Bullying and the gifted.

Abstract

Bullying among school-age youth continues to be cause for concern. In a recent U.S. national survey, approximately 28% of 12-to 18-year-old students reported they had been bullied at school during the school year, and victimization was highest among sixth graders (37%) compared to seventh or eighth graders (30% and 31% percent, respectively;Robers, Kemp, & Truman, 2013). It is not surprising that sixth graders reported more bullying, given that this is the year that most students transition to middle school. Gifted youth are at particular risk for being targets of bullying (Peterson & Ray, 2006a, 2006b. Longitudinal data show that victims of bullying have compromised social, emotional, and academic development (Ttofi, Farrington, Lösel, & Loeber, 2011) and even physical health (Copeland et al., 2014). Studies have documented that victims often experience depression, social anxiety, and low self-esteem, which could then contribute to academic and social challenges (Cook, Williams, Guerra, Kim, & Sadek, 2010).From 1970 through 2014, approximately 14 peer-reviewed articles and four dissertations focused on bullying, aggression, or victimization among gifted or exceptional children. Less than five of these studies were conducted outside of the United States. In comparison to numerous studies focusing on students in general education and students with disabilities (Blake, Lund,

Cyberbullying and Internet Addiction in Gifted and Nongifted Teenagers

“…Importantly, similar results for gifted and nonidentified students in both self-perception of cyberbullying and Internet addiction would confirm that being gifted would not be a risk or prevention factor in terms of becoming involved in such situations. This result would reinforce the approach of Mitchell (2011) and Parker and Bain (2011), indicating that being gifted is not a variable that contributes to increased bullying via the Internet; unlike other studies which indicate that being gifted has been related to both a higher (Peterson & Ray, 2006) and lower (Estell et al, 2009) incidence of bullying.…”

“…However, in other studies, the opposing conclusion is reached; that is, these students seem to be less vulnerable to bullying and are even less likely to get involved in situations of this type (Estell et al, 2009). Cohen et al (1994) indicated that gifted students, in the last years of primary and first years of secondary, are generally well accepted by their peers, postulating that these students could have low ratios in these situations, with a lower likelihood in the role of victim or aggressor, in comparison with other students.…”

“…We speculate that a shortcoming in interpersonal factors could contribute to a negative self-perception in their social relationships, a feeling of rejection or exclusion, and no social benefit to being intelligent, even if the objective data do not describe this reality (Lee et al, 2012). It could also be speculated that gifted students’ asynchronous development, and characteristics such as greater sensitivity toward social situations, together with more demanding behavior, makes some gifted adolescents more vulnerable and less competent in their online relationships and/or more prone to show passive aggressive behaviors with greater implications and frequency than nonidentified students (Espelage & King, 2018; Peairs et al, 2019). A straightforward explanation for the distinct pattern of associations found for gifted and nonidentified students regarding the role of interpersonal factors explaining cyberbullying would require new, more specific studies devoted to exploring differences in social strategic behaviors used by gifted and nonidentified students.…”

“…Cohen et al (1994) indicated that gifted students, in the last years of primary and first years of secondary, are generally well accepted by their peers, postulating that these students could have low ratios in these situations, with a lower likelihood in the role of victim or aggressor, in comparison with other students. This latter perspective emphasizes the fact that people identified as gifted tend to have higher levels of social functioning, prosocial behavior, and exceptional empathy (Estell et al, 2009), and also a greater capacity for resistance and emotional strength. These characteristics are related to an adequate social self-concept (Bain & Bell, 2004;Robinson, 2008) and to efficient coping strategies (Cross et al, 2015), which would favor greater success when faced with stressful socialemotional situations.…”

Soledad en la Alta Capacidad Intelectual: Factores de Riesgo y Estrategias de Afrontamiento

“…La ACI implica una serie de características personales, biológicas, cognitivas y emocionales, que si no se desarrollan en un entorno sociocultural adecuado pueden llevar a la aparición de problemas en el ámbito personal, social y académico (Eren et al, 2018). Los niños y adolescentes con ACI no sólo parecen mostrar una mejor empatía y una mayor preocupación por las injusticias y los problemas del mundo que les rodea, sino que además han sido definidos en numerosas ocasiones como más sensibles e intensos emocionalmente (Espelage y King, 2018;Freeman, 2005;Pfeiffer, 2018). Estas características que podrían actuar como factores de protección ante las adversidades y favorecer un desarrollo socioemocional promedio o superior (Baudson, 2016;Gómez-Péreza et al, 2014;Lee et al, 2012) también podrían suponer una mayor vulnerabilidad a experimentar la soledad física o existencial (Guthrie, 2019;Rinn, 2018;Shechtman y Silektor, 2012).…”