, there was not an association between prosocial giving behaviour and self-concept for both non-gifted and gifted adolescents. Future research could consider to take the transition to high school into account. This transition might influence the development of both prosocial giving behaviour and self-concept during early adolescence within both non-gifted and gifted adolescents.Show less
This study focuses on the relationship between giftedness and prosocial giving behaviour. This study examined whether early adolescents give differently towards various targets, whether gifted...Show moreThis study focuses on the relationship between giftedness and prosocial giving behaviour. This study examined whether early adolescents give differently towards various targets, whether gifted early adolescents show more prosocial behaviour than non-gifted early adolescents and whether gifted early adolescents show more prosocial behaviour towards their friends than anonymous people. 117 early adolescents between 9 and 12 years old participated in this study where they participated in a game called the Prosocial Donation Task. In this game, they had to divide 10 coins between themselves and a target (a friend, someone they do not like, an anonymous person, their father and their mother). The results show a significant difference in early adolescents’ giving behaviour, meaning that early adolescents give differently towards varying targets. However, the study found no significant indication that gifted early adolescents give differently than non-gifted early adolescents. Moreover, the study found no significant evidence that gifted early adolescents give differently towards their friend than an anonymous person.Show less
This study examined whether highly intelligent children experience stronger peer attachment and if they show more prosocial giving behaviour when attending gifted education as opposed to regular...Show moreThis study examined whether highly intelligent children experience stronger peer attachment and if they show more prosocial giving behaviour when attending gifted education as opposed to regular primary education. To examine the relation between peer attachment, prosocial giving behaviour and education type 117 Dutch students between 9 and 12 years old have filled in the Raven Progressive Matrices, the IRI, the Prosocial Donation Task and the IPPA as part of the Brightwave study. The results show that there is no significant effect of education type on peer attachment in highly intelligent children (t(1) = .102, p = .751). Furthermore, no significant effect of education type was found on prosocial giving behaviour (t(44) = .562, p = .577). We did find a significant effect of peer attachment on the number of donated coins F(2,88) = 10.543, p = .002. However, this effect was not influenced by education type. The results from this study were unexpected because previous research has shown that highly intelligent children differ from their classmates in terms of emotional development and playstyle (Kroesbergen et al., 2016). This could make them feel less familiar towards their classmates which would cause them to show less prosocial giving behaviour (Amici, 2015). A possible explanation why highly intelligent children do not experience higher peer attachment or show more prosocial giving behaviour in gifted education is that they do not differ as much from their classmates in regular education as previously thought or despite this difference they may still befriend some classmates that share their interests and playstyle.Show less
