Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Some gifted students may have symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), which are associated with academic challenges. Self-efficacy for mathematics is typically lower in students with ADHD symptoms compared with their peers. This study explored how gifted students’ sources of self-efficacy may mediate the relationship between their ADHD symptoms and mathematics self-efficacy. The study was conducted within the Israeli education system, which in recent years has promoted academic excellence alongside the inclusion of diverse student populations, in line with national inclusion policies. A quantitative longitudinal study collected self-report questionnaires from 88 gifted students at the beginning and end of seventh grade, to trace changes across the challenging transition year to middle school. Participants were identified as gifted students, while ADHD symptom levels were assessed as a continuous self-report variable and were not used to define twice-exceptionality. Results revealed that while higher inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity levels correlated with lower mathematics self-efficacy, the effect was indirect, mediated by specific sources of self-efficacy, with the pattern and strength of the mediating relationships differing between the beginning and end of seventh grade. These findings highlight the importance of targeting self-efficacy sources to promote positive mathematical achievement for gifted students with high levels of ADHD symptoms.

Plain Language Summary

How to Help Gifted Students with High Levels of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Symptoms Develop Self-Efficacy in Mathematics

Why Was This Study Done?

Some gifted students (with high cognitive abilities) also show elevated symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), such as distractibility, restlessness, and impulsivity. These students often report lower self-efficacy in mathematics. Research has shown that students with higher self-efficacy tend to perform better academically than those with lower self-efficacy. Therefore, this study examined which factors help gifted students with high levels of ADHD symptoms develop stronger self-efficacy in math.

What did the Researchers do?

The researchers followed 88 gifted students in Israel throughout seventh grade, a key transition year into middle school. At both the beginning and the end of the school year, students filled out questionnaires about their symptoms of ADHD, as well as their self-efficacy in math. The study also looked at four sources that help build self-efficacy: mastery experiences (succeeding in the past), vicarious experiences (learning by watching others), social persuasion (encouragement and feedback), and physiological states (how calm or stressed they felt).

What did the Researchers Find?

Gifted students with high levels of ADHD symptoms tended to report lower self-efficacy in math. This was explained by the four sources of self-efficacy: they had fewer successful experiences in math, felt less calm and focused during math tasks, received less encouragement from others, and had no role models for successful performance.

Why Does This Matter?

Teachers and parents can help gifted students with high levels of ADHD symptoms improve their math self-efficacy by strengthening its four sources: providing opportunities for success, offering encouragement, supporting physical and emotional regulation, and enabling learning through both peer observation and exposure to positive role models. Enhancing self-efficacy may help these students better manage math challenges and reach their potential.

Keywords

gifted students ADHD symptoms mathematics self-efficacy sources of self-efficacy

Introduction

Attention difficulties are commonly associated with giftedness (Antshel et al., 2007, 2008; Cornoldi et al., 2023). The unique subgroup of gifted children who also exhibit symptoms characteristic of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been under-investigated in terms of academic self-efficacy and its sources, especially in mathematics, which is considered a key academic domain in the 21st century (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2022). Although gifted students typically enjoy high academic self-efficacy (Pajares & Kranzler, 1995; Shaunessy et al., 2006), research conducted in the general student population has shown that students’ symptoms of inattention and/or hyperactive-impulsive predict lower self-efficacy (Almasi, 2016; Major et al., 2013; Newark et al., 2016; Schmidt-Barad et al., 2023). Thus, while such findings have been established in broader adolescent samples, gifted students with higher levels of inattention, hyperactivity, and/or impulsivity may show lower self-efficacy for mathematics performance. Very few studies have examined the sources of self-efficacy among gifted students. Ozcan et al. (2021), in one of the few studies focusing on gifted students, found that mastery experiences (e.g., receiving good grades) and vicarious experiences (e.g., observing peers who performed less successfully in math) were the most influential sources of mathematics self-efficacy. However, Ozcan et al. did not examine possible links to gifted students’ levels of ADHD symptoms. In addition, although most studies do not indicate widespread emotional or social difficulties among gifted students in general (Tourreix et al., 2023), there is evidence that gifted students diagnosed with ADHD may experience lower levels of self-esteem and confidence compared with their gifted peers without such a diagnosis (Foley-Nicpon et al., 2012). Given these challenges, the present study focuses on gifted students experiencing ADHD-related symptoms, an under-researched subgroup that requires targeted educational support. Understanding the relationship between gifted students’ possible attention and/or hyperactive-impulsive behavior problems and their self-efficacy in mathematics is important to provide adequate educational responses to the distinct needs of this population. This focus is also aligned with OECD (2022) recommendations to promote both excellence and inclusive education for diverse learners.

There are mixed findings in the literature regarding the degree of comorbidity for giftedness and ADHD (Mezzanotte, 2020). For example, gifted children with ADHD may score lower on working memory and processing speed subtests of IQ tests, which may, in turn, lead to failure to identify them as gifted (Dovis et al., 2015; Lee & Olenchak, 2015; Whitaker et al., 2015). Furthermore, they often underachieve academically (McCoach et al., 2020) and may fail to meet the threshold of the national identification process, which emphasizes high academic achievement (Ministry of Education in Israel, 2019, 2024). Thus, the diagnosis of ADHD among gifted individuals is often missed or misdiagnosed (Beljan et al., 2006; Cornoldi et al., 2023; Edwards, 2009; François-Sévigny et al., 2022; Hartnett et al., 2004; Webb, 2005). Moreover, subclinical ADHD symptoms may still impact gifted students’ academic self-efficacy (McCoach et al., 2020). Therefore, it is important to examine ADHD symptom severity as a continuous variable rather than using a binary diagnostic approach. In the present study, ADHD symptomatology was measured as a continuous variable using a validated self-report questionnaire based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed., DSM-5) criteria, without relying on clinical diagnoses. This dimensional approach reflects current research trends emphasizing the spectrum of ADHD-related traits within the general population, even when symptoms do not reach diagnostic thresholds (Barkley, 2011; Barkley & Murphy, 2006; Johns-Mead et al., 2023). This approach is consistent with previous research on gifted students with attention-related difficulties, such as McCoach et al. (2020), who also focused on ADHD symptoms rather than formal diagnoses. This method allows for a more nuanced understanding of how increasing levels of inattention and/or hyperactive-impulsive symptoms relate to academic outcomes, even among students who do not meet formal diagnostic criteria.

These diagnostic and academic challenges are particularly relevant during early adolescence, especially in seventh grade, when students face increased academic demands, changes in instructional structure, and the need for greater self-regulation (De Rossi et al., 2023; Langberg et al., 2008). While hyperactivity and impulsivity tend to decrease during this developmental period, inattention symptoms often remain relatively stable (Langberg et al., 2008), potentially affecting students’ self-efficacy. In fact, various studies indicate that although some ADHD symptoms decrease with age and the transition to middle school (Langberg et al., 2008; O’Neill et al., 2017), the transition itself may temporarily disrupt the natural developmental decline in symptomatology. Notably, Langberg et al. (2008) demonstrated that the middle school transition was associated with a plateau, or even a slight increase, in symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity, particularly as reported by parents. These findings highlight the vulnerability of this developmental stage and support the rationale for focusing on students’ self-efficacy during this period.

Based on this rationale, the study examined ADHD symptomatology as the independent variable, the four sources of self-efficacy (mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological states) as mediators, and mathematics self-efficacy as the dependent variable. The following literature review examines central concepts and empirical findings related to the core constructs of the study, including characteristics of the target population and key variables relevant to the research model.

Gifted Students

There is no clear consensus in the literature regarding the definition of giftedness, and countries vary considerably in how they identify and educate gifted students (Reis et al., 2021; Renzulli, 2004; Rutigliano & Quarshie, 2021). Definitions of giftedness range from exceptionally high IQ scores and intellectual abilities (Guignard et al., 2016; Murphy & Walker, 2015; Renzulli & Delcourt, 1986) to domain-specific talents, including mathematics (Brulles et al., 2012; Rutigliano & Quarshie, 2021). These definitions often encompass high levels of creativity (Kaufman et al., 2012; Leikin & Kloss, 2011; Leikin & Lev, 2013; Murphy & Walker, 2015), academic motivation (Garrett & Moltzen, 2011; Hong & Aqui, 2004; Murphy & Walker, 2015), and talents in domains such as sports (Walker et al., 2011), the arts (Clark & Zimmerman, 2001), and music (Persson, 2009). Some contemporary models conceptualize giftedness within the theory of multiple intelligences (Gardner, 2011; Reis et al., 2021; Renzulli, 2004; Rutigliano & Quarshie, 2021). In Israel, the Steering Committee for the Advancement of Gifted Education defines gifted individuals as those ranking within the top percentile of their age group across the assessed domains of giftedness: general knowledge, language (Hebrew), and mathematics (Ministry of Education in Israel, 2024). The present study adopts this national definition to identify and examine gifted students in the Israeli context.

