GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND IMPLICATIONS
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN
ADULT STATUS AND PERSONALITY RATINGS
Observation of such cases as those described in the foregoing
chapters suggests that children of exceptionally high intelligence
do not regress toward mediocrity as they mature but maintain
their initial distinguished status. Studies by other workers
(Kuhlmann, Baldwin and Stechner, Terman) confirm such a conclusion.
A further study of this point was reported by Hollingworth and
Lorge in 1936, in which the following questions were investigated:
1. To what extent is status in IER Intelligence Scale CAVD at
maturity predictable from childhood scores in Stanford-Binet?
2. How do those who tested above 180 IQ in childhood differ
at maturity from those at lower levels in measures of general
culture and of scientific information?
3. Is there discernable any consistent specialization in mental
abilities from childhood to maturity?
4. At what degree of intelligence in terms of IQ (Stanford-Binet)
is the word "genius" justifiable, if at all?
5. At what point on the scale of IQ (Stanford-Binet) obtained
in childhood will individuals later prove "unmeasurable" by
available tests of adult intelligence?
In 1934-1935 a group of eighteen persons whose high IQ's had
been measured tweleve or thirteen years earlier (at ages 7 to
9 years) were measured in these respects and to these were added
three others whose childhood IQ's were known to have been over 170.
The tests used, to be reported here, were: CAVD Intelligence Scale,
Levels N-Q; the Coöperative General Culture Test (Form 1933 or
1934); and the Coöperative General Science Test (Form 1933).
There were also available data on most of the individuals from
Army Alpha tests taken at ages 16 to 19. Of the 21 cases thus
studied, nine had a childhood IQ over 170; eight over 150 [to 170];
the remaining four ranged down to 133.
ADULT STATUS OF HIGHLY INTELLIGENT CHILDREN [1]
The detailed data have been reported elsewhere and only the general
results need to be recited here.
"For these gifted individuals (albeit there are so few studied)
superior status on the Stanford-Binet at or near ages 7 to 9 years
of age is highly predictive of status on Army Alpha at or near 16
to 19 years of age, and of status on CAVD at or near maturity. . . .
"It is clear that CAVD is more closely associated with General
Culture than with General Science. . . . There obviously is
a specificity of success for Science as compared with general
Culture. . . .
"The results for the CAVD as interpreted through norms obtained
on selected populations show that highly intelligent children
(of IQ 140 or above) fall within the upper quartile of the college
graduate population of the United States, when they are at or
near maturity."
Such results are confirmed also by a study reported two years
earlier, in which over 100 children had been re-measured with
Army Alpha 10 to 12 years after their initial Stanford-Binet
measurements at ages 7 to 9 years. [2] All these children had
IQ's over 130, and half of them were over 150, ranging up to
190. From this study the following conclusions had been drawn:
"Of 116 children testing in the top centile of the distribution
of school children by Stanford-Binet, 82 per cent were found
when near maturity, ten years later, to rate in the top centile
of the military draft by Army Alpha. The remainder rated in high
centiles. No individual of either sex regressed to or nearly
to the average. . . . Girls regressed from the top centile somewhat
more frequently than boys, this regression being in part but not
fully accounted for by the known sex difference between medians
on Army Alpha.
"This result affords a validation, by means of elapsed time,
of the predictive power of available mental tests on the one
hand; and on the other, a proof of the constancy of the intellectual
development of gifted children in terms of centile status."
CRITIQUE OF THE CONCEPT OF "GENIUS" AS APPLIED IN TERMS OF IQ
The term "genius" has been used by Terman--and following him
by many others--to denote children testing at or above 140 IQ
(S-B). In the light of the developmental data herein presented, it
would appear that the term "genius" is thus misapplied, unless we
wish to define as "geniuses" persons who represent approximately the
best fourth of all students being graduated from American colleges.
Of individuals here followed to early maturity, those who test
at about 140 IQ (S-B) are found to define approximately the 75th
percentile of college graduates, taking the country over. They
are far from "genius," if by that term is to be meant the degree
of mental ability that is capable of outstanding original
intellectual achievement. It is only when we have an IQ (S-B) of at
least 160 in a child, that we may begin to expect mildly noteworthy
accomplishments, such as winning "honors" in a first-class college.
Very rarely are "honors" won in first-class colleges by those who
test below this status in childhood. The small sample of college
graduates here presented is truly representative of the much larger
sample in our files (not tested by our end tests) in this respect.
Of primary interest to the present investigators is the subsequent
history of those who in childhood have achieved the extremely
infrequent rating of 180 IQ or higher. At maturity will these
persons still stand out from their contemporaries in mental tests
and in achievement?
This question is answered affirmatively by our data. The five
children here included, [3] who achieved IQ's (S-B) on _first_
test in childhood of more than 180, are they who "find the tops"
on CAVD at maturity. Every one of these top-rank persons is
noteworthy among contemporaries. Before the age of 22 in all cases,
one had prosecuted research in history, one in mathematics, one in
chess, and two had become established in learned professions. One
stood high in the national ranking for chess. A long list of medals
and prizes had been won by them. All but one of those graduated
from college had been elected to Phi Beta Kappa.
These unusual achievements show how children testing above 180 IQ
rise above the generality of the college populations in adolescence
and in early maturity. None of those who tested in childhood around
140, 150, or 160 IQ (S-B) approaches these others at maturity in
honors and prizes won, or in test scores.
This is, perhaps, the most significant fact to be derived from
our data: that the children who test at and above 180 IQ constitute
the "top" among college graduates. They are the students of whom one
may confidently predict that they will win honors and prizes for
intellectual work.
Furthermore, it is shown that at approximately 190 IQ (S-B)
individuals "go through the ceiling" of available tests for adult
intelligence by the time they are 21 years old. We cannot at
present distribute these persons at maturity.
Perhaps this is the point at which the term "genius" begins to
apply--i.e., at or near IQ 180 (S-B)--if we adhere to the dictionary
definition of the word, "Exalted intellectual power, marked by an
extraordinary faculty for original creation, expression, or
achievement" which is beyond the reach of available modes of
measurement in its maturity.
APPLICATION OF BERNREUTER INVENTORY OF PERSONALITY TO HIGHLY
INTELLIGENT ADOLESCENTS [4]
The data of the present study were obtained early in 1933, the
subjects being 36 boys and 19 girls, of the average age of 18 years
6 months. The IQ's (S-B) of all had been taken in early childhood.
The group ranged from 135-190 IQ (S-B) with a median at about
153 IQ (S-B). All but four of these young persons were Jewish,
a factor which must be considered as of possible consequence,
but which cannot be evaluated properly from any data at present
in scientific literature.
