The idea of a child being gifted usually makes us picture someone who picks up things more quickly than other children, does very well at school, or scores highly on an intelligence test. Yet superior intellectual ability does not necessarily mean that a child will achieve academic success, have emotional maturity, possess social confidence, or be psychologically adjusted.
This difference was remarkably well recognised by the American psychologist Leta Stetter Hollingworth (1886–1939), whose research contributed to the establishment of the systematic study of gifted children. While intelligence testing was gaining increasing influence at that time, Hollingworth posed a more complex question: what occurs to a child after exceptional ability has been identified?
Her work shifted the conversation about giftedness from intelligence scores to include issues of development, education, social relationships, personality, and environmental opportunity (Hollingworth, 1926; Silverman, 1992). One can see even more clearly Hollingworth’s importance when her work is considered in the light of the rest of her career.
Having been one of the pioneers in the field of gifted education, she had previously looked into the claims concerning women’s intellectual abilities and had cast doubt on the scientific assumptions employed to justify differences between the sexes. In both of these areas she repeatedly looked at whether the apparent differences in ability were in fact supported by evidence or had instead been interpreted in the light of the social beliefs of her time (Hollingworth, 1914; MacArthur, 2014).
Read More: Gifted Children and Emotional Sensitivity: A Guide for Caregivers
Questioning Assumptions About Intelligence And Gender
Psychology was being studied at a time when assertions regarding fundamental psychological differences between the sexes were common. There was one particularly influential argument holding that men were more variable than women in terms of intellectual ability. On this basis, while the average level of performance of the sexes might be about the same, men were believed to be more likely to fall at both the very high and very low ends of the ability scale.
In the paper she published in 1914, entitled Variability As Related To Sex Differences In Achievement: A Critique, Hollingworth gave a critical examination of the argument and raised the question of whether the evidence really did show that there was greater male variability (Hollingworth, 1914). Her contribution was important since she made the distinction between noting a difference and explaining the cause of it; based on a difference in achievement alone, it cannot be concluded that the difference is biological, for educational opportunity, social expectations, occupational restrictions, cultural practices and encouragement might also affect achievement.
This mode of thinking was typical of Hollingworth’s scientific approach; she was concerned not only with the question of whether people were different, but also with the conditions under which such differences arose. Hence her research into women forms an important basis for her subsequent work with gifted children, since in both cases she challenged explanations which regarded complex psychological outcomes as simple results of biology (Benjamin, 1975; Miller, 1990; MacArthur, 2014).
Read More: The Psychology Behind Why Eldest Children Are Given More Responsibility
From Intelligence Testing To The Study Of Gifted Children
The introduction of intelligence testing opened up new opportunities for spotting children whose intellectual ability was much higher than that of their age group. However, Hollingworth realised that once exceptional intelligence had been identified, this was only the starting point; the more challenging issue was then to decide what action schools and families should take in light of this information.
Imagine a ten-year-old child who grasps mathematical ideas that most of his classmates will not meet for several years. If he stays in the same class and keeps getting taught things that he has already learned, he may eventually become bored. This boredom might lead him to finish his work too quickly, to daydream, to talk during lessons, to refuse repetitive tasks, or to seem generally disinterested in school. The teacher might see this behaviour as a sign of laziness or of poor discipline, when in fact the real issue is that the material is not providing enough intellectual challenge.
In her 1926 book Hollingworth’s Gifted Children: Their Nature And Nurture, Hollingworth looked at the subject of giftedness in a much broader manner. Instead of considering intelligence as a separate trait, she studied the development, interests, temperament, personality, education, family situation, and social adjustment of gifted children. The book thus became one of the fundamental works in the newly emerging area of gifted education (Hollingworth, 1926; Borland, 1990).
The way she approached the situation therefore shifted the focus from “How intelligent is this child?” to a more useful series of questions: What implications does this level of ability have for the child’s development? What kind of educational environment is needed by the child? And what difficulties might occur as a result of the child’s exceptional ability?
Read More: High IQ or High Anxiety? Exploring the Link Between Giftedness and Anxiety Disorders
A High IQ Does Not Mean An Adult Mind
A key point in Hollingworth’s work is that intellectual development does not have to keep pace with emotional and social development; it is possible for a child to show reasoning skills much beyond what is usually expected for their chronological age even though they still have the emotional needs of a child. For example, suppose there is a child of ten years of age who is able to grasp complicated scientific concepts and who can talk about philosophical issues with adults, yet becomes very distressed when they lose a game.
Although adults might expect the child to behave in a more mature way since the child is intellectually advanced, more advanced reasoning does not necessarily lead to better emotional control. This could result in a mismatch: the child might be able to grasp an abstract concept like fairness yet still have difficulty in controlling the emotions that arise when something seems unfair. In a similar way, a child might understand complicated social issues in an intellectual sense but still find it hard to handle ordinary relationships with peers.
