The big-fish-little-pond effect (BFLPE) refers to the theoretical prediction that equally able students will have lower academic self-concepts in higher-achieving or selective schools or programs than in lower-achieving or less selective schools or programs, largely due to social comparison based on local norms. While negative consequences of being in a more competitive educational setting are highlighted by the BFLPE, the exact nature of the BFLPE has not been closely scrutinized. This article provides a critique of the BFLPE in terms of its conceptualization, methodology, and practical implications. Our main argument is that the BFLPE, while having added to our understanding of the origins of self-concepts, disproportionately emphasizes one aspect of social comparison to the exclusion of many other intervening factors. In light of our critique, we suggest a broader conception of social comparison effects on academic self-concept that emphasizes a more active role of individuals in regulating their social cognition and motivation, as well as a more distinct effect of social-contextual influences. We also suggest alternative research designs that would incorporate contextual, developmental, and individual differences as potential moderators or mediators of the BFLPE. What is the BFLPE?The big-fish-little-pond effect (BFLPE) was proposed by Marsh and Parker (1984;Marsh 1984Marsh , 1987 based on the assumption that students use a local "frame of reference" to form their self-concepts on a relevant dimension of the self. Marsh and Parker operationalized the frame of reference or standard of comparison to be school-average ability level 1 . Thus, the general theoretical prediction based on the BFLPE is that equally able students will have lower academic self-concepts in higher average-ability schools but higher self-concepts in comparatively lower average-ability schools. In plain language, whether one perceives oneself as a big fish depends on the size of the other fish (more accurately, the average size of the other fish) in the pond. The stronger the peer group as a frame of reference, the lower one's academic self-concept. By the same token, weaker peer groups lead to higher academic self-concepts.Since Marsh and his colleagues proposed the BFLPE model, numerous studies have been conducted to date (see Marsh and Hau 2003;Marsh et al. 2005;Marsh et al. 2007, for most recent studies), and the areas where the BFLPE is investigated have also been extended from academic to artistic and athletic, among others (e.g., Chanal et al. 2005). The research interest generated by the BFLPE model is largely due to its practical implications. Marsh (1987;Marsh et al. 2004) has repeatedly warned that parents who are eager to send their children to selective schools should be aware of possible negative consequences associated with the BFLPE. Moreover, based on the fact that people are constantly working in social settings that potentially provide social comparative information and salient cues for social comparison, the BFLPE shoul...

While neither the notion of personality being related to creativity, nor the idea that the diverse conceptions and measures of creativity can cloud the field are new, the 2 thoughts are rarely combined. Using a systematic review methodology, 1 overarching question was examined: Do differential creativity-personality relationships exist based on different creativity conceptions or measurement schemes? In the review, 188 reported relationships of creativity to personality across 96 peer-reviewed, empirical studies were examined and coded for definitions and measurements of creativity. Results support standing beliefs regarding openness and extraversion as strong positive predictors. However, the amount of creativity variance explained differed as much as 8 times depending on the type of assessment. Production measures and self-reported measures were more related to personality than ideation and externally rated measures. The 4 elements of divergent thinking also demonstrated differential relationships to personality. The results of this analysis encourage subsequent research that is more discerning when interpreting the relationships between creativity and personality.

The purpose of this study is to examine the academic achievement, academic self-concepts, and aspirations of gifted college students who are enrolled in an honors program and of gifted college students who are not enrolled in an honors program. Participants include 294 gifted college students, 248 of whom were enrolled in an honors program and 46 who were not enrolled in an honors program. A series of analyses of covariance is used to compare the mean grade point averages, academic self-concepts, and educational aspirations of the two groups. Academic self-concept is measured using the Academic subscale of the Self Description Questionnaire III. Results indicate the gifted/honors students have higher academic achievement and higher academic self-concepts than the gifted/ nonhonors students, even when controlling for SAT score. No significant differences are found with regard to aspirations. Implications are discussed.

As universities actively compete for the best and brightest students, educators may wonder about the nature of these gifted students and what awaits them in college. Yet, research on the programs and opportunities provided for talented undergraduates at institutions of higher education is limited, leaving researchers to question what universities are doing for bright students. The purpose of this review is to examine recent research on academically talented undergraduates, both on the nature of the undergraduates themselves and the programs provided for them at public institutions of higher education. Areas in need of additional research are discussed.

No abstract