The inventories were taken and scored by the investigators in
person. All subjects had been personally known since childhood
to the senior investigator.
The method of scoring follows Bernreuter, three categories only
being found of sufficient independence to warrant recording.
SHOWS GROUP RESULTS FOR HIGHLY INTELLIGENT BOYS AND GIRLS, GIVING EVIDENCE THAT SUCH GROUPS ARE MUCH LESS
NEUROTIC, MUCH MORE SELF-SUFFICIENT, AND MUCH LESS SUBMISSIVE IN ATTITUDE THAN COLLEGE STUDENTS OR
ADULTS IN GENERAL ARE, ACCORDING TO THE CATEGORIES AND NORMS SET UP BY BERNREUTER
B1-_N_ NEUROTIC TENDENCY B1-_S_ SELF-SUFFICIENCY B1-_D_ DOMINANCE-SUBMISSION
Statistical Highly College Adult Highly College Adult Highly College Adult
categories intelligent norm norm intelligent norm norm intelligent norm norm
boys group group boys group group boys group group
Number 36 427 86 36 427 99 36 427 100
Mean -104.9 -52.9 -69.3 54.5 24.9 38.8 87.4 46.3 52.7
σ 56.7 85.2 76.3 42.3 54.0 52.4 44.6 67.4 61.8
σ Mean 9.4 4.1 8.2 7.0 2.6 5.3 7.4 3.3 6.2
σσ 6.7 2.9 5.8 5.0 1.8 3.7 5.2 2.3 4.4
σ diff. ms. 10.2 12.5 7.5 8.8 8.1 9.6
D
------
σ diff. 5.1 2.8 3.9 2.1 5.1 3.6
Median -112.0 -70.0 -75.0 54.5 25.0 35.0 98.1 45.0 55.0
Girls Girls Girls
Number 19 317 123 19 317 126 19 317 130
Mean -45.0 -39.6 -34.2 52.0 6.9 16.8 46.5 33.1 19.2
σ 65.7 78.9 80.6 51.7 55.7 55.6 55.5 63.5 65.5
σ Mean 15.1 4.4 7.3 11.9 3.1 5.0 12.7 3.6 5.7
σσ 10.7 3.1 5.1 8.4 2.2 3.5 9.0 2.5 4.1
σ diff. ms. 15.7 16.8 12.3 12.9 13.2 13.9
D
------
σ diff. .04 .64 3.7 2.7 1.0 1.96
Median -42.6 -40.0 -30.0 52.0 5.0 0.0 40.7 33.0 15.0
The summary of results shows that the highly intelligent are less
neurotic, more self-sufficient, and less submissive, as a group,
than are the populations with which they are comparable. This
divergence from the norms is found both for boys and for girls
of the highly intelligent group, but it is much more pronounced
for boys.
To one who has been familiar with the characteristics and the
careers of these persons for fifteen years, the correspondence
between what is found on the inventory and what is found in the
actual lives is interestingly close. Boy 13, for instance (extremely
high score for self-sufficiency and dominance), took ship on his
own initiative as soon as he was twenty-one years old and sailed
around the world as an ordinary seaman, returning to his post
in the financial district of New York City when the journey was
completed. Boy 35 is a well-known player in metropolitan and
sectional chess tournaments, and was able to meet seasoned players
when he was fifteen to seventeen years old (high scores for
self-sufficiency and dominance). Boy 29 entered college at 14
years of age, "held his own" with the older students, earned
money throughout his course, graduated at eighteen years of age
with Phi Beta Kappa, and won a prize for research, in competition,
in his junior year at medical school. Girl H won and held an
appointment in public service, against heavy odds of sex, age,
and general economic depression.
The indication from these data is that adolescents who as children
tested from 135-190 IQ (S-B) are _much less neurotic_, _much more
self-sufficient_ and _much less submissive_ than college students
in general, or than adults of the mental caliber represented in
the Bernreuter norms. It is to be noted in this comparison with
the generality of college students that from data so far collected,
the median intelligence of the group here presented reaches about
Q#3# for college students, taking them the country over.
[1] For a more detailed account see Lorge and Hollingworth's
"The Adult Status of Highly Intelligent Children," in _Journal
of Genetic Psychology_ (1936), Vol. 49, pages 215-226.
[2] Hollingworth and Kaunitz. "The Centile Status of Gifted
Children at Maturity." _Journal of Genetic Psychology_ (September,
1934), pages 106-120.
[3] Study made by Leta S. Hollingworth in previous years.
[4] For detailed results see the paper by this title, by Hollingworth
and Rust, _Journal of Psychology_ (1937), Vol. 4, pages 287-293.
CHAPTER NINETEEN
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PERSONALITY IN HIGHLY INTELLIGENT CHILDREN [1]
The children included in the term "highly intelligent children"
cover a very wide range in intellectual variation--from an IQ of
130 (S-B) to the topmost limit of human diversity. This topmost
limit seems to define itself at approximately 200 IQ. The most
extreme deviates reported in the literature as fully measured
fall at or near this point. A considerable number falling above
180 IQ have been reported, many of them not fully measured by
Stanford-Binet because of the limitations of the test. It is
therefore clear that children in the upper 1 per cent are not all
alike. On the contrary, the child at the top of this group exceeds
the child who barely reaches the group by much more than the
latter exceeds the average child. The most able child in the
upper 1 per cent surpasses the least able in this group by as
much as the average child surpasses a moron (in terms of IQ).
The really difficult problems of adjustment to life and to people
come to those who test above 170 IQ. As there are so very few of
these children, parents and teachers are seldom called upon to
consider their needs. Thus when one does appear, he or she is the
more likely to be misunderstood.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Obviously, it is not possible to discuss every aspect of personality
in the limited number of pages of this book. We shall confine
ourselves, therefore, to a few of the more important phases of
development which are unique in the case of gifted children;
particularly to such complexities as arise from the combination
of immaturity and deviation, these continuing for approximately
twenty-one years. This is the period when development is taking
place as distinguished from the period of maturity.
It should be stated emphatically at the outset that children
of very superior intelligence are not, as a group, socially
annoying. The problems of personality adjustment are those
of the child, not those of society as ordinarily understood.