Hollingworth’s research brought forward various questions concerning development and adjustment, showing that gifted children should not be regarded as small adults merely because they show advanced intellectual abilities (Hollingworth, 1926; Hollingworth & Thorndike, 1942). Just as later academic work on Hollingworth has done, it has also stressed her interest in the connection between exceptional ability and the child’s overall development (Benbow, 1990; Kearney, 1990).
Read More: Who Was Alfred Binet? The Psychologist Who Created the First IQ Test
The Social Problem Of Being Different
A child’s social life can also be affected by their exceptional intellectual ability. A gifted child might have interests, a vocabulary, or intellectual concerns which are quite different from those of other children of the same age. This does not imply that gifted children are certainly socially isolated, but it does mean that there may be a mismatch between the child’s intellectual interests and the social environment in which they find themselves.
For example, a ten-year-old who spends his free time reading about astronomy or philosophy might find it hard to find classmates who are interested in the same subjects. If this situation occurs over and over again, the child could start to feel as though he is different from the other pupils. On the other hand, the classmates might see the child as being unusual or too serious.
That is the reason why Hollingworth’s contributions are significant beyond the field of intelligence testing. She realised that ability exists within a social context and that a child’s experience of being gifted to some extent depends on the way families, teachers, and peers react to that ability (Hollingworth, 1926; Borland, 1990). Her work also indicated that proper education should include more than just providing gifted children with extra work.
If a student has already understood a particular concept, completing twenty more questions of the same kind might increase their workload without improving their learning. The educational approach could instead call for greater complexity, depth, independence, creativity, or more opportunities for advanced study (Borland, 1990; Benbow, 1990).
Read More: The Role of Women in the Early History of Psychology
Studying Children With Extremely High Intelligence
Hollingworth’s interest eventually turned to children who had exceptionally high intelligence, and her studies of those children who obtained a score above 180 on the Stanford-Binet intelligence scale became especially important since cases of this kind were very rare. Hollingworth and Thorndike published her research posthumously in the book Children Above 180 IQ: Stanford-Binet, Origin and Development (1942).
It was not merely the fact that Hollingworth studied very high IQ scores that made this work important; she also tried to find out what such exceptional ability meant for the child’s development and education. Later historical analyses have pointed out that her programme involved a great deal of work with gifted children and that she carried out research together with practical educational intervention (Benbow, 1990; Kearney, 1990). It is important to make this distinction.
Let us imagine that two children both show very high intellectual ability; in one case the child will have parents who give them books, offer them intellectual stimulation and provide opportunities to pursue their interests, while in the other case the child will receive little encouragement. In the first instance, the child may go to a school which is able to give them advanced instruction, while in the other, the child may stay in a course which is much below their ability level. Therefore, people with the same degree of intellectual ability may experience very different environments.
Nature And Nurture In Giftedness
The title of Hollingworth’s 1926 book, Gifted Children: Their Nature and Nurture, reflects the complexity of her approach. We cannot attribute giftedness solely to heredity or the environment; individual characteristics matter as much as the circumstances in which they develop. Even when a child has great intellectual ability, educational opportunities, family support, teaching quality, available resources, and social expectations determine whether they recognise and develop that potential.
It does not follow that the environment can produce exceptional intellectual ability in every child. Instead, the statement emphasises the way in which individual potential interacts with environmental conditions. It was especially important since in the early twentieth century debates about intelligence could at times take on a highly deterministic character. Hollingworth’s work encouraged educators to focus on the educational steps they could take after recognising exceptional ability (Hollingworth, 1926; Silverman, 1989).
Read More: Intellectual Disability: Symptoms, Causes and Treatment
When “Gifted” Becomes A Label
Studying giftedness also reveals the psychological impact of labels. Describing a child as ‘gifted’ can lead to recognition. It can also grant access to suitable educational opportunities. But it can also result in the creation of expectations. Adults may constantly tell a child that they are “the intelligent one.” They might start to link intelligence with always being successful.
As a result, when they come across a truly difficult task, failing may become threatening. Rather than thinking to themselves, “I haven’t learned this yet”, they might think something else. They might think, “If I can’t do this, perhaps I am not intelligent at all.” This shows the distinction between ability and identity. The fact that someone has exceptional intellectual ability does not mean that they will succeed in all areas. Difficulty in one area does not prove that their abilities in other areas are lacking.
It is therefore necessary for a psychologically healthy educational environment to acknowledge ability. It should not treat ability as a requirement for continual perfection. Hollingworth’s work suggests that we should see gifted children as individuals in the process of developing. We should not see them merely as people with high scores on intelligence tests. Indeed, her focus on education, adjustment, personality and social development makes this view especially relevant (Hollingworth, 1926; Silverman, 1992).