Symptoms of ADHD

According to the National Institute of Mental Health (2022), symptoms of the ADHD neurodevelopmental disorder begin in early childhood and can persist throughout life. In Israel, per the Ministry of Health (2024), the formally recognized criteria for ADHD are based on the DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). ADHD is characterized by symptoms of inattention, such as distractibility, overlooking details, inability to maintain attention for extended periods of time, partial listening, losing objects, and forgetfulness, as well as by symptoms of hyperactive-impulsive behavior manifested in excessive movement, need to move hands and legs, talkativeness, and impatience (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). ADHD is often accompanied by difficulty in emotional regulation (Uchida et al., 2021); difficulties such as response delay and difficulties in monitoring, working memory, processing speed, mental flexibility, planning, and organization (van Lieshout et al., 2013); and physiological difficulties manifested in rapid pulse, stress, and tension (Payen et al., 2022).

Globally, the prevalence of the formal ADHD diagnosis among children and adolescents is 5% to 8% (Faraone et al., 2021; Phipps, 2023; Young et al., 2020). Yet, diagnosing ADHD among adolescents is complex and difficult due to the high prevalence of co-occurring psychiatric disorders such as learning disabilities (DuPaul et al., 2013). Many students with ADHD are classified as having low achievements in language and mathematics (Colomer et al., 2013; Czamara et al., 2013; Jangmo et al., 2019; Kaufmann & Nuerk, 2006). Moreover, in the absence of appropriate treatment, there is a high risk of a wide range of negative behaviors (Kappi & Martel, 2022). Some attend special education settings, and others drop out of the education system altogether (Harpin et al., 2016). Among gifted individuals, ADHD is often underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed. Given the challenges inherent to formally diagnosing ADHD in gifted adolescents, the current study measured ADHD symptoms as a continuous, non-categorical variable using self-reports, rather than as a categorical medical or psychiatric diagnosis. Self-report questionnaires or checklists have been widely employed in the research literature (Canu et al., 2023; Coghill & Sonuga-Barke, 2012; Jensen et al., 2021; Johns-Mead et al., 2023; Vold et al., 2023) to effectively assess ADHD symptoms (Kessler et al., 2005). Given this unique educational context, the next section will explore the concept of academic self-efficacy and its relevance for gifted students with symptoms of ADHD.

Academic Self-Efficacy

One of the most important predictors of academic success is self-efficacy, a concept that emerged from Bandura’s social learning theory (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 2006; Koutroubas & Galanakis, 2022; Waddington, 2023). Self-efficacy involves individuals’ belief that in future situations they will be able to organize and execute courses of action that will successfully lead to the desired results. Such beliefs influence academic performance.

Self-efficacy has been widely studied as a factor influencing academic functioning in the general population. For example, Zimmerman et al. (1992) highlighted the critical role of self-efficacy in learning outcomes, showing that students with similar objective capabilities may still experience different levels of academic success depending on their perceived self-efficacy. Among individuals with ADHD, researchers indicate that both students and adults with ADHD tend to feel less academically capable compared to their peers without ADHD (Almasi, 2016; Major et al., 2013; Newark et al., 2016; Sarid & Lipka, 2023; Schmidt-Barad et al., 2023; Waite et al., 2022).

Several studies have shown that gifted students tend to report a higher sense of academic self-efficacy than average-ability students (Baudson & Preckel, 2016; Chae & Gentry, 2011; Guez et al., 2018; Korkmaz et al., 2018; Kuznetsova et al., 2024; Malpass et al., 1999; Ozcan et al., 2021), others have found a positive association between self-efficacy and academic achievement within gifted populations (Askari et al., 2020; Eyni et al., 2022; Malpass et al., 1999; Pajares, 1996; Sarıtaş & Olpak, 2022; Zahed et al., 2019). When ADHD symptoms are present, some studies have found that gifted students may experience emotional challenges, such as lower academic self-efficacy (McCoach et al., 2020), decreased self-esteem, and reduced self-confidence (Foley-Nicpon et al., 2012). Nevertheless, a recent systematic review of the literature (Tourreix et al., 2023) emphasizes that there is no consistent empirical evidence for a distinct or uniform emotional profile among gifted students with ADHD, highlighting the need for further research on this subgroup.

These varying levels of self-efficacy may be shaped by different sources of influence, as conceptualized in Bandura’s social learning theory. The next section outlines these sources and their relevance to the current study.

Self-Efficacy Sources

According to social learning theory (Bandura, 1986, 1991; Usher & Pajares, 2008), four sources predict academic self-efficacy: (a) one’s Mastery Experience, the interpreted result of one’s own previous attainments; (b) one’s Vicarious Experience of observing others and comparing oneself to others, particularly to individuals such as classmates, peers, and adults like teachers; (c) Social Persuasion by a significant other; and (d) one’s Physiological State such as rapid pulse, sweating, and stress, which may be interpreted as inability to perform the task, lowering the individual’s sense of self-efficacy.

To date, the research literature provides little information regarding academic self-efficacy and its sources in general, and mathematics self-efficacy in particular, among gifted students who display ADHD symptoms. The current study will examine the role of these four sources of self-efficacy (Mastery Experience, Vicarious Experience, Social Persuasion, and Physiological State) as possibly mediating between gifted students’ level of ADHD symptoms and level of self-efficacy in mathematics.

While the four sources of self-efficacy have been shown to predict academic self-efficacy in general populations (Bandura, 1977, 1986; Usher & Pajares, 2008), their specific influence on students with ADHD remains unclear. Most existing studies in this field have examined the impact of only individual sources on the self-efficacy of students with ADHD, without providing a comprehensive assessment of all four key sources. Some findings suggest that these sources may operate differently among students with ADHD compared to their peers without ADHD (Colomer et al., 2013; Ewe, 2019; Jangmo et al., 2019; Kaufmann & Nuerk, 2006; Major et al., 2013; Sherman et al., 2008; Somma et al., 2019; Usher & Pajares, 2008); yet, a holistic investigation of their combined role in this population is still lacking. Thus, the present study aimed to determine whether the relationship between ADHD symptom levels and mathematics self-efficacy in gifted students is direct or if it is mediated by the four sources of self-efficacy. Understanding this relationship could provide valuable insights for educational interventions aimed at strengthening self-efficacy in this population.

Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Gifted Students at the Transition to Middle School

Mathematics is considered one of the most challenging and demanding academic fields for many students, and it is included in the OECD’s (2022) target skills for the 21st century. Therefore, examining students’ self-efficacy in mathematics can well reflect these challenges and difficulties for gifted students with inattention and/or hyperactive-impulsive symptoms. Moreover, gifted students are sometimes underachievers in mathematics (Fong & Kremer, 2020), and students with ADHD are considered underachievers in mathematics (Colomer et al., 2013; Czamara et al., 2013; Kaufmann & Nuerk, 2006).

This study’s longitudinal exploration comparing the beginning and end of seventh grade aimed to examine changes in mathematics self-efficacy during this critical transition year to middle school (Eccles & Roeser, 2011; Usher & Pajares, 2008). At the beginning of seventh grade, serving as a baseline, the transition to middle school, represents a critical period for shaping students’ self-efficacy (Usher & Pajares, 2006). Accordingly, self-efficacy may weaken when students are required to take on more self-directed responsibility in learning, particularly if their sense of self-efficacy has not been strongly developed in earlier years. Previous studies have indicated that this transition often results in decreased academic achievements, highlighting the challenge students face in adjusting to new academic and social demands (Benner, 2011; Eccles & Roeser, 2011; Hughes et al., 2013; Pearson et al., 2017; Usher & Pajares, 2008; Uvaas & McKevitt, 2013; van Rens et al., 2018, 2020). The end of seventh grade provides an opportunity to assess the impact of these adaptation processes on mathematics self-efficacy.