If the gifted child should annoy society, society would pay
more attention to him. Society builds splendid institutions
and provides expert care and guidance for vicious and feeble-minded
children. That society does not pay such attention to the gifted
is in itself evidence of social acceptability. The researches
of Terman, [2] of Hartshorne and May, [3] and of Haggerty, [4]
among others, have shown that highly intelligent children are
more stable emotionally than are children in general, are much
more resistant to childish temptations, and exhibit far less of
undesirable behavior than is exhibited by the dull. Teachers do,
however, report them for "restlessness" and "lack of interest"
somewhat more often than they report children of 100 IQ for
these behaviorisms. The researches of Burt [5] and of Healy and
Bronner [6] show few children testing above 130 IQ among delinquents,
in proportion to their frequency in the population as a whole.
With these facts as to generally superior adjustment before
us, let us inquire whether there are, nevertheless, special
perplexities in the life of a gifted child, and at what point in
the range of intellect these perplexities begin. Is it possible
that a child who varies as far _above_ his contemporaries as an
imbecile or an idiot varies _below_ them, will find only advantages
and no special difficulties of development created for him by the
fact of his wide deviation from the norm?
Observation and measurement of gifted children as they have grown
from early childhood to maturity have made it possible to formulate
definitely some of the special problems of development which arise
from being an extreme and infrequently occurring deviate. The more
intelligent the child, the more likely he or she is to become
involved in these puzzling difficulties. Let us consider some of
these problems.
THE PART PLAYED BY PHYSIQUE
The "looks" of a person has much to do with his social adjustment.
If highly intelligent children really resembled the cartoonist's
idea of them, there would be little chance of excellent development.
Fortunately, the researches of the past twenty years have proved
that the popular notions about the poor physiques of the gifted and
the weird ugliness of their physiognomies are not only erroneous
but the exact opposite of the truth. These are superstitions,
founded perhaps on the unconscious longing for "a just nature"
which will distribute gifts somewhat equally instead of bestowing
everything upon a few persons.
It has been amply proved, by measurements, that highly intelligent
children are tall, heavy, strong, healthy, and fine looking as a
group, exceeding the generality of children in all these respects.
This does not mean that every individual among the gifted is
physically superior, but it does mean that a gifted child is
more likely to have a fine body than is a child taken from the
general population.
As for beauty of face, in two separate series of photographs
in which the faces of highly intelligent adolescents were compared
with the faces of adolescents of ordinary mentality, the faces
of the former were found to be more beautiful. This was the
impression made upon "naïve" judges who knew nothing concerning
the comparative intelligence of those judged. It may be that
one reason why teachers often do not identify gifted children
accurately, is that they are looking for pupils who correspond to
the cartoonist's picture, and thus are led away from consideration
of the beautiful and the well grown!
As gifted children approach and reach maturity, they reap the
benefits of superior vitality, size, and beauty. However, many
of them suffer, while growing up, from feelings of inferiority
connected with size and strength, for typically they are somewhat
accelerated in school status and they naturally choose children
older than themselves as chums. Thus in physical competitions
they are at a disadvantage. Observation shows that they tend
to develop sedentary forms of play, or forms of physical enjoyment
that do not depend upon being included in a group; such as
swimming, skating, horseback riding, and walking.
PROBLEM OF LEADERSHIP
Also, in all matters pertaining to leadership, the competition
with older classmates and friends exerts an influence, particularly
during adolescence. The very young boy (or girl) in high school
is not so likely to be elected to a post of leadership because
of his comparative size, his voice, and the juvenility of his
clothes. Thus a feeling may be engendered in him that he cannot
gain the confidence of contemporaries; and this, in turn, may
impair his self-confidence.
If long continued, this state of affairs may lead to emotional
straining after social recognition. In social gatherings, size and
physical maturity are important as _absolute_ quantities and
qualities, and not in relation to age. Thus a child should not
be placed too far out of his age-group. A very gifted boy, reaching
at twenty years a stature of five feet nine inches, remarked, "It
is very odd to be as large as the people you're with!" Being
always the smallest member of a social group may develop attitudes
which are hard to revise when eventually the boy or girl achieves
adult stature and is "as large as the people you're with."
This difficulty in assuming a normal place among more mature
schoolmates arises especially in adolescence, when association
with members of the opposite sex makes its introduction. Being
in high school or in college with much older classmates, the boy
of thirteen to sixteen finds himself at a disadvantage with the
girls whom he meets. The girls brought to parties by the older
boys are "too old" for him, and he feels unable to claim their
attention. Many of these young boys show sufficient insight and
sufficient management of their disadvantage to take care of it.
They know that the trouble lies in being "too young," and that
later they will achieve standing with the girls. In a few cases,
however, this difficulty may lead to an unfortunate avoidance of
girls, even in more mature years. In the case of girls, adjustment
to the society of older boys in high school and college seems
to present no special difficulties, since girls develop earlier
than boys do, and are taken seriously by boys who are older
than themselves.
The "inferiority complexes" of gifted persons have been little
studied, but it is certain that many such persons do feel socially
inferior and shy. Some of this may be due to the physical
comparisons just suggested, arising from prolonged association
with older persons.
PROBLEMS OF ADJUSTMENT TO OCCUPATION
Where the gifted child drifts in the school unrecognized, working
chronically far below his capacity (even though young for his
grade), he receives daily practice in habits of idleness and
daydreaming. His abilities never receive the stimulus of genuine
challenge, and the situation tends to form in him the expectation
of an effortless existence. Children with IQ's up to 150 get along
in the ordinary course of school life quite well, achieving
excellent marks without serious effort. But children above this
mental status become almost intolerably bored with school work
if kept in lockstep with unselected pupils of their own age.
Children who rise above 170 IQ are liable to regard school with
indifference or with positive dislike, for they find nothing in the
work to absorb their interest. This condition of affairs, coupled
with the supervision of unseeing and unsympathetic teachers, has
sometimes led even to truancy on the part of gifted children.
On the other hand, if a very gifted child is placed in the
regular grades as far ahead of his age as his learning capacity
warrants, the evils of social dislocation may result, as previously
described. Experimental education is at present trying to solve
the problem of how to secure right habits of work for the highly
intelligent child, and some progress has been made in recent years.
Another problem of development with reference to occupation
grows out of the versatility of these children. So far from
being one-sided in ability and interest, they are typically
capable of so many different kinds of success that they may
have difficulty in confining themselves to a reasonable number
of enterprises. Some of them are lost to usefulness through
spreading their available time and energy over such a wide array
of projects that nothing can be finished or done perfectly. After
all, time and space are as limited for the gifted as for others,
and the life-span is probably not much longer for them than for
others. A choice must be made among the numerous possibilities,
since modern life calls for specialization.