Read More: Exceptionality: Special Education Insights
Hollingworth And The Development Of Gifted Education
Hollingworth’s work went beyond writing on gifted children. According to historical scholarship, she played a role in establishing gifted education as a separate field of study. She taught one of the first courses that was solely concerned with the nature and needs of gifted children. Also, she set up educational programmes. She carried out several studies. She also authored one of the field’s earliest major textbooks (Silverman, 1989; Borland, 1990).
Also she thus linked psychological research with educational practice. Also, she did not limit her study of giftedness to the laboratory. Instead, she used schools and classrooms as important settings. They helped in understanding how exceptional ability develops. They also helped in understanding what sort of educational arrangements could support it (Silverman, 1992). One of the characteristic aspects of her career was the combination of research and practical intervention. As a result, later historians have regarded her as a significant pioneer in the field of gifted education. They have also regarded her as a pioneer in educational psychology in general (Benbow, 1990; MacArthur, 2014).
Read More: How Childhood Validation Shapes Adult Self-Worth
Why Hollingworth Still Matters
Hollingworth’s work is still relevant since the questions she posed go beyond the field of gifted education. Psychology has ongoing research into how individual characteristics interact with social environments. She also researched ways to assess intelligence. She has conducted research into how educational systems can respond to individual differences. Her studies of women cast doubt on the simple ideas regarding intellectual differences between the sexes. Her research into gifted children questioned the idea that exceptional intelligence necessarily ensures successful development (Hollingworth, 1914; Silverman, 1992).
In both of these areas, her method was based on one main idea. That idea held that researchers should examine psychological differences rather than assume them. The fact that there is a difference in achievement does not mean that we know the cause of it. A high intelligence score does not give us all the information needed about a person’s developmental requirements.
Read More: The Link Between Success and Intelligence, According to Psychology
Conclusion
Leta Stetter Hollingworth’s most significant contribution might have been raising important questions about human ability. Intelligence was becoming more and more subject to measurement and classification. She would not regard a psychological score as a full description of a person. She showed that giftedness includes more than intellectual ability. It also includes education, social relationships, emotional development, personality, the family environment, and opportunities for growth. Her career also shows a more general lesson for psychology. Just because a difference exists does not mean that this provides an explanation for the difference.
She was looking at assertions regarding women’s intellectual abilities. Or she was studying children who had exceptionally high intelligence. In either case, Hollingworth treated psychological differences as questions. These questions needed evidence. The term “gifted” therefore gives us some information regarding a person’s abilities. But it by no means tells the whole story about that person.
A child may have great intellectual potential. However, this does not mean the child needs nothing more. In fact, such a child may still require suitable teaching. Along with this, emotional support is important. Similarly, meaningful friendships matter. Finally, the child needs opportunities to grow at the right level. Hollingworth showed us an important point about exceptional ability. First, the reason for identifying it should not be simply to label a child. Instead, the aim is to get a good understanding of the individual. In this way, we can set up conditions in which that ability can develop. At the same time, we should not overlook the rest of the person.
References +
- Benbow, C. P. (1990). Leta Stetter Hollingworth: A pilgrim in research in her time and ours. Roeper Review, 12(3), 210–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199009553274
- Borland, J. H. (1990). Leta Hollingworth’s contributions to the psychology and education of the gifted. Roeper Review, 12(3), 162–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199009553263
- Hollingworth, L. S. (1914). Variability as related to sex differences in achievement: A critique. American Journal of Sociology, 19(4), 510–530. https://doi.org/10.1086/212287
- Hollingworth, L. S. (1925). Vocabulary as a symptom of intellect. American Speech, 1(3), 154–158. https://doi.org/10.2307/452538
- Hollingworth, L. S. (1926). Gifted children: Their nature and nurture. Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1037/10599-000
- Hollingworth, L. S., & Thorndike, R. L. (1942). Children above 180 IQ: Stanford-Binet, origin and development. World Book Company. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146814204400111
- Kearney, K. (1990). Leta Hollingworth’s unfinished legacy: Children above 180 IQ. Roeper Review, 12(3), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199009553267
- MacArthur, H. (2014). Hollingworth, Leta S. (1886–1939). In The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118625392.wbecp123
- Miller, R. (1990). Leta Stetter Hollingworth: Pioneer woman of psychology. Roeper Review, 12(3), 142–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199009553258
- Peters, C. C. (1994). Leta Stetter Hollingworth: Women and giftedness. Gifted Education International, 9(3), 136–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142949400900302
- Silverman, L. K. (1989). It all began with Leta Hollingworth: The story of giftedness in women. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12(2), 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235328901200202
- Silverman, L. K. (1992). Leta Stetter Hollingworth: Champion of the psychology of women and gifted children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.1.20