Gifted students with high levels of ADHD symptoms who are entering the new middle school environment may face multiple challenges beyond the general academic challenges experienced by all students.

The Current Study

Examining a theoretical model based on Baron and Kenny (1986), the current study explored under-investigated relationships between ADHD symptoms, mathematics self-efficacy, and sources of self-efficacy in the gifted population. Using a longitudinal design, this model allowed for identification of changes across the transition year to middle school in how gifted students’ symptoms of inattention and/or hyperactive-impulsivity may relate to their mathematics self-efficacy, whether directly or as indirectly mediated by sources of self-efficacy like mastery and vicarious experiences. Seventh grade represents a particularly sensitive period in which to examine students’ academic self-efficacy, as prior research has identified the transition to middle school as a challenging phase in students’ academic development (Benner, 2011; Eccles & Roeser, 2011; Usher & Pajares, 2006, 2008; Uvaas & McKevitt, 2013; van Rens et al., 2018, 2020). This study builds on prior findings demonstrating that students’ academic self-efficacy in mathematics often declines during the transition to middle school (Usher & Pajares, 2006, 2008). A longitudinal design was employed to examine changes over the school year. This method is commonly used in educational psychology to track developmental or contextual changes in students’ self-efficacy over time (Caruana et al., 2015; Eccles & Roeser, 2011; Usher & Pajares, 2008).

A noncategorical measure of ADHD symptoms was selected due to the well-documented difficulties in accurately diagnosing this disorder among gifted students (Canu et al., 2023; Coghill & Sonuga-Barke, 2012; Jensen et al., 2021; Johns-Mead et al., 2023; Vold et al., 2023). In the present study, ADHD was not diagnosed clinically or categorically nor classified by severity (e.g., mild, moderate, severe); instead, a continuous self-report measure of symptom levels was used, reflecting students’ inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity. Empirical exploration of this under-investigated research population (gifted students reporting varying levels of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms) using novel methodologies (longitudinal design and continuous ADHD measurement) was expected to provide new insights into the mechanisms that promote gifted seventh graders’ self-efficacy in this key 21st-century skill (OECD, 2022) and to assist in designing educational practices to improve this unique subgroup’s mathematics outcomes (Rutigliano & Quarshie, 2021). Thus, the current study aligned with the Israeli education system’s efforts to advance inclusion and integration specifically aimed at gifted students, in accordance with OECD (2022) recommendations. This policy recognizes that academic self-efficacy is key to improving the academic performance and social integration of students with unique needs.

The following hypotheses were formulated based on the existing literature:

A negative relationship was hypothesized between ADHD symptoms and mathematics self-efficacy level among gifted students, at both time points, in line with prior studies indicating that higher ADHD symptoms are associated with lower academic self-efficacy (Almasi, 2016; Major et al., 2013; Newark et al., 2016; Schmidt-Barad et al., 2023).

A negative relationship was hypothesized between ADHD symptoms and the four sources of mathematics self-efficacy among gifted students, at both time points, in line with previous findings suggesting that individuals with higher levels of ADHD symptoms tend to report weaker sources of academic self-efficacy (Colomer et al., 2013; Dvorsky & Langberg, 2016; Jangmo et al., 2019; Kaufmann & Nuerk, 2006; Major et al., 2013; Uchida et al., 2021).

A positive relationship was hypothesized between gifted students’ sources of mathematics self-efficacy and their mathematics self-efficacy levels, at both time points, in line with Bandura’s social learning theory (Bandura, 2006; Usher & Pajares, 2008).

The effect of ADHD symptoms on mathematics self-efficacy level will not be direct but rather will be indirect and negative, as higher ADHD symptoms are expected to reduce the sources of self-efficacy (Usher & Pajares, 2008). These relationships are expected to change over the school year, with the negative indirect effect potentially differing between the two time points due to changes in self-efficacy sources (Eccles & Roeser, 2011).

Self-efficacy in mathematics will be higher at the first time point compared with the second time point, as previous studies have shown that the transition to middle school may lead to declines in academic self-efficacy (Usher & Pajares, 2006).

Method

Participants

The full research sample consisted of 448 seventh-grade students from nine middle schools in Jerusalem, all of whom completed the full set of questionnaires. From this larger group, a subsample of 88 students (32 boys, 56 girls), comprising approximately 20% of the sample, was selected for the current study. These students indicated that they had been identified as gifted during the second or third grade through the Israeli Ministry of Education’s national gifted identification process, which selects the top 1.5% to 3.0% of students based on a standardized test assessing academic and cognitive abilities (Ministry of Education in Israel, 2019, 2024; Shemi, 2022). This relatively high proportion of gifted students reflects the purposeful selection of schools known to have a high concentration of students identified as gifted by the Ministry. Notably, both the overall sample and the gifted subsample included a higher proportion of girls than boys, a gender imbalance possibly explained by the inclusion of single-gender religious schools and the tendency for females to respond more frequently to educational surveys (Porter & Whitcomb, 2005).

Students’ mean age was 12.5 years at the first time point (Time 1, seventh grade, 2022). These seventh graders attended nine urban middle schools in Jerusalem, Israel, including private/public and secular/religious schools. They reported having participated in full pull-out days for gifted students during elementary school. No data were collected about whether they continued to participate in such pull-out programs in seventh grade. All participants studied mathematics according to the standard national seventh-grade curriculum. Seven students reported attention difficulties, and five reported taking medication for ADHD. Chi-square and t-tests were conducted to examine whether the gifted students (n = 88) differed from the broader research sample (N = 448) in terms of demographic characteristics and study variables. No significant differences were found.

All participants were Israeli nationals, fluent in Hebrew, and educated in the Israeli school system. As aforesaid, the participants in this study were identified as gifted by the Israeli Ministry of Education, but were not diagnosed with ADHD or any psychological disorder. ADHD symptomatology was measured as a continuous variable using a self-report scale, rather than a clinical assessment. Therefore, the presence of ADHD symptoms in this study should be interpreted dimensionally, along a spectrum from low to high, without indicating clinical diagnosis or functional impairment. As such, the sample does not represent twice-exceptional students, but rather gifted students with varying levels of self-reported attentional symptoms (Barkley & Murphy, 2006; Johns-Mead et al., 2023).

During the study year, all participants studied mathematics within their regular classroom settings, following the Israeli national mathematics curriculum for seventh grade. The mathematics instruction was not part of an enrichment or pull-out gifted program but rather took place daily as part of the standard academic schedule. Therefore, the learning environment reflected the mainstream educational context shared by all seventh-grade students in Israel.

Self-Report Questionnaires

Students completed three self-report assessments and a demographic questionnaire, all in Hebrew.

Mathematics Self-Efficacy

Using the Self-Efficacy in Mathematics Questionnaire (Midgley et al., 2000), students rated 7 statements such as “I’m certain I can master the skills taught in class this year in mathematics” using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = not at all true to 5 = very true. In the data analysis process, the answers to one question (Item 7) were reversed, and a mean score was calculated for the seven statements. Higher scores indicated greater self-efficacy. The reliability of the questionnaire in this study, Cronbach’s α, was .90. The validity of the original scales is documented in Midgley et al. (1998).

Sources of Mathematics Self-Efficacy

The Sources of Self-Efficacy in Mathematics Scale (Usher & Pajares, 2009) comprises 24 statements referring to the four self-efficacy sources using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = not at all true to 5 = very true. Six statements each for the four sources included: Mastery Experience (“I make excellent grades on math tests”), Vicarious Experience (“Seeing adults do well in math pushes me to do better”), Social Persuasion (“My math teachers have told that I am good at learning math”), and Physiological State (“Just being in math class makes me feel stressed and nervous”).

The questionnaire was translated into Hebrew for this study. The translation process followed a rigorous forward-backward translation procedure conducted by bilingual experts who are native Hebrew speakers and fluent in English. Cultural and linguistic adaptations were made to ensure conceptual equivalence and clarity for the Israeli educational context.

Seven statements were reversed for statistical processing: all six statements referring to Physiological State (Statements 18–24) and one statement referring to Mastery Experience (Statement 3). Reliability (internal consistency) for the four self-efficacy sources was high in the current study, as indicated by the Cronbach α values: Mastery Experience (α = .90), Vicarious Experience (α = .80), Social Persuasion (α = .89), and Physiological State (α = .93). The validity of the original scales is documented in Usher and Pajares (2009).

