Gender and Giftedness

  • Sally M. Reis
  • Thomas P. Hébert

During the last few decades, an increasing number of psychologists have become interested in gifted and talented students, and the reasons they underachieve or excel in school and, subsequently, in life. While some research has focused on this population, comparatively little has been conducted on the ways that psychologists can help male and female gifted students to achieve well both in and out of school, and find challenging work, as well as contentment in their personal lives. In this chapter, research from the last few decades concerning giftedness and gender is summarized, with special attention paid to how psychologists can help intervene for positive outcomes for both girls and boys. When we refer to academically gifted and talented students, we include those who have been identified as academically gifted and talented, high achieving, or very creative. In this chapter, current research is summarized relating to gender differences in ability, achievement, belief in self, social and emotional factors, socialization factors including teacher and parent influences, and barriers to the development of giftedness in males and females. The chapter concludes with some suggested strategies for talent development in both gifted boys and girls, and the psychoeducational and clinical implications of the interaction between gender and giftedness.


Stereotype Threat Gifted Student Talent Development Talented Student Urban High School 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alvino, J. (1991). An investigation into the needs of gifted boys. Roeper Review, 13(4), 174–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Association of University Women (AAUW). (1991). Shortchanging girls, shortchanging America: A call to action. Washington, DC: The American Association of University Women Educational Foundation.Google Scholar
  3. American College Testing Program. (1989). State and national trend data for students who take the ACT Assessment. Iowa City, IA: Author.Google Scholar
  4. Arnold, K. D. (1993). Academically talented women in the 1980s: The Illinois Valedictorian Project. In K. Hulbert & D. Schuster (Eds.), Women’s lives through time: Educated American women of the twentieth century (pp. 393–414). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Beausay, B. (1998). Teenage boys: Surviving and enjoying these extraordinary years. Colorado Springs, CO: Waterbook Press.Google Scholar
  6. Block, J. H. (1982). Sex role identity and ego development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  7. Buescher, T. M., Olszewski, P., & Higham, S. J. (1987). Influences on strategies adolescents use to cope with their own recognized talents (Report No. EC 200 755). Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Baltimore.Google Scholar
  8. Callahan, C. M., Cunningham, C. M., & Plucker, J. A. (1994). Foundations for the future: The socio-emotional development of gifted, adolescent women. Roeper Review, 17, 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Canada, G. (1998). Reaching up for manhood. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  10. Coleman, J. (1961). The adolescent society. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cooley, D., Chauvin, J., & Karnes, F. (1984). Gifted females: A comparison of attitudes by male and female teachers. Roeper Review, 6, 164–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cramer, R. H. (1989). Attitudes of gifted boys and girls towards math: A qualitative study. Roeper Review, 11, 128–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  14. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Davis, J. A. (1964). Great aspirations: The school plans of America’s college seniors. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  16. Deaux, K. (1993). Commentary: Sorry wrong number: a reply to Gentile’s call. Psychological Science, 4, 125–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dickens, M. N. (1990). Parental influences on the mathematics self-concept of high achieving adolescent girls. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.Google Scholar
  18. Doyle, J. A. (1989). The male experience (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., & Adler, T. F. (1984). Grade-related changes in the school environment: Effects on achievement motivation. In J. Nicholls (Ed.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 3, pp. 283–331). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  20. Educational Testing Service. (2006). 2006 college-bound seniors: A profile of SAT program test takers. Princeton, NJ: Author.Google Scholar
  21. Ehrlich, V. (1982). Gifted children: A guide for parents and teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Feingold, A. (1994). Gender differences in personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116(3), 429–456.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fennema, E. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs and gender differences in mathematics. In E. Fennema & G. Leder (Eds.), Mathematics and gender (pp. 1–9). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  24. Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Carpenter, T. P., & Lubinski, C. A. (1990). Teachers’ attribution and beliefs about girls, boys, and mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 21, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ford, D. Y. (1992). The American achievement ideology as perceived by urban African-American students. Urban Education, 27(2), 196–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Franken, R. E. (1988). Human motivation (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. Fredrickson, R. H. (1979). Preparing gifted and talented students for the world of work. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 556–557.Google Scholar
  28. Fredrickson, R. H. (1986). The multipotential as vocational decision-makers. In R.H. Fredrickson & J. W. M. Rothney (Eds.), Recognizing and assisting multipotential youth. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar
  29. Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1986). Educational psychology: A realistic approach (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  30. Gruber, H. E. (1986). The self-construction of the extraordinary. In R. J. Sternberg and J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 247–263). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Halpern, D. (1989). The disappearance of cognitive gender differences: What you see depends on where you look. American Psychologist, 44, 1156–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic perfectionism. Psychology, 15, 27–33.Google Scholar