The dangers in development with respect to work habits are,
therefore, that the child may not develop any habits of sustained
effort, and that he may fail of success as a worker through being
interested in too many things ever to accomplish very much at
any one of them. His problem as he goes into adolescence is
to make a definite choice, and to form the habit of effort.
LEARNING TO "SUFFER FOOLS GLADLY"
A lesson which many gifted persons never learn as long as they
live is that human beings in general are inherently very different
from themselves in thought, in action, in general intention, and
in interests. Many a reformer has died at the hands of a mob which
he was trying to improve in the belief that other human beings
can and should enjoy what he enjoys. This is one of the most
painful and difficult lessons that each gifted child must learn,
if personal development is to proceed successfully. It is more
necessary that this be learned than that any school subject be
mastered. Failure to learn how to tolerate in a reasonable fashion
the foolishness of others leads to bitterness, disillusionment,
and misanthropy.
This point may be illustrated by the behavior of a seven-year-old
boy with an IQ of 178. He was not sent to school until the age
of seven because of his advanced interest in reading. At seven,
however, the compulsory attendance law took effect and the
child was placed in the third grade at school. After about four
weeks of attendance, he came home from school weeping bitterly.
"Oh Grandmother, Grand-mother," he cried, "they don't know what's
_good_! They just _won't_ read!"
The fact came to light that he had taken book after book to
school--all his favorites from his grandfather's library--and
had tried to show the other third-grade pupils what treasures
these were, but the boys and girls only resisted his efforts,
made fun of him, threw the treasures on the floor, and finally
pulled his hair.
Such struggles as these, if they continue without directing
the child's insight, may lead to complete alienation from his
contemporaries in childhood, and to misanthropy in adolescence
and adulthood. Particularly deplorable are the struggles of these
children against dull or otherwise unworthy adults in authority.
The very gifted child or adolescent, perceiving the illogical
conduct of those in charge of his affairs, may turn rebellious
against all authority and fall into a condition of negative
suggestibility--a most unfortunate trend of personality, since
the person is then unable to take a coöperative attitude toward
authority.
A person who is highly suggestible in a negative direction is as
much in bondage to others around him as is the person who is
positively suggestible. The social value of the person is seriously
impaired in either case. The gifted are not likely to fall victims
to positive suggestion but many of them develop negativism to
a conspicuous degree.
The highly intelligent child will be intellectually capable
of self-determination, and his greatest value to society can be
realized only if he is truly self-possessed and detached from
the influences of both positive and negative suggestion. The
more intelligent the child, the truer this statement is. It is
especially unfortunate, therefore, that so many gifted children
have in authority over them persons of no special fitness for
the task, who cannot gain or keep the respect of these good
thinkers. Such unworthy guardians arouse, by the process of
"redintegration," contempt for authority wherever it is found,
and the inability to yield gracefully to command.
Thus some gifted persons, mishandled in youth, become contentious,
aggressive, and stubborn to an extent which renders them difficult
and disagreeable in all human relationships involving subordination.
Since subordination must precede posts of command in the ordinary
course of life, this is an unfortunate trend of personality.
Cynicism and negativism are likely to interfere seriously with
a life career. Happily, gifted children are typically endowed
with a keen sense of humor, and are apparently able to mature
beyond cynicism eventually in a majority of cases.
THE TENDENCY TO BECOME ISOLATED
Yoder [7] noticed, in studying the boyhood of great men, that
although play interests were keen among them, the play was often
of a solitary kind. The same is true of children who "test high."
The majority of children testing above 160 IQ play little with
other children unless special conditions are provided, such as
those found in a special class. The difficulties are too great,
in the ordinary course of events, in finding playmates who are
appropriate in size and congenial in mentality. This fact was
noted some years ago by the present writer. Terman [8] in 1930
made a special study of the play of those in his group of children
who tested above 170 IQ and found them generally more solitary in
work and play than children clustering around 140 IQ.
These superior children are not unfriendly or ungregarious by
nature. Typically they strive to play with others but their efforts
are defeated by the difficulties of the case. These difficulties are
illustrated in the efforts of the seven-year-old boy already
mentioned. Other children do not share their interests, their
vocabulary, or their desire to organize activities. They try to
reform their contemporaries but finally give up the struggle
and play alone, since older children regard them as "babies"
and adults seldom play during the hours when children are awake.
As a result, forms of solitary play develop, and these, becoming
fixed as habits, may explain the fact that many highly intellectual
adults are shy, ungregarious, and unmindful of human relationships,
or are even misanthropic and uncomfortable in ordinary social
intercourse.
This difficulty of the gifted child in forming friendships is
largely a result of the infrequency of persons who are like-minded.
The more intelligent a person is, regardless of age, the less often
can he find a truly congenial companion. The average child finds
playmates in abundance who can think and act on a level congenial
to him because there are so many average children.
Adding to the conditions which make for isolation is the fact that
gifted children are often "only" children, or they have brothers
and sisters who differ widely from them in age. Thus playmates
in the home are less numerous for them than for children generally.
The imaginary playmate as a solution of the problem of loneliness
is fairly frequent. We know but little at present of the psychology
of this invention of the unreal to fill real needs. Reasoning
from the general principles of mental hygiene, one would say
that the pattern of companionship represented in the imaginary
playmate is less valuable for personal development than a pattern
founded on reality, and that effort should be made to fill the
real need with genuine persons, if possible.
Also, the deep interest in reading which typifies the gifted
child may further his isolation. Irwin believes that reading should
be deferred in the education of the highly intelligent. "I believe
it is especially important that intellectual children get a grasp
on reality through real experiences in making and doing things
before they are ever introduced to the wonders that lie within
books." From this point of view, the development of the physical,
social, and emotional aspects of personality would have first
attention in the education of a gifted child, the intellectual
being fostered last of all because it comes of itself and is too
likely to run away with the other three and lead to isolation.
This tendency to become isolated is one of the most important
factors to be considered in guiding the development of personality
in highly intelligent children, but it does not become a serious
problem except at the very extreme degrees of intelligence.
The majority of children between 130 and 150 IQ find fairly easy
adjustment, because neighborhoods and schools are selective,
so that like-minded children tend to be located in the same
schools and districts. Furthermore, the gifted child, being
large and strong for his age, is acceptable to playmates a year
or two older. Great difficulty arises only when a young child
is above 160 IQ. At the extremely high levels of 180 and 190 IQ,
the problem of friendships is difficult indeed, and the younger
the person, the more difficult it is. The trouble decreases with
age because as persons become adult, they naturally seek and find
on their own initiative groups who are like-minded, such as
learned societies.