ADHD Symptoms

We measured ADHD symptoms as a continuous variable (Coghill & Sonuga-Barke, 2012; Johns-Mead et al., 2023) using the 18-item Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS-v1.1; Kessler et al., 2005) symptom checklist, corresponding to the list of ADHD symptoms appearing in the DSM-IV-TR (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). The tool examines symptom presence and severity on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = never to 5 = very often (Kessler et al., 2005). The questionnaire has two subscales: a 10-item inattention scale, for example, “How often do you have problems remembering appointments or obligations?” (high reliability: α = .86), and an 8-item hyperactivity scale, for example, “How often do you leave your seat in meetings or other situations in which you are expected to remain seated?” (high reliability: α = .80). The total ADHD score (high reliability: α = .90) was calculated as the mean of the inattention/hyperactivity scores. The ASRS-v1.1 was found to be reliable and valid based on testing on adolescents from different countries (Somma et al., 2019, 2021), and its Hebrew translation was previously found to have high internal consistency (Dayan et al., 2022). The validity of the original scales is documented in Van de Glind et al. (2013). Although the ASRS-v1.1 was developed for adults, its application among adolescents is supported by Sonnby et al. (2015), who validated the scale in a sample of 15- to 16-year-olds and found good internal consistency and acceptable sensitivity and specificity.

Demographic Questionnaire

Self-reported demographic data included gender, age, school type (public/private, secular/religious for boys/girls/mixed), parents’ marital status, country of birth and number of years in Israel, ADHD diagnosis, ADHD medication, and participation in the gifted students’ pull-out program.

Procedure

In Israel, the location for this study, the Ministry of Education is responsible for identifying gifted students and developing national programs to support them. The study was conducted during the 2022 to 2023 school year. In the summer of 2022, after receiving the approvals of the Chief Scientist of the Israeli Ministry of Education and the University Ethics Committee, we requested permission from the nine school principals to conduct the study among seventh grade students at the beginning and end of the school year. In selecting the schools, preference was given to schools with a high potential for a population of students identified as qualifying for the Israeli Ministry of Education Gifted and Outstanding Students Program. The study was conducted in the schools only after obtaining the consent of the school principals and informing the parents. Written notification sent to the parents stated that they could refuse to consent to their child’s participation in the study, without any repercussions. Data were collected at two points during the academic year, reflecting a longitudinal design: at the beginning of seventh grade (Time 1, September 2022) and at the end of the same school year (Time 2, May 2023). Each data collection phase spanned approximately 1 month. The researcher and her research assistant visited schools after advance coordination with the principal and the homeroom teachers, explained the nature of the research and participants’ anonymity to the students, and emphasized their full right not to participate in the study. Several concepts were explained to the students, including mathematics self-efficacy, sources of mathematics self-efficacy, and ADHD symptoms. The research questionnaire was sent to the participants’ mobile phone or personal computer. The study was conducted during class time, averaging about an hour to complete. The researcher and research assistant moved among the students and answered questions or read specific questions at the students' request. Out of the total sample of seventh-grade students in the nine schools who completed the study questionnaires at both time points (N = 448) in a larger research project, the current sample of 88 students self-reported that they had been identified and were participating in the Israeli Ministry of Education Gifted and Outstanding Students Program, including participation in full pull-out days outside the school setting. The identification of gifted students in Israel is based on a national test administered in second or third grade, which assesses abilities in general knowledge, language (Hebrew), and mathematics.

Data Analysis

To address the first three hypotheses, Pearson correlations were conducted. To address the fourth and fifth hypotheses, dependent t-tests were first conducted, followed by path analysis to examine the fourth hypothesis. Path analysis was conducted using AMOS 22 Structural Equation Modeling software to test the mediating role of sources of self-efficacy in the relationship between ADHD symptoms and mathematics self-efficacy level. This multivariate data analysis technique in a graphic environment is used when testing a complex model containing a variety of variables, or a variety of dependent relationships between the variables (Byrne, 2010). The AMOS software makes it possible to simultaneously test relationships between variables and improve the reliability of the test by examining the measurement model and the structural model. This form of analysis can confirm or refute the theoretical infrastructure on which the research is based (Hoyle & Panter, 1995).

The first step in the path analysis was evaluation of the measurement model, where various indices were examined to determine the model’s fit to the data, including root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), normed fit index (NFI), and comparative fit index (CFI; Hoyle & Panter, 1995; Kline, 2023). This step ensures the reliability and validity of the structural model before testing the mediating relationships. Once the measurement model was validated, we tested the mediation model to examine how ADHD symptoms influence mathematics self-efficacy through the mediating variables of self-efficacy sources. This approach allows for a clearer understanding of the mechanisms at play in the relationship between ADHD symptoms and mathematics self-efficacy.

The RMSEA index indicates the amount of variation that is not explained even after application of the model. The index that examines the fit between the estimated model and the data is called the NFI. The CFI examines this fit between the model and the LR (likelihood ratio), considering the sample size and the c² tests. The goal is to obtain a low and non-significant c², indicating a fit between the model and the data. If the sample is too small, the value of c² may indicate that the data do not fit the proposed model, in which case the model is theoretically meaningless. If the sample is too large, even a “good” model will be rejected, and its effectiveness therefore questionable. If the value of the index normed c² (c²/df) is less than 3, the fit of the data to the model is good (Hoyle & Panter, 1995; Kline, 2023). If the value of the index RMSEA is at most 0.05, the fit is good. A value greater than 0.08 indicates an error in the structure, and a value greater than 0.1 indicates that the model should be rejected. The closer the values of the CFI and NFI indices are to 1, the better the fit. These model fit standards are consistent with commonly accepted guidelines in the literature (Jung, 2024).

Results

Correlations and Differences

Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations for the study variables at both time points. Partially supporting Hypotheses 4 and 5, dependent t-tests were conducted to examine differences between the first and second time points. ADHD symptoms increased significantly, t(87) = −2.30, p = .012, d = .69. Mastery Experience increased significantly, t(87) = 4.78, p < .001, d = .64. Vicarious Experience did not show a significant change, t(87) = 1.00, p = .161, d = .79. Social Persuasion increased significantly, t(87) = 2.44, p = .008, d = .79. Physiological State increased significantly, t(87) = 4.00, p < .001, d = .97. Mathematics self-efficacy showed a marginally non-significant decrease, t(87) = 1.64, p = .053, d = .74. These findings indicate significant differences over time in four of the study variables, with participants’ scores on ADHD symptoms, Mastery Experience, Social Persuasion, and Physiological State increasing. Vicarious Experience and mathematics self-efficacy did not change significantly over time, although the mean scores for both variables decreased from the first to the second time points.

Table 1.

Means and Standard Deviations for Gifted Students’ Research Variables at the Two Time Points.

Scale	Time 1 (September)		Time 2 (May)
(Score range: 1–5)	M	SD	M	SD	p	d
ADHD Symptoms	2.64	.66	2.81	.76	–2.30*	.69
Mastery Experience	4.06	.83	3.73	.81	4.78**	.64
Vicarious Experience	3.37	.83	3.29	.79	1.00ns	.19
Social Persuasion	3.93	.79	3.72	.87	2.44**	.48
Physiological State	3.66	1.06	3.25	1.13	4.00**	.97
Math Self-Efficacy	4.02	.80	3.88	.91	1.64ns	.74

Note. N = 88. Higher scores indicate higher levels of ADHD symptoms, sources of self-efficacy, and mathematics self-efficacy.

*p < .05. **p < .01.

Pearson correlations calculated to test the first three research hypotheses showed significant weak to strong relationships among all the research variables at both time points (see Tables 2 and 3). Mathematics self-efficacy was found to have a strong positive relationship with three of the self-efficacy sources, Mastery Experience (first time point: r = .84, p < .01; second time point: r = .80, p < .01), Physiological State (first time point: r = .76, p < .01; second time point: r = .65, p = .01), and Social Persuasion (first time point: r =.62; second time point: r = .61, p < .01) and a weak negative relationship with ADHD symptoms (first time point: r = −.28, p < .01; second time point: r = −.24, p < .05).

Table 2.

Pearson Correlation Matrix Among Study Variables at the First Time Point, N=88.