  33. Hany, E. A. (1994). The development of basic cognitive components of technical creativity: A longitudinal comparison of children and youth with high and average intelligence. In R. F. Subotnik & K. D. Arnold (Eds.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 115–154). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  34. Hébert, T. P. (1991). Meeting the affective needs of bright boys through bibliotherapy. Roeper Review, 13, 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hébert, T. P. (1995). Coach Brogan: South Central High School’s answer to academic achievement. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 7, 310–323.Google Scholar
  36. Hébert, T. P. (1996). Portraits of resilience: The urban life experiences of gifted Latino young men. Roeper Review, 19, 82–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hébert, T. P. (1998a). Gifted black males in an urban high school: Factors that influence achievement and underachievement. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 385–414.Google Scholar
  38. Hébert, T. P. (1998b, June). When bright boys play sports: How can parents help? Parenting for High Potential, 8–12, 19.Google Scholar
  39. Hébert, T. P. (2000a). Defining belief in self: Intelligent young men in an urban high school. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 91–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hébert, T. P. (2000b). Gifted males pursuing careers in elementary education: Factors that influence a belief in self. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24, 7–45.Google Scholar
  41. Hébert, T. P. (2001). “If I had a new notebook, I know things would change”: Bright underachieving young men in urban classrooms. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 174–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hébert, T. P. (2002a). Gifted black males in a predominately white university: Portraits of high achievement. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(1), 25–64.Google Scholar
  43. Hébert, T. P. (2002b). Gifted males. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N.M. Robinson, & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 137–144). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.Google Scholar
  44. Hébert, T. P. (2006). Gifted university males in a Greek fraternity: Creating a culture of achievement. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 26–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hébert, T. P., & Olenchak, F. R. (2000). Mentors for gifted underachieving males: Developing potential and realizing promise. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 196–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hess, R. D., Holloway, S. D., Dickson, W. P., & Price, G. G. (1984). Maternal variables as predictors of children’s school readiness and later achievement in vocabulary and mathematics in sixth grade. Child Development, 55, 1902–1912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jepsen, D. A. (1979). Helping gifted adolescents with career exploration. In N. Colangelo & R.T. Zaffrann (Eds.), New voices in counseling the gifted (pp. 277–283). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.Google Scholar
  48. Kao, C., & Hébert, T. P. (2006). Gifted Asian American adolescent males: Portraits of cultural dilemmas. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30, 88–117.Google Scholar
  49. Kerr, B. (1994). Smart girls: A new psychology of girls, women, and giftedness (rev. ed.). Scottsdale, AZ: Gifted Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  50. Kerr, B. A., & Cohn, S. J. (2001). Smart boys: Talent, manhood, and the search for meaning. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.Google Scholar
  51. Kimball, M. M. (1989). A new perspective on women’s math achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 198–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kissane, B. V. (1986). Selection of mathematically talented students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17, 221–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Klein, A. G., & Zehms, D. (1996). Self-concept and gifted girls: A cross sectional study of intellectually gifted females in grades 3, 5, 8. Roeper Review, 19(1), 30–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kline, B. E., & Short, E. B. (1991a). Changes in emotional resilience: Gifted adolescent boys. Roeper Review, 13(4), 184–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Kline, B. E., & Short, E. B. (1991b). Changes in emotional resilience: Gifted adolescent females. Roeper Review, 13, 118–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kramer, L. R. (1985). Social interaction and perceptions of ability: A study of gifted adolescent females. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  57. Kramer, L. R. (1991). The social construction of ability perceptions: An ethnographic study of gifted adolescent girls. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(3), 340–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Leroux, J. A. (1988). Voices from the classroom: Academic and social self-concepts of gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11(3), 3–18.Google Scholar
  59. Levant, R. (1992). Toward the reconstruction of masculinity. Journal of Family Psychology, 5, 379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. McGillicuddy-De Lisi, A. V. (1985). The relationship between parental beliefs and children’s cognitive level. In R. Sigel (Ed.), Parental belief systems (pp. 7–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  61. Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students’ goal orientations and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. National Science Foundation. (2000). Shaping the future. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  63. Newberger, E. H. (1999). The men they will become: The nature and nurture of male character. Reading, MA: Perseus Books.Google Scholar
  64. Nicholls, J. G. (1975). Causal attributions and other achievement-related cognitions: Effects of task outcome, attainment value, and sex. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 379–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Olszewski-Kubilius, P. M., Kulieke, M. J., & Krasney, N. (1988). Personality dimensions of gifted adolescents: A review of the empirical literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32(4), 347–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Parsons, J. E., Adler, T. F., & Kaczala, C. (1982). Socialization of achievement attitudes and beliefs: Parental influences. Child Development, 53, 310–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Perleth, C., & Heller, K. A. (1994). The Munich longitudinal study of giftedness. In R. F. Subotnik & K. K. Arnold (Eds.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 77–114). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  68. Phillips, D. A. (1987). Socialization of perceived academic competence among highly competent children. Child Development, 58, 1308–1320.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Piechowski, M. M. (2006). “Mellow out”, they say. If only I could: Intensities and sensitivities of the young and bright. Madison, WI: Yunasa Books.Google Scholar