THE CONCEPT OF "OPTIMUM INTELLIGENCE"
All things considered, the psychologist who has observed the
development of gifted children over a long period of time from
early childhood to maturity, evolves the idea that there is a
certain restricted portion of the total range of intelligence
which is most favorable to the development of successful and
well-rounded personality in the world as it now exists. This
limited range appears to be somewhere between 125 and 155 IQ.
Children and adolescents in this area are enough more intelligent
than the average to win the confidence of large numbers of their
fellows, which brings about leadership, and to manage their own
lives with superior efficiency. Moreover, there are enough of them
to afford mutual esteem and understanding. But those of 170 IQ
and beyond are too intelligent to be understood by the general
run of persons with whom they make contact. They are too infrequent
to find many congenial companions. They have to contend with
loneliness and with personal isolation from their contemporaries
throughout the period of immaturity. To what extent these patterns
become permanently fixed, we cannot yet tell.
There is thus an "optimum" intelligence, from the viewpoint of
personal happiness and adjustment to society, which is well below
the maximum. The exploration of this concept should yield truths
of value for education, and for social science as well. The few
children who test at the very top of the juvenile population have
a unique value for society. On them depends in large measure the
advancement of learning. If they fail of personal happiness and
human contact, their work for society as a whole may be impaired or
lost.
CONCLUSION
As far as observations go at present, intellectually gifted
children between 130 and 150 IQ seem to find the world well suited
to their development. As a group, they enjoy the advantages of
superior size, strength, health, and beauty; they are emotionally
well balanced and controlled; they are of good character;
and they tend to win the confidence of their contemporaries,
which gives them leadership. This is the "optimum" range of
intelligence, if personal happiness is being considered. If a
parent would want his child to enjoy "every advantage," he could
not do better than wish the child to be endowed with an IQ not
lower than 130 or higher than 150.
Above this limit, however--surely above 160 IQ--the deviation
is so great that it leads to special problems of development
which are correlated with personal isolation. As one boy with
an IQ of 190 has said: "It isn't good to be in college so awfully
young (twelve years of age). It produces a feeling of alienation."
How to provide against alienation from contemporaries of both
sexes, and how to prevent the negativism that results from
continuous living under inefficient or unreasonable authority,
are two of the important problems for education in its attempt
to insure good adjustment of personality for children of extremely
high intelligence.
[1] For the original discussion of this topic see the paper by this
title, by Leta S. Hollingworth, in the Fifteenth _Yearbook_ of the
Department of Elementary School Principals, National Education
Association (July, 1936), pages 272-281.
[2] Terman, Lewis M. _Genetic Studies of Genius_: Vol. I. Stanford
University Press, Stanford University, California; 1925.
[3] Hartshorne, H., and May, M. A. _Studies in Deceit_. The
Macmillan Company, New York; 1927.
[4] Haggerty, Melvin E. _Evaluation of Higher Institutions_.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois; 1937.
[5] Burt, C. _The Young Delinquent_. D. Appleton-Century Company,
Inc., New York; 1924.
[6] Healy, W., and Bronner, A. F. _Criminals and Delinquents:
Their Making and Unmaking_. The Macmillan Company, New York; 1928.
[7] Yoder, G. F. "A Study of the Boyhood of Great Men." _Pedagogical
Seminary_ (1894).
[8] _Op. cit._
CHAPTER TWENTY
THE CHILD OF VERY SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE AS A SPECIAL PROBLEM IN
SOCIAL ADJUSTMENT [1]
This discussion is limited to the problems that arise from _the
combination of immaturity and superiority_. Thus the problems
considered pertain chiefly to the period in the life of the
gifted child before he is twenty years of age; for the problems
of the person of superior intellect tend to be less numerous
as he grows older and can use his intelligence independently
in gaining control of his own life.
It should be stated emphatically at the outset that children
of very superior intelligence are not, as a group, socially
annoying. The problems presented are _those of the child_, not
those of society, as ordinarily understood. That this is so is
sufficiently proved by the scant attention that organized society
has bestowed upon the study of gifted children. Society studies
that which is socially annoying. The school attends to those who
give it trouble. Thus feeble-minded children ("minus deviates,"
as they are called in modern laboratories) have long been studied.
Millions of dollars have been spent in considering them, and a
voluminous literature has grown up through prolonged investigation
of their maladjustments. Gifted children, on the other hand, have
been studied hardly at all. Such investigations as we have are the
result of intellectual interest on the part of a few educators
and psychologists, who in the course of mental surveys became
interested in those children who test always at the top.
THE QUALITY OF GIFTED CHILDREN
Such data as we now possess, from the scientific study of the
gifted as organisms, show us that children of very superior
intelligence are typically superior in other qualities also.
They are superior in emotional stability and control. The old
idea that the very bright "child prodigy" is likely to be nervous
has been widespread, and popular fallacy inclines to mention
"bright and high-strung" in the same breath. In fact, we not
infrequently hear people claiming to be "high-strung" as a kind
of compliment to themselves, implying that they are therefore
also bright. Psychological researches of recent years have shown
these ideas to be merely superstitions, founded on nothing more
substantial than the human craving for a just nature that will
somehow penalize the lucky and equalize biological wealth.
The researches of Terman [2], particularly, and of Hartshorne
and May [3], have shown that highly intelligent children are more
stable emotionally than are unselected "controls" age for age,
and are superior to "controls" in their resistance to temptation.
The researches of Burt [4], and of Healy and Bronner [5], show
among delinquents few children of the high degree of intelligence
with which this paper deals.
The studies cited do not, of course, exhaust the recent scientific
literature, but they do fairly exemplify the results of concrete,
impersonal investigation, as distinguished from the results of
popular "wishful thinking." The child who tests above 130 IQ [6]
is _typically_ (though of course not invariably) large and strong
for his age, healthier than the average, contributes far less than
his quota to juvenile misbehavior as socially defined, and is
emotionally stable in superior degree.
Starting with these facts as to generally superior adjustment,
let us inquire whether there are, therefore, no special perplexities
in the life of a gifted child. Is it possible that a child may vary
as far in a "plus" direction from the average performance of his
contemporaries as an imbecile varies in a "minus" direction, and
find no special problems created for him by this wide difference
in mental power between himself and the average child of his age?
The psychologist who is professionally acquainted with children
who test above 130 IQ will be able to formulate clearly certain
special problems of adjustment, observed in the case study of
these children, which arise primarily from the very fact that
they are gifted. Let us attempt to state some of these problems.
The more intelligent the child, the more likely he is to become
involved in these puzzling situations.