Variables	ADHD Symptoms	Mastery Experience	Vicarious Experience	Social Persuasion	Physiological State
ADHD Symptoms	1
Mastery Experience	–.21*	1
Vicarious Experience	–.27*	.44**	1
Social Persuasion	–.15	.74**	.42**	1
Physiological State	–.30**	.67**	.31**	.47**	1
Math Self-Efficacy	–.28**	.84**	.37**	.62**	.76**

p < .05. **p < .01.

Table 3.

Pearson Correlation Matrix Among Study Variables at the Second Time Point, N=88.

Variables	ADHD Symptoms	Mastery Experience	Vicarious Experience	Social Persuasion	Physiological State
ADHD Symptoms	1
Mastery Experience	–.26*	1
Vicarious Experience	–.12	.38**	1
Social Persuasion	–.25*	.61**	.41**	1
Physiological State	–.46**	.54**	.32**	.42**	1
Math Self-efficacy	–.24*	.80**	.48**	.61**	.65**

p < .05. **p < .01.

Path Analysis

The first step in structural equation analysis is evaluating the measurement model by examining the extent to which the model fits the data. Table 4 includes the fit indices of the model tested in this study (Byrne, 2010; Hoyle & Panter, 1995) for predicting students’ level of self-efficacy in mathematics. As seen in the table, the measurement of all variables in the model was valid. These results reinforce the theoretical assumptions that dictated the selection of the model variables. The results also indicate a very good fit of the measurement model to the research data, as evidenced by the following fit indices: RMSEA = 0.10, CFI = 0.93, NFI = 0.87, all indicating good model fit (Hoyle & Panter, 1995; Kline, 2023).

Table 4.

Result of Structural Equation Modeling.

Path of variables			Direct effect β	Estimate (B)	p
ADHD-T1	à	VE-T1	–.207	–.216	.019
SP-T1	à	PS-T1	.454	.586	***
ADHD-T1	à	ADHD-T2	.551	.614	***
VE-T1	à	VE-T2	.511	.570	***
PS-T1	à	PS-T2	.545	.588	***
ME-T1	à	MSE-T1	.852	.845	***
ADHD-T1	à	PS-T2	–.190	–.304	.030
ME-T1	à	ME-T2	.642	.729	***
MSE-T1	à	MSE-T2	.742	.912	***
SP-T1	à	SP-T2	.525	.568	***
VE-T2	à	MSE-T2	.417	.449	***
PS-T2	à	MSE-T2	.136	.106	.026
ADHD-T2	à	SP-T2	–.055	–.061	.577

Note. Model fit indices indicated an acceptable to good fit of the measurement model to the data: χ²(43) = 85.38; p < .001***; χ²/df = 1.98; CFI = .93; NFI = .87; RMSEA = .10. While some values slightly deviate from conventional thresholds, they are considered acceptable given the sample size and model complexity (Byrne, 2010; Hoyle & Panter, 1995; Kline, 2023). ADHD = ADHD symptoms; MSE = mathematics self-efficacy; ME = mastery experience; VE = vicarious experience; SP = social persuasion; PS = physiological state. T1 = time 1 (beginning of seventh grade, 2022); T2 = time 2 (end of seventh grade, 2023).

The second step in structural equation analysis is evaluating the structural model to examine the hypothesized relationships between the exogenous (independent) variables and the endogenous variables (influenced by other variables). In this study, all structural equation analysis variables were measured twice, at the first and second time points. The exogenous variable was the level of ADHD symptoms, and the four sources of self-efficacy were the forms of mediation, while the endogenous (dependent) variable was the level of self-efficacy in mathematics. Figure 1 shows the path analysis of the structural model for the study sample at the two time points, at the beginning and end of the year.

Figure 1.

Path Analysis Models for Gifted Students at Beginning (Time 1) and End (Time 2) of Seventh Grade.

The Figure

Findings from the path analysis showed no direct effect of ADHD symptoms on mathematics self-efficacy level, at either time point, in the current sample of gifted students. Self-efficacy in mathematics was predicted by mediating variables at both time points. Students’ level of ADHD symptoms negatively predicted Vicarious Experience at the first time point (β = −.21, p < .05) and higher Physiological State (reversed scoring; β = −.19, p < .05). Namely, when ADHD symptoms were higher, two sources of self-efficacy mediated symptoms’ effect on students’ self-efficacy levels, differently at the two time points: lower Vicarious Experience at the beginning of seventh grade (T1, 2022) and higher Physiological State (reversed scoring) at the end of the school year. Overall, students’ level of ADHD symptoms influenced changes over the course of the year in the role played by students’ sources of mathematics self-efficacy.

Regarding the effects of the mediating variables on mathematics self-efficacy level, at the beginning of the year this dependent variable was predicted only by Mastery Experience (β = .85, p < .05), explaining 70% of the variance. At the end of the year, self-efficacy in mathematics was predicted by Vicarious Experience (β = .44, p < .05) and Physiological State (β = .13, p < .05), which explained 49% of the variance. Thus, the sources of self-efficacy for mathematics performance changed from Mastery Experience at the beginning of the year to Vicarious Experience and Physiological State at the end of the year. Each study variable showed a predictive relationship between the two time points’ measurement, at the school year’s beginning (T1, seventh grade, 2022) and end (T2, seventh grade, 2023). The values that emerged was β = .74, p < .05 for mathematics self-efficacy level at T2 and β = .64, p < .05 for Mastery Experience at T1, showed relative stability between the first and second time points.

Discussion

This longitudinal study aimed to narrow a gap in the literature regarding the mathematics self-efficacy of gifted students who exhibit ADHD symptoms. The discussion below focuses specifically on the gifted student subsample (n = 88), identified as gifted in elementary school, who participated in the present study. It examined the role that inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms may play in the decline of self-efficacy as these students transition to middle school, as well as whether self-efficacy sources could mediate this decline. Considerable research has shown that Bandura’s (1977) four main sources of self-efficacy beliefs (mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological states) exert significant influence on self-efficacy, particularly in mathematics (Gao, 2020; Haciomeroglu, 2019; Joët et al., 2011; Kyaruzi, 2023; Özcan & Kültür, 2021; Usher & Pajares, 2009; Yildiz & Özdemir, 2019). However, these sources have not been sufficiently investigated for their possible role as mediators between gifted adolescents’ ADHD symptoms and their self-efficacy for mathematics, while tracing changes from the beginning to the end of seventh grade.

Overall, the current results showed that higher ADHD symptom levels correlated with lower self-efficacy in mathematics, confirming the first hypothesis. This pattern aligns with studies showing that students and adults with ADHD have a lower sense of academic self-efficacy than those without ADHD (Almasi, 2016; Lewin, 2021; Major et al., 2013; Newark et al., 2016; Sarid & Lipka, 2023; Schmidt-Barad et al., 2023; Waite et al., 2022). Similarly, broader research indicates that gifted individuals diagnosed with ADHD tend to experience lower self-perceptions in various domains, including self-esteem and self-image (Foley-Nicpon et al., 2012; Tourreix et al., 2023). Likewise, the current results demonstrated that higher ADHD symptom levels correlated with lower scores on the sources of self-efficacy in mathematics among gifted students across both measurement points, confirming the second hypothesis. These results align with prior studies showing that adolescents and adults with ADHD symptoms reported diminished impact from self-efficacy sources compared with those without ADHD symptoms (Colomer et al., 2013; Dvorsky & Langberg, 2016; Jangmo et al., 2019; Kaufmann & Nuerk, 2006; Major et al., 2013), as well as heightened affective and physiological arousal (Uchida et al., 2021).