  70. Pintrich, P. R., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1985). Classroom experience and children’s self-perceptions of ability, effort, and conduct. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 646–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pollack, W. S. (1998). Real boys: Rescuing our sons from the myths of boyhood. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  72. Pollack, W. S., & Schuster, T. (2000). Real boys’ voices. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  73. Reis, S. M. (1987). We can’t change what we don’t recognize: Understanding the special needs of gifted females. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(2), 83–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Reis, S. M. (1995). Talent ignored, talent diverted: The cultural context underlying giftedness in females. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(3), 162–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Reis, S. M. (1998). Work left undone: Compromises and challenges of talented females. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.Google Scholar
  76. Reis, S. M. (2005). Feminist perspectives on talent development: A research based conception of giftedness in women. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 217–245). Boston: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Reis, S. M., & Callahan, C. M. (1989). Gifted females: They’ve come a long way—or have they? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12(2), 99–117.Google Scholar
  78. Reis, S. M., Callahan, C. M., & Goldsmith, D. (1996). Attitudes of adolescent gifted girls and boys toward education, achievement, and the future. In K. D. Arnold, K. D. Noble., & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development (pp. 209–224). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  79. Reis, S. M., Hébert, T. P., Díaz, E. I., Maxfield, L. R., & Ratley, M. E. (1995). Case studies of talented students who achieve and underachieve in an urban high school (Research Monograph No. 95120). Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.Google Scholar
  80. Reis, S. M., & McCoach, D. B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go? Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(3), 152–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Reis, S. M., & Park, S. (2002). Gender differences in high-achieving students in math and science. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25(1), 52–74.Google Scholar
  82. Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.Google Scholar
  83. Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how to guide for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.Google Scholar
  84. Rimm, S. (1999). See Jane win. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  85. Rosser, P. (1989a). Sex bias in college admissions tests: Why women lose out. Cambridge, MA: National Center for Fair and Open Testing.Google Scholar
  86. Rosser, P. (1989b). The SAT gender gap: Identifying the causes. Washington, DC: The Centre for Women Policy Studies.Google Scholar
  87. Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1994). Failing at fairness: How America’s schools cheat girls. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  88. Sanborn, M. P. (1979). Career development: Problems of gifted and talented students. In N. Colangelo & R. T. Zaffrann (Eds.), New voices in counseling the gifted (pp. 284–300). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.Google Scholar
  89. Schroer, A. C. P., & Dorn, F. J. (1986). Enhancing the career and personal development of gifted college students. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 567–571.Google Scholar
  90. Schuler, P. A. (1997). Characteristics and perceptions of perfectionism in gifted adolescents in a rural school environment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.Google Scholar
  91. Schunk, D. H. (1984). Sequential attributional feedback and children’s achievement behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(4), 511–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Siegle, D., & Reis, S. M. (1994). Gender differences in teacher and student perceptions of students’ ability and effort. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 6(2), 86–92.Google Scholar
  93. Siegle, D., & Reis, S. M. (1998). Gender differences in teacher and student perceptions of students’ ability and effort. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42(1), 39–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Silverman, L. K. (1992). Career counseling. In L. K. Silverman (Ed.), Counseling the gifted and talented (pp. 215–238). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.Google Scholar
  95. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape the intellectual identities and performance of women and African-Americans. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Stevenson, H. W., & Newman, R. S. (1986). Long-term prediction of achievement in mathematics and reading. Child Development, 57, 646–659.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Subotnik, R. (1988). The motivation to experiment: A study of gifted adolescents’ attitudes toward scientific research. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11(3), 19–35.Google Scholar
  99. Swiatek, M. A. (2001). Social coping among gifted high school students and its relationship to self-concept. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 30(1), 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Thompson, M. (2000). Speaking of boys: Answers to the most-asked questions about raising sons. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
  101. Wainer, H., & Steinberg, L. S. (1992). Sex differences in performance on the mathematics section of the Scholastic Aptitude Test: A bidirectional validity study. Harvard Educational Review, 62(3), 323–336.Google Scholar
  102. Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  103. Wilcove, J. L. (1998). Perceptions of masculinity, femininity, and androgyny among a select cohort of gifted adolescent males. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 288–309.Google Scholar
  104. Woolfolk, A. E. (2004). Educational psychology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sally M. Reis
  • Thomas P. Hébert
    • 1
  1. 1.The University of GeorgiaUSA

Personalised recommendations