THE PROBLEM OF WORK
Where the gifted child drifts in the school unrecognized, held to
the lock step which is determined by the capacities of the average,
he has little to do. He receives daily practice in habits of
idleness and daydreaming. His abilities are never genuinely
challenged, and the situation is contrived to build in him
expectations of an effortless existence. Children up to about
140 IQ tolerate the ordinary school routine quite well, being
usually a little young for grade through an extra promotion or
two, and achieving excellent marks without serious effort. But
above this status, children become increasingly bored with school
work, if kept in or nearly in the lock step. Children at or
above 180 IQ, for instance, are likely to regard school with
indifference, or with positive distaste, for they find nothing
interesting to do there.
On the other hand, if the child be greatly accelerated in grade
status, so that he is able to function intellectually with real
interest, he will be misplaced in other important respects.
A child of eight years graded with twelve-year-olds is out of
his depth socially and physically, though able to do intellectual
work as well as they can. These problems come out clearly when
we consider that the seats and desks planned for twelve-year-olds
will not fit him; that he will always be the last one chosen
in athletic contests; that no one will know how to treat him
at class parties; that the teacher will be prone to complain
of his manual work, such as handwriting; and that he will be
emotionally immature in comparison with older classmates. When
he jumps up and down, clapping his hands and shouting, "Goody!
goody!" at an announcement from the teacher, the older children
will laugh at him, and later may hang paper tails and other
tokens of ignominy upon him; whereas his childish glee would
have constituted no violation of taste among eight-year-olds.
A thousand concrete instances might be described to show what
these problems of adjustment are. Experimental education is
trying to solve them. At present, the special class is being
tried in populous centers, wherein a whole group of the young
gifted can be brought together (as has long been done for the
dull and slow).
In less populous communities, a moderate degree of acceleration,
combined with enrichment of the curriculum for the individual,
is being tried. We do not yet know how the problem of adjustment
to school work can best be solved. Indeed, we have just learned
how to define this problem.
THE PROBLEM OF ADJUSTMENT TO CLASSMATES
Typically, where there is no scientific recognition of the
presence of the gifted, these children, by the time they are
eight or nine years old, are more or less accelerated in
scholastic status and appear as the youngest in the class.
Such a child is thus youngest in the fourth or fifth grade,
in a heterogeneous group in which the oldest are retardates,
thirteen or fourteen years old. Now, in the case of boys
especially, it may happen that these dull adolescents lie in
wait to bully and tease the young gifted boy, whose "book-learning"
they detest and whose immaturity suggests the term "baby." The
present writer knows of instances in which these young children
have valiantly suffered at the hands of dull, bullying classmates,
protecting themselves as best they might by agility and wit,
since, of course, they could not possibly compete in size and
strength. The gross indignities and tortures thus suffered are
directly a penalty of being gifted; for little boys of like age,
in the grade proper to their age, do not come into classroom
contact with these over-age bullies to anything like the same
extent, and hence do not become targets for the latter.
One young gifted boy thus bullied said, "I rigged up a sling
and was going to hit him [[the bully]] with a marble, but got
afraid I might shoot his eye out." This simple statement tells
volumes.
It would seem that the school should somehow take effective
cognizance of this problem of the bully, which is created for
the gifted child directly as a result of the contacts forced
upon both of them by the school. Segregation of pupils on the
basis of mentality would go far to obviate such problems, but
except in cities, homogeneous grouping is difficult. At present,
compulsory education, with heterogeneous classes, forced upon
gifted children situations that would be analogous to those
arising if teachers and superintendents were compelled to consort
daily, unprotected, with giant thugs and gangsters. Gifted adults
are free to segregate themselves from thugs and gangsters, and
also to make explicit provision for police protection, but the
American school forces the dull bully upon the gifted child, in
daily contacts, out of which lasting problems of mental hygiene
may arise.
THE PROBLEM OF PLAY
Reports by gifted children themselves show that they are, as a
group, much interested in play, and that they have more "play
knowledge" than has the average child. When their reports are
compared item by item with reports similarly rendered by unselected
children, it appears that the gifted know more games of intellectual
skill, such as bridge and chess; that they care less, age for age,
for play which involves predominantly simple sensori-motor activity
which is aimless; and that gifted girls are far less interested
in traditional girls' play, as with dolls and tea sets, than
unselected girls are. The gifted enjoy more complicated and more
highly competitive games than the generality do, age for age.
Outdoor sports hold a high place with the gifted, being almost
as popular among them as is reading.
But although they love play, and have much play knowledge, the
play of the highly intelligent works out in practice as a somewhat
difficult compromise among their various powers. They follow their
intellectual interests as far as they can, but these are checked
in many ways by age, by degree of physical immaturity, and by
tradition. An eight-year-old of 160 IQ may, for example, be deeply
interested in tennis, but he is likely to be more or less kept
from playing because his physical development is not yet equal
to the demands of the game. He may love to play bridge, but
others of his age who are available as playmates do not, of
course, know how to play bridge, and he is not allowed to sit
up at night when his elders play.
By trial-and error experience, the highly intelligent child
has to work out an adjustment if he can, but there is likely
to be noticeable difficulty if he tests above 170 IQ. In the
ordinary course of events, it is hard for such a child to find
playmates who are congenial both in size and in mental interests.
Thus many of those who test very high are finally thrown back
upon themselves, and tend strongly to work out forms of solitary,
intellectual play. [7] The same situation is discovered in studies
of the childhood of eminent persons. Yoder [8], in his study of
the juvenile history of fifty very eminent persons, concluded that
their play "was often of a solitary kind." Reading, calculation,
designing, compiling collections, constructing an "imaginary land,"
evoking imaginary playmates--these forms of play stand out
prominently among the recreational interests of such children.
Since physical activity is hard to carry out interestingly alone,
their play tends to become habitually sedentary. Nevertheless, they
develop a high degree swimming, skating, and other forms of athletic
enjoyment which do not depend upon being included in a group.
Of six young children testing above 180 IQ, known to the present
writer, only one [9] had no conspicuous difficulty in play,
during early childhood. [10] The other five were all so divergent
from the usual in play interests that parents and teachers noticed
them. They were unpopular with children of their own age because
they always _wanted to organize the play_ into a complicated
pattern, with some remote and definite climax as the goal. As the
mother of one six-year-old said, "He can never be satisfied just to
toss a ball around, or to run about pulling and shouting." Children
of six years are ordinarily incapable of becoming interested in
long-sustained, complicated games which lead to remote goals, but
are, on the contrary, characteristically satisfied only by the
kind of random activity which bored this child of 187 IQ. The
playmates of ordinary intelligence naturally resented persistent
efforts to reform them and to organize them for the attainment
of remote goals. Furthermore, they did not have in their vocabulary
words that the gifted child knew well, used habitually, and took
for granted. Literally, they could not understand each other.