At the beginning of seventh grade, the negative correlation found between the gifted students’ level of ADHD symptoms and Vicarious Experience suggests that as ADHD symptoms increased, the effectiveness of learning through modeling decreased. However, by the end of the seventh grade, this relationship had disappeared, indicating that as ADHD symptoms increased, the influence of verbal encouragement diminished. At the beginning of seventh grade, the primary challenge appeared to be learning from external models, while by the year’s end, the difficulty seemed to shift toward processing verbal persuasion. Perhaps this change in focal challenges may stem from the initial adjustment period at the start of the school year, when students are still adapting to a new environment and instructional methods. By the year’s end, after partial adaptation, other difficulties related to verbal interaction and processing feedback and guidance may have become more pronounced. Furthermore, the decline in the effectiveness of Social Persuasion could potentially be explained by a decrease in positive Mastery Experiences, as reduced positive personal experiences often limit the impact of verbal persuasion on self-efficacy. The current results also showed the positive relationship between sources of self-efficacy and self-efficacy in mathematics among students at both measurement points, confirming the third hypothesis. These findings indicated that as the influence of self-efficacy sources increases, so does self-efficacy in mathematics. These results align with Bandura’s self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 2006; Usher & Pajares, 2008) and the rare findings of Ozcan et al. (2021), which reported a positive correlation between sources of academic self-efficacy and self-efficacy in mathematics among gifted students, suggesting that these sources positively reinforce self-confidence.

Beyond confirming these relationships, the current study expanded on prior research by highlighting a shift in the relative influence of specific sources over the school year. At the beginning of the year, Mastery Experience served as the strongest predictor of mathematics self-efficacy, likely reflecting students’ reliance on prior successful experiences from elementary school. However, as the academic demands increase in middle school, a decrease in students’ personal academic success may possibly lead them to draw more on Vicarious Experience and Physiological State. This shift may be attributed to a growing influence from peers and social comparison during middle school (Dijkstra et al., 2008), which could be speculated as increasing the importance of Vicarious Experience, while Mastery Experience plays a diminishing role. Moreover, as the year progresses, rising academic pressures appear to heighten the impact of physiological factors like fatigue and stress on self-efficacy.

The fourth research hypothesis exploring the mediation model at the two time points revealed a novel finding, whereby mathematics self-efficacy level was not found to be directly influenced by ADHD symptom levels but rather was shaped through self-efficacy sources, whose impact changed over the year. The mediators Mastery Experience, Vicarious Experience, Social Persuasion, and Physiological State were found to play an important role, with their impact on the relationship between ADHD symptoms and mathematics self-efficacy varying over the course of the year.

The fifth research hypothesis predicted that level of self-efficacy for mathematics performance among gifted students with higher ADHD symptoms would decrease during the seventh-grade school year. Indeed, although gifted students generally have a higher sense of academic self-efficacy compared with average-ability students (Chae & Gentry, 2011; Guez et al., 2018; Korkmaz et al., 2018), the main finding in this study indicates a significant and distinct decreased level of self-efficacy in mathematics among gifted students with higher ADHD symptoms. This finding is consistent with previous studies showing that gifted individuals with ADHD face unique academic challenges (Kanapathy et al., 2022; Tourreix et al., 2023), as well as lower self-esteem and self-image compared to gifted individuals without ADHD (Foley-Nicpon et al., 2012). These challenges add to the broader academic demands associated with the transition to middle school, experienced by all students (Benner, 2011; Pearson et al., 2017; van Rens et al., 2018, 2020), and especially by students with ADHD (Langberg et al., 2008; Uvaas & McKevitt, 2013).

In sum, this study revealed the complex dynamics between ADHD symptoms and self-efficacy in mathematics among gifted students, providing a new understanding of their unique learning processes and challenges. Over the school year, a general decline in mathematics self-efficacy was observed among gifted students, with symptom levels further influencing this trend through varying self-efficacy sources. However, the study findings emphasized that ADHD symptoms did not directly relate to mathematics self-efficacy; instead, their relationship was mediated by the four self-efficacy sources, which impacted self-efficacy differently over the year. At the beginning of the year, the decline in self-efficacy was mainly due to a decrease in Vicarious Experience, while Mastery Experience was the primary positive source of influence. Later in the year, the decrease was associated with Social Persuasion, whereas Vicarious Experience became a source of positive influence on mathematics self-efficacy.

Practical Implications of the Study

The current findings highlight that gifted seventh graders’ lower self-efficacy for performing mathematics does not stem from their higher ADHD symptoms alone, but rather from emotional, social, academic, and bodily experiences and situations that affect the students’ beliefs about their academic competence. This pinpoints the importance of developing targeted educational approaches to support sources of self-efficacy in gifted students with inattention and/or hyperactive-impulsive behaviors, especially during critical phases such as the transition to middle school, when personal and social challenges intensify. The findings underscore the need to design and to empirically test the effectiveness of comprehensive educational interventions that foster development of the four sources of mathematics self-efficacy to help this population fully realize their academic potential. Toward this end, it is essential to deepen pre-service and in-service teachers’ knowledge about gifted students and the characteristics of ADHD, recognizing that this disorder does not necessarily diminish mathematics self-efficacy. The focus of intervention should be on the four sources of self-efficacy, providing educational tools to help students cope with challenges and develop a sense of efficacy in mathematics. Below are recommendations for practical intervention based on the four sources of self-efficacy, tailored to students, parents, and educational staff.

Mastery Experience

The experience of success was the primary source of mathematics self-efficacy at the start of the year, but over time, this influence diminished. Increased academic demands in middle school, coupled with limited attentional resources, may have led to a reduction in personal academic successes. To address this, educators should create learning situations that foster gradual successes, emphasizing effort and personal progress while setting achievable goals. In addition, highlighting daily achievements both at school and at home and encouraging self-monitoring of progress can strengthen self-confidence and help students cope with the shifting challenges throughout the year.

Vicarious Experience

At the beginning of the year, a negative correlation was found between the level of ADHD and the vicarious experience source; students with more ADHD symptoms engaged less in learning by observing others. By the end of the year, this negative connection was no longer observed; vicarious experience positively contributed to the sense of mathematics self-efficacy. Perhaps, for gifted students with high inattention symptoms, mentoring programs or conversations with same-age adolescents, with parents who serve as role models, or with respected teachers can have a positive impact by sharing coping strategies and maintaining a positive influence throughout the year.

Social Persuasion

Social persuasion was an important source of self-efficacy; however, among students with high levels of ADHD, this source decreased. Gifted students with high ADHD symptoms can benefit significantly from tailored encouragement, especially from teachers and parents who express trust in their abilities. Teachers should provide positive feedback and foster a sense of belonging in the learning group. Parents play a key role in daily support and consistent reinforcement of their children’s capabilities, focusing on small successes. In addition, students with ADHD symptoms may exhibit heightened sensitivity to both positive and negative feedback, potentially reducing the effectiveness of social persuasion on their self-efficacy (Beaton et al., 2022; Dovis et al., 2015; Furukawa et al., 2021; Luman et al., 2012; Miller et al., 2014; Mohammadi & Khanjani, 2021). This sensitivity can limit the sustained impact of verbal encouragement on self-efficacy, particularly when previous experiences include instances of failure or negative feedback.

Physiological State

Awareness of physiological state is crucial for gifted students with high levels of inattention symptoms, as their physiological state directly impacts their sense of self-efficacy. Parents are encouraged to emphasize the importance of sufficient sleep and physical activity to these students and to support them in maintaining a healthy lifestyle. Teachers are advised to incorporate short breaks during the school day and to encourage stress relief activities before exams, such as breathing exercises, mindfulness, drinking water, and light physical activity. Addressing the students’ physiological state can help them cope with academic challenges and strengthen their sense of self-efficacy. The heightened physiological arousal observed among students with ADHD is often associated with stress and emotional tension, which can negatively impact mathematics self-efficacy (Payen et al., 2022; Somma et al., 2019). Recognizing and addressing the influence of physiological states on self-efficacy is particularly important for students with ADHD, as these factors may impair concentration and confidence during academic tasks. Overall, these findings, which support the existing research literature, contribute significantly to expanding our vital knowledge about this unique population of gifted individuals with ADHD symptoms, emphasizing their need for a tailored curriculum. To address this need, administrators and educational specialists should lead and collaborate in developing appropriate frameworks to provide these students with the necessary pedagogical and personal support (Goksu & Gelicli, 2023; Riga & Malafantis, 2023; VanTassel-Baska & Brown, 2022).

Study Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research

The study was based on a relatively small sample of students, and findings must be re-examined among a larger sample to validate them and enable generalization. In addition, although the current study was longitudinal, it was observational and examined relationships between variables; hence, future interventional research could actively examine causality. Our findings were based on data collected during only one school year; thus, longer-term follow-up would provide a more complete picture, while addressing possible additional background factors not examined in this study. Longitudinal studies are needed to track gifted students with ADHD symptoms over several years. These studies can reveal the dynamics of mathematics self-efficacy over time.

