Social Representation of Gifted Children: A Preliminary Study in France

Gifted and Talented International

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 61-70

  Tavani, Jean Louis ^a   Zenasni, Franck ^a   Pereira Fradin, Maria ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

Author keywords

Gifted children; sensitivity; social representation; Verg s method

Indexed keywords

EID: 84894660778     PISSN: 15332276     EISSN: 24709565     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15332276.2009.11673530     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Ablard, K., (1997). Self-perceptions and needs as a function of type of academic ability and gender. Roeper Review 20 (2), 110–115.
2. Abric, J-C., (1987). Coopération, compétition et représentations sociales. Cousset: Delval.
3. Abric, J-C., (1994). Les représentations sociales: aspects théoriques. In J-C., Abric (Eds.). Pratiques sociales et représentations (pp. 11–35).
4. Bain, S., Bliss, S., Choate, S., (2006). Perceptions of Developmental, Social, and Emotional Issues in Giftedness: Are They Realistic? Roeper Review, 29 (1), 41–48.
5. Chan, D. W., (2002). Perceptions of giftedness and self-concepts among junior secondary students in Hong Kong. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31 (4), 243–252.
6. Doise, W., Clémence, A., & Lorenzi-Cioldi, F., (1993). The quantitative analysis of social representations. Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
7. Flament, C., (1981). L’analyse de similitude: une technique pour l’étude des représentations sociales. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 1, 375–395.
8. Flament, C., (1986). L’analyse de similitude: une technique pour les recherches sur les représentations sociales. In W., Doise et A., Palmonari (Eds.). L’étude des représentations sociales (pp. 139–156). Genève: Delachaux et Niestlé.
9. Flament, C., (1998). Sur: Question de méthodologie en sciences sociales de F. Lorenzi-Cioldi. Swiss Journal of Psychology. 57 (4), 279–280.
10. Flament, C., & Rouquette, M-L., (2003). Anatomie des idées ordinaires. Paris: Armand Colin.
11. Feldhusen, J., & Dai, D., (1997). Gifted students’ attitudes and perceptions of the gifted label, special programs, and peer relations. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 9 (1), 15–20.
12. Galloway, B., & Porath, M., (1997). Parent and teacher views of gifted children’s social abilities. Roeper Review, 20, 118–128.
13. Green E. G. T., & Clémence A., (2008). Discovery of the faithfulness gene: a model of transmission and transformation of scientific information. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 497–517.
14. Jacobsen, M., (1999). The gifted adult. New York: Ballantine.
15. Jodelet, D., (2007). Les representation sociales. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
16. Lee L., (1999). Teachers’ conceptions of gifted and talented young children. High Ability Studies, 10 (2), 183–199.
17. Moscovici S., Hewstone M., (1983). Social representation and social explanations: From the "naive" to the "amateur" scientist, in Hewstone M., (Eds.), Attribution theory: Social and functional extensions. Oxford: UK. Basil Blackwell.
18. Moscovici, S., (1961). La psychanalyse son image son public. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
19. Moulton, P., Moulton, M., Housewright, M., & Bailey, K., (1998). Gifted and talented: Exploring the positive and negative aspects of labelling. Roeper Review, 21 (2), 153–154.
20. Ribich, F., Barone, W., & Agostino, R., (2001). Semantically different: Preservice teachers’ reactions to the gifted student concept. The Journal of Educational Research, 91, 308–312.
21. Robinson, N. M., & Noble, K. D., (1991). Social-emotional development and adjustment of gifted children. In M. C., Wang, M. C., Reynolds, & H. J., Walberg (Eds.). Handbook of special education: Research and practice, Volume 4, Emerging programs (pp. 57–76). New York: Pergamon Press.
22. Rouquette, M-L., (1998). La communication sociale. Paris: Dunod.
23. Vergès, P., (1992). L’évocation de l’argent: une méthode pour la définition du noyau central d’une représentation. Bulletin de Psychologie, 4 (405), 203–209.
24. Wolter R. P., Gurrieri C., Sorribas E., (2009). Empirical illustration of the social thinking hierarchy: "the domino effect". Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 43 (1), 1–11.
25. Voelklein, C., & Howarth, C., (2005). A Review of Controversies about Social Representations Theory: A British Debate. Culture Psychology, 11 (4), 431–454.
26. Vergès, P., (2003). Ensemble de programmes permettant l’analyse des évocations. Manuel du logiciel EVOC2000. Unpublished document.