The result was that the child of 187 IQ did not "get along"
with those of his own age and size. But when he sought to join
the play of children _of his own mental age_ (above twelve years),
the six-year-old was rejected by them also, as being "a baby" and
"too little to play with us." The child, thus thrown back upon
himself, developed elaborate mathematical calculation, collecting,
reading, and games with imaginary playmates, as his chief forms
of play.
These young children of extremely high intellectual acumen fail
to be interested in "child's play" for the same reasons that in
adulthood they will fail to patronize custard-pie movies or
chute-the-chutes at amusement parks. It is futile, and probably
wholly unsound psychologically, to strive to interest the child
above 170 IQ in ring-around-the-rosy or blind-man's-buff. Many
well-meaning persons speak of such efforts as "socializing the
child," but it is probably not in this way that the very gifted
can be socialized. The problem of how the play interests of these
children can be realized is one that will depend largely on
individual circumstances for solution. Often it can be solved
only by the development of solitary play.
What, if any, effect the habitual evocation of imaginary playmates,
and the elaboration of the imaginary land, may exert on character
formation and habits of adjustment in adulthood is at present
unknown. Psychologists should study the hygienic aspects of
these methods of finding satisfaction outside of the real world.
Since gifted children are, as has been stated, on the whole a
stable and rational group, perhaps no effects, or good effects
only, result from this play of the imagination.
SPECIAL PROBLEMS OF THE GIFTED GIRL
It has been mentioned that gifted girls are less interested in
traditional girls' play than are unselected girls. They show a
preference for boys' books and boys' play, and a greater community
of interests with boys than the generality of girls display. This
merely means that girls of a high degree of intelligence are,
as a group, more competitive, aggressive, and active than girls
are supposed to be.
An illustrative case is that of a seven-year-old girl of IQ
170, whose mother wished to learn from psychology how to break
her child of being a "tomboy" and how to rear her to "be a lady."
The mother complained that the girl had never cared for dolls,
that she would not take an interest in her clothes, and that
she wanted to do nothing after school but read or play "rough,
outdoor games." "How," inquired the mother, "could I break her
of the habit of climbing lampposts?" This child was active and
competitive. When asked why she did not play with dolls, she
replied, "They aren't _real_. The doll that is supposed to be
a baby doll is twice as big as the one that is made like a mother
doll."
Aside from their dissatisfaction with the play habits ordinarily
associated with their sex, gifted girls have various other problems
to face which arise directly from the facts that they are able and
that they are girls. When they reach the stage of life-planning,
as they do very early, they are confused in their self-seeking
by the uncertainty in contemporary customs as to what a girl may
become. This difficulty is growing less and less, to be sure, but
it is still something to be reckoned with, especially in certain
localities. The intelligent girl begins very early to perceive
that she is, so to speak, of the wrong sex. From a thousand tiny
cues, she learns that she is not expected to entertain the same
ambitions as her brother. Her problem is to adjust her ambitions
to a sense of sex inferiority without, on the one hand, losing
self-respect and self-determination, and, on the other, without
becoming morbidly aggressive. This is never an easy adjustment
to achieve, and even superior intelligence does not always suffice
to accomplish it. The special problem of gifted girls is that they
have strong preferences for activities that are hard to follow
on account of their sex, which is inescapable.
PROBLEMS OF CONFORMITY
Judgments of teachers and parents indicate that highly intelligent
children are, on the whole, more easily disciplined than children
generally are. Nonetheless, certain problems of discipline do
arise, which grow out of their intelligence. First, in the case
of the schoolroom situation almost the only respect in which
discipline is especially troublesome with these children is
in the matter of orderly discussion when they are together in
special classes. It is hard for them to maintain silence when
ideas press for utterance. The tendency is for many to speak
at once, each striving to outspeak the others. An atmosphere
of confusion is thus created unless discipline can be imposed.
To hold his tongue, to listen quietly and respectfully to others,
to speak according to some order of procedure, and to restrain
disappointment at failure to be heard at all--these habits seem
especially difficult for gifted children to form. Only gradually
do these children learn self-government in this respect.
Also it has been noticed during the experimental education of
the highly intelligent that they sometimes tend to slight routine
drudgery in favor of more stimulating and more original projects.
The sheer drudgery involved in learning their multiplication table,
for example, is likely to be waived in order to follow some
absorbing story or experiment, unless conformity be urged from
without.
At home, a special problem of discipline may arise occasionally
due to the circumstance of that child, while still very immature
in years, has come to exceed one parent or both in intelligence.
For the best discipline routine _the parent must be more intelligent
than the child_ or the child's respect for the opinions of
the former will inevitably be lost. With the most gifted children
this may quite early become a problem, since such children, by
the age of ten years or before, are more intelligent than the
average adult is. Very readily such a child perceives that in
comparison with himself his parent is slow-witted and lacking
in general information. Yet in self-control and in experience
of life, the child is still very immature. Thus quite unfortunate
developments may ensue in the parent-child relationship. The child
may become the director of the parent's activities, reversing the
socially acceptable condition of affairs. Fortunately, in the
vast majority of cases at least one of the parents is a person
of superior intelligence. We seldom find a very intelligent
child in a home where _both_ parents are average or below average
in mental power.
Because he learns everything very quickly, the highly intelligent
child is especially quick to discover what forms of conduct
on his part bring him satisfactions. If the tantrum is rewarded
by the parent with cookies, company, attention, or other childish
delights, then the bright child may display even "bigger and
better" tantrums than will those who are slower to learn. If
illness brings coddling, release from undesired responsibility,
and other pleasures, then the quick learner will readily perceive
the value of "headaches" and other aches as means to ends. On the
other hand, the very intelligent learn readily to refrain from
undesirable behavior that is followed quickly and inevitably
by punishment. Two or three experiences usually suffice for
these excellent learners. Neglect and ostracism are good forms
of punishment for them. Darwin tells us that he was cured of
telling sensational fibs, as a child, simply by the chilling
silence with which they were always received by his parents.
One more problem may be noted here. There is with intelligent
children a stronger tendency to _argue_ about what is required
of them than is found with the average child. This tendency
to argue as to the why and wherefore of a requirement is met
both at home and at school, and calls for thought in proper
handling on the part of parents and teachers. To find a golden
mean between arbitrary abolition of all argument, on the one
hand, and weak fostering of an intolerable habit of endless
argumentation, on the other, is not always easy, but it is always
worth while as a measure for retaining the respect of the child.