Another limitation concerns the gender distribution within both the full sample and the gifted subsample, which had a higher proportion of girls than boys. This imbalance may be partially explained by contextual factors such as the inclusion of single gender (e.g., religious) schools in the sampling frame, and by evidence that girls are often more likely than boys to voluntarily respond to educational surveys (Porter & Whitcomb, 2005). Therefore, the findings may be less generalizable to gifted male students, and future studies should aim to ensure a more balanced gender representation. In addition, while the gifted subsample was drawn from a larger cohort of seventh-grade students (N = 448), no formal statistical comparisons were conducted between the groups. As such, the distinctiveness of the gifted group within the full sample remains untested, and future research should include inferential comparisons to better establish group-specific patterns.

It is also recommended to further examine the impact of demographic variables such as gender, age, and socioeconomic background on the relationship between ADHD symptoms and self-efficacy in mathematics. Furthermore, future researchers may do well to investigate psychosocial factors like motivation, self-regulation, and problem-solving skills that prior research identified as playing a role as mediators of academic self-efficacy (Mahatmya et al., 2023). Such research could address calls for future empirical exploration to promote understanding of gifted subgroups’ heterogeneity (Bucaille et al., 2022). In addition, further study utilizing additional rating sources and objective measures (e.g., teacher assessments, standardized academic testing) would expand the current study findings, which relied on potentially biased self-reporting through questionnaires. Moreover, further research is recommended to assess academic self-efficacy in various subjects other than mathematics among gifted students with ADHD symptoms, such as sciences, language, or arts.

Finally, this study aligns with international trends while adapting to the Israeli context and educational goals, providing important insights into the unique academic and psychological experiences of gifted students with high levels of ADHD symptoms within the Israeli educational system. Yet, findings from the Israeli context may not be generalizable to other populations, cultural environments, or educational systems. The Israeli education context’s specific programs for gifted students may differ from those in other countries. Future researchers and educators should therefore consider cultural and systemic factors when designing interventions aimed at improving self-efficacy in mathematics for this population.

Supplemental Material

sj-xlsx-1-gcq-10.1177_00169862261422458 – Supplemental material for Longitudinal Study: Sources of Self-Efficacy Mediating Between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms and Mathematics Self-Efficacy Level Among Gifted Students

Supplemental material, sj-xlsx-1-gcq-10.1177_00169862261422458 for Longitudinal Study: Sources of Self-Efficacy Mediating Between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms and Mathematics Self-Efficacy Level Among Gifted Students by Dorit Meyer and Bracha Kramarski in Gifted Child Quarterly

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Dorit Meyer

Ethical Considerations

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the School of Education at Bar-Ilan University (approval no. 121) on July 25, 2022.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Open Practices

The data analyzed in this study are available for purposes of reproducing the results at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KWp63U_4BrT_V_uQqmcNSrzeYxwPmH-w/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=113936421475637428222&rtpof=true&sd=true. The code or protocol used to generate the findings reported in the article are not available for purposes of reproducing the results or replicating the study. There are no other newly created, unique materials used to conduct the research.

Artificial Intelligence Use

ChatGPT4 was used for translation, wording, and linguistic and grammatical accuracy. However, the software did not replace human linguistic editing. The authors confirm that they have taken steps to ensure accuracy of AI-generated content, and that it contains no plagiarism or bias.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online at

Author Biographies

Dorit Meyer, PhD from the Department of Education at Bar Ilan University; Ministry of Education District Instructor for inclusion and integration programs (2015–2021); educational counselor in a middle school for outstanding and gifted students (2017–2024); lecturer and pedagogical instructor at two teacher colleges in Israel (2016–2024). Her research deals with sense of academic self-efficacy among students in school and higher education, with specific emphasis on unique groups such as gifted students and students with ADHD symptoms.

Bracha Kramarski is associate professor (Emerita). Her field of research focuses on theory and practice about self-regulated learning (SRL), emphasizing metacognition and self-efficacy among students and teachers. She served in several academic positions at Bar-Ilan University in the Faculty of Education.

References

Almasi

N. G.

(2016). The comparison of self-efficacy dimensions in ADHD and normal students. Open Journal of Medical Psychology, 5(4), 88–91. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojmp.2016.54010

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890423349

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596

Antshel

K. M.

Faraone

S. V.

Maglione

Doyle

Fried

Seidman

Biederman

(2008). Temporal stability of ADHD in the high-IQ population: Results from the MGH longitudinal family studies of ADHD. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 47, 817–825. https://doi.org/10.1097/CHI.0b013e318172eecf

Antshel

K. M.

Faraone

S. V.

Stallone

Nave

Kaufmann

F. A.

Doyle

Fried

Seidman

Biederman

(2007). Is attention deficit hyperactivity disorder a valid diagnosis in the presence of high IQ? Results from the MGH Longitudinal Family Studies of ADHD. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48, 687–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469–2007.01735.x

Askari

M. R.

Makvandi

Neisi

(2020). The prediction of academic performance based on academic engagement, academic self-efficacy, the achievement goals and perception of school atmosphere in gifted students. Psychology of Exceptional Individuals, 9(36), 127–149. https://doi.org/10.22054/jpe.2020.44149.2016

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Prentice-Hall.

Bandura

(1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L

10.

Bandura

(2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In Pajares

Urdan

(Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (vol. 5, pp. 307–337). Information Age.

11.

Barkley

R. A.

(2011). Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale-IV (BAARS-IV). Guilford Press.

12.

Barkley

R. A.

Murphy

K. R.

(2006). Identifying new symptoms for diagnosing ADHD in adults. ADHD Report, 14(2), 7–11. https://doi.org/10.1521/adhd.2006.14.2.1

13.

Baron

R. M.

Kenny

D. A.

(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

14.

Baudson

T. G.

Preckel

(2016). Teachers’ conceptions of gifted and average-ability students on achievement-relevant dimensions. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(3), 212–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862166471

15.

Beaton

D. M.

Sirois

Milne

(2022). Experiences of criticism in adults with ADHD: A qualitative study. PLOS ONE, 17(2), Article e0263366. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263366

16.

Beljan

Webb

J. T.

Amend

E. R.

Web

N. E.

Goerss

Olenchak

F. R.

(2006). Misdiagnosis and dual diagnoses of gifted children and adults: ADHD, bipolar, OCD, Asperger’s, depression, and other disorders. Gifted and Talented International, 21(2), 83–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2006.11673478

17.

Benner

A. D.

(2011). The transition to high school: Current knowledge, future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 23, 299–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9152-0

18.

Brulles

Peters

S. J.

Saunders

(2012). Schoolwide mathematics achievement within the gifted cluster grouping model. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(3), 200–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X12451439

19.

Bucaille

Jarry

Allard

Brochard

Peudenier

Roy

(2022). Neuropsychological profile of intellectually gifted children: A systematic review. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 28(4), 424–440. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617721000515

20.

Byrne

B. M.

(2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge

21.

Canu

W. H.

Johnson

M. W.

Blum

J. E.

(2023). Self-report measures for assessing ADHD in adults. In Matson

J. L.

(Ed.), Clinical handbook of ADHD assessment and treatment across the lifespan (pp. 495–515). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41709-2_19

22.

Caruana

E. J.

Roman

Hernández-Sánchez

Solli

(2015). Longitudinal studies. Journal of Thoracic Disease, 7(11), E537–E540. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.10.63

23.

Chae

Gentry

(2011). Gifted and general high school students’ perceptions of learning and motivational constructs in Korea and the United States. High Ability Studies, 22(1), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2011.577275

24.

Clark

Zimmerman

(2001). Identifying artistically talented students in four rural communities in the United States. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(2), 104–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620104500204

25.

Coghill

Sonuga-Barke

E. J.

(2012). Annual research review: Categories versus dimensions in the classification and conceptualisation of child and adolescent mental disorders-implications of recent empirical study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(5), 469–489. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02511.x

26.

Colomer

A. M.

Miranda

Lucangeli

(2013). Numerical and calculation abilities in children with ADHD. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 11(2), 1–15. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1039820.pdf

27.

Cornoldi

Giofrè

Toffalini

(2023). Cognitive characteristics of intellectually gifted children with a diagnosis of ADHD. Intelligence, 97, Article 101736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2023.101736

28.

Czamara

Tiesler

C. M.

Kohlböck

Berdel

Hoffmann

Bauer

C. P.

Koletzko

Schaaf

Lehmann

Herbarth

Berg

A. V.

Müller-Myhsok

Schulte-Körne

Heinrich

(2013). Children with ADHD symptoms have a higher risk for reading, spelling and math difficulties in the GINIplus and LISAplus cohort studies. PLOS ONE, 8(5), Article e63859. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0063859

29.

Dayan

Khoury-Kassabri

Pollak

(2022). The link between ADHD symptoms and antisocial behavior: The moderating role of the protective factor sense of coherence. Brain Sciences, 12(10), Article 1336. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12101336

30.

De Rossi

D’Aiello

Pretelli

Menghini

Di Vara

Vicari

(2023). Age-related clinical characteristics of children and adolescents with ADHD. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14, Article 1069934. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1069934

31.

Dijkstra

Kuyper

Van der Werf

Buunk

A. P.

van der Zee

Y. G.

(2008). Social comparison in the classroom: A review. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 828–879. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308321210

32.

Dovis

Van der Oord

Huizenga

H. M.

Wiers

R. W.

Prins

P. J.

(2015). Prevalence and diagnostic validity of motivational impairments and deficits in visuospatial short-term memory and working memory in ADHD subtypes. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 24, 575–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-014-0612-1

33.

DuPaul

G. J.

Gormley

M. J.

Laracy

S. D.

(2013). Comorbidity of LD and ADHD: Implications of DSM-5 for assessment and treatment. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(1), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412464351

34.

Dvorsky

M. R.

Langberg

J. M.

(2016). A review of factors that promote resilience in youth with ADHD and ADHD symptoms. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 19, 368–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-016-0216-z

35.

Eccles

J. S.

Roeser

R. W.

(2011). Schools as developmental contexts during adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00725.x

36.

Edwards

(2009). Misdiagnosis, the recent trend in thinking about gifted children with ADHD. Apex, 15(4), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.21307/apex-2009-005

37.

Ewe

L. P.

(2019). ADHD symptoms and the teacher-student relationship: A systematic literature review. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 24(2), 136–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2019.1597562

38.

Eyni

Hosseini

S. A.

Ebadi

(2022). Comparison of psychological distress, mindfulness and academic self-efficacy in gifted and normal students. Rooyesh-e-ravanshenasi Journal, 10(11), 1–14.

39.

Faraone

S. V.

Banaschewski

Coghill

Zheng

Biederman

Bellgrove

M. A.

Newcorn

J. H.

Gignac

Al Saud

N. M.

Manor

Rhode

L. A.

Yang

Cortese

Almagor

Stein

M. A.

Albatti

T. H.

Aljoudi

H. F.

Alqahtani

M. M. J.

Asherson

Wang

(2021). The world federation of ADHD international consensus statement: 208 evidence-based conclusions about the disorder. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 128, 789–818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.01.022

40.

Foley-Nicpon

Rickels

Assouline

S. G.

Richards

(2012). Self-esteem and self-concept examination among gifted students with ADHD. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35(3), 220–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353212451735

41.

Fong

C. J.

Kremer

K. P.

(2020). An expectancy-value approach to math underachievement: Examining high school achievement, college attendance, and STEM interest. Gifted Child Quarterly, 64(2), 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986219890599

42.

François-Sévigny

Pilon

Gauthier

L. A.

(2022). Differences in parents and teachers’ perceptions of behavior manifested by gifted children with ADHD compared to gifted children without ADHD and non-gifted children with ADHD using the Conners 3 Scale. Brain Sciences, 12(11), 1571–1590. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12111571

43.

Furukawa

Alsop

Shimabukuro

Sowerby

Jensen

Tripp

(2021). Increased behavioral sensitivity to repeated experiences of punishment in children with ADHD: Experimental studies using the matching law. Journal of Attention Disorders, 25(12), 1665–1665. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054720914384

44.

Gao

(2020). Sources of mathematics self-efficacy in Chinese students: A mixed-method study with q-sorting procedure. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(4), 713–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09984-1

45.

Gardner

(2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books.

46.

Garrett

Moltzen

(2011). Writing because I want to, not because I have to: Young gifted writers’ perspectives on the factors that” matter” in developing expertise. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(1), 165–180. https://hdl.handle.net/10289/5629

47.

Goksu

D. Y.

Gelicli

(2023). Differentiation models for the curriculum of gifted and talented individuals: A literature review. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 8(2), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.24331/ijere.1227783

48.

Guez

Peyre

Le Cam

Gauvrit

Ramus

(2018). Are high-IQ students more at risk of school failure? Intelligence, 71, 32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2018.09.003

49.

Guignard

J. H.

Kermarrec

Tordjman

(2016). Relationships between intelligence and creativity in gifted and non-gifted children. Learning and Individual Differences, 52, 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.07.006

50.

Haciomeroglu

(2019). The relationship between elementary students’ achievement emotions and sources of mathematics self-efficacy. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 5(2), 548–559. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1215585.pdf

51.

Harpin

Mazzone

Raynaud

J. P.

Kahle

Hodgkins

(2016). Long-term outcomes of ADHD: A systematic review of self-esteem and social function. Journal of Attention Disorders, 20(4), 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054713486516

52.

Hartnett

D. N.

Nelson

J. M.

Rinn

A. N.

(2004). Gifted or ADHD? The possibilities of misdiagnosis. Roeper Review, 26(2), 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190409554245

53.

Hong

Aqui

(2004). Cognitive and motivational characteristics of adolescents gifted in mathematics: Comparisons among students with different types of giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(3), 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620404800304

54.

Hoyle

R. H.

Panter

A. T.

(1995). Writing about structural equation models in structural equation modeling. In Hoyle

R. H.

(Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 158–176). Sage.

55.

Hughes

L. A.

Banks

Terras

M. M.

(2013). Secondary school transition for children with special educational needs: A literature review. Support for Learning, 28(1), 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.12012

56.

Jangmo

Stålhandske

Chang

Chen

Almqvist

Feldman

Bulik

C. M.

Lichtenstein

D’Onofrio

Kuja-Halkola

Larsson

(2019). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, school performance, and effect of medication. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 58(4), 423–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.11.014

57.

Jensen

D. A.

Halmøy

Stubberud

Haavik

Lundervold

A. J.

Sørensen

(2021). An exploratory investigation of goal management training in adults with ADHD: Improvements in inhibition and everyday functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 659480. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.659480

58.

Joët

Usher

E. L.

Bressoux

(2011). Sources of self-efficacy: An investigation of elementary school students in France. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3), 649–663. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024048

59.

Johns-Mead

Vijayakumar

Mulraney

Melvin

Youssef

Sciberras

Anderson

A. A.

Nicholson

J. M.

Efron

Hazel

Silk

T. J.

(2023). Categorical and dimensional approaches to the developmental relationship between ADHD and irritability. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 64(10), 1422–1431. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13818

60.

Jung

K. S.

(2024). The relations of social competence and mental well-being by perception of giftedness in gifted students. High Ability Studies, 35(2), 107–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2023.2300415

61.

Kanapathy

binti Hamuzan

H. A.

Menon

Woon

Y. H.

(2022). Gifted and talented students “underachievement” and intervention: A case study. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 3(5), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2022.3.5.453

62.

Kappi

Martel

(2022). Parental barriers in seeking mental health services for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children: Systematic review. Journal of Attention Disorders, 26(3), 408–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054720986909

63.

Kaufman

J. C.

Plucker

J. A.

Russell

C. M.

(2012). Identifying and assessing creativity as a component of giftedness. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(1), 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282911428196

64.

Kaufmann

Nuerk

H. C.

(2006). Interference effects in a numerical Stroop paradigm in 9-to 12-year-old children with ADHD-C. Child Neuropsychology, 12(3), 223–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297040500477483

65.

Kessler

R. C.

Adler

Ames

Demler

Faraone

Hiripi

E. V. A.

Howes

J. I. N. R.

Secnik

Spencer

Ustun

T. B.

Walters

E. E.

(2005). The world health organization adult ADHD self-report scale (ASRS): A short screening scale for use in the general population. Psychological Medicine, 35(2), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291704002892

66.

Kline

R. B.

(2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.

67.

Korkmaz

Ilhan

Bardakci

(2018). An investigation of self