THE PROBLEMS OF ORIGIN AND OF DESTINY
Early interest in origins and in destinies is one of the conspicuous
symptoms of intellectual acumen. "Where did the moon come from?"
"Who made the world?" "What is the very end of autumn leaves?"
"Where did I come from?" "What will become of me when I die?" "Why
did I come into the world?"
Although these questions rise vaguely and intermittently in
the minds of children in general, they do not begin to require
logically coherent answers until about the mental age of twelve
or thirteen years. Then they begin to press for more or less
systematic accounts. From these circumstances of mental development,
the erroneous idea has long been promulgated, even by psychologists,
that _puberty_ in some mysterious manner leads to the rise of
religious needs and convictions. Since among the generality
a "mental age" of thirteen years is, roughly, coincident with
the age of pubescence, the two developments have been assumed
to be casually related.
When we observe young gifted children, we discover that religious
ideas and needs originate in them _whenever they develop to a
mental level_ past "twelve years mental age." Thus they show
these needs when they are but eight or nine years old, or earlier.
The higher the IQ the earlier does the pressing need for an
explanation of the universe occur, the sooner does the demand for
a concept of the origin and destiny of the self appear.
In the cases of children who test above 180 IQ observed by the
present writer, definite demand for a systematic philosophy
of life and death developed when they were but six or seven
years old. Similar phenomena appear in the childhood histories
of eminent persons where data of childhood are available. Goethe,
for example, at the age of nine constructed an altar and devised
a religion of his own, in which God could be worshiped without
the help of priests.
Much could be said of the special problems of the young gifted
child in this period of immaturity when his intellectual needs
are those of an adolescent while his emotional control and physical
powers are still but those of a child. It would be of great
interest to study the reactions of older persons to the insistent
questions and searchings of these young children. "You are too
young to understand." "You can't know all that till you grow
older." "You unnatural child!" These are responses that have
been heard incidentally, falling from the lips of undiscerning
parents. A girl of eight years, of IQ 150, recently was heard
to express a determination to join the "Agnostic Church," because
she had asked, "What is it called when you can't make up your mind
whether there is a God or not?" and had been told that this would
be agnosticism.
Part and parcel of these questionings concerning origin and
destiny are those concerning birth and reproduction. At a "tender"
age these children ask for an account of sex and reproduction and
suffer much at the hands of parents and guardians who are shocked
at what thus emanates from the mouths of babes. Lifelong problems
of mental hygiene may be thus engendered by parents who cannot
understand why a child should be "so unnatural" as to weep over
questions of birth and death at six or seven years of age.
In the same way problems of right and wrong become troublesome
for these young children in a way that does not happen except
for the very able. For instance, a six-year-old boy of IQ 187
wept bitterly after reading "how the North taxed the South after
the Civil War." The problem of evil in the abstract thus comes
to trouble these children almost in their cradles, at an age
when they are ill-suited to grapple with it from the point of
view of emotional maturity. Special problems of mental hygiene
are perhaps inherent in this situation which do not arise with
the generality of children.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The list of problems that we have suggested here does not
by any means exhaust the subject under discussion. However,
the present writer believes that these are some of the
more important problems of childhood that originate directly
from the circumstance of being very highly intelligent among
official guardians who are ignorant or careless of the fact.
These problems of adjustment do not arise unless a child is
gifted intellectually. They are conspicuous to the psychologist
who studies children with "test knowledge" of them.
It is especially to be noted that many of these problems are
functions of immaturity. To have the intelligence of an adult
and the emotions of a child combined in a childish body is to
encounter certain difficulties. It follows that (after babyhood)
the younger the child, the greater the difficulties, and that
adjustment becomes easier with every additional year of age. The
years between four and nine are probably the most likely to be
beset with the problems mentioned.
The physical differences between a child of six whose IQ is 150
and children of nine years (whose mental age corresponds to his)
are unabridgeable, and so are the differences of taste, due to
differences in emotional maturity. The child of six graded with
nine-year-olds is out of his element physically and socially,
but the same thing is not true of a sixteen-year-old among
nineteen-year-olds. The difference between six and nine is very
great. The difference between sixteen and nineteen is small in
terms of biological development.
Moreover, as the bright go forward in school, they find work
increasingly adapted to their powers by the automatic developments
of the established curriculum. Senior high schools are, we have
discovered, adapted only to adolescents of superior intelligence.
Classmates become automatically more congenial through being more
highly selected. The dull bully, with his crude horseplay, has
left school, and in any case the gifted, being older, can defend
themselves physically.
By the time a gifted person is physically mature, many of the
problems herein outlined automatically disappear as problems.
What after-effects there may be of the poor solution of these
childish problems we do not know. Apparently these superior
organisms tolerate well the strains put upon them by reason
of their deviation from the average. However, that an organism
stands strain well is no reason for putting or leaving strain
unnecessarily upon it.
As the gifted individual grows to maturity, he or she can achieve
control of his or her own life, and can dispense to a relatively
great extent with inadvertent cruelties and mistaken efforts of
uninformed official guardians. It is _during childhood_ that the
gifted boy or girl is at the mercy of guardians whose duty it is
to know his nature and his needs much more fully than they now do.
[1] Reprinted from _Mental Hygiene_: Vol. XI, No. 1, pages 3-16
(January, 1931). Read by Leta. S. Hollingworth at the First
International Congress of Mental Hygiene, Washington, D. C.,
May 8, 1930.
[2] Terman, Lewis M. _Genetic Studies of Genius_: Vol. I. Stanford
University Press, Stanford University, California; 1925.
[3] Hartshorne, H., and May, M. A. _Studies in Deceit_. The
Macmillan Company, New York; 1927.
[4] Burt, C. _The Young Delinquent_. D. Appleton-Century Company,
Inc., New York; 1924.
[5] Healy, W., and Bronner, A. F. _Criminals and Delinquents: Their
Making and Unmaking_. The Macmillan Company, New York; 1928.
[6] The intelligence quotient is the ratio between the [chronological
age] status achieved on tests by an individual and that achieved
by the generality [of the same chronological age].
[7] Hollingworth, Leta S. _Gifted Children: Their Nature and
Nurture_. The Macmillan Company, New York; 1926.
[8] Yoder, G. F. "A Study of the Boyhood of Great Men." _Pedagogical
Seminary_ (1894).
[9] This child attended a private school where a number of the pupils
tested above 140 IQ.
[10] This was written in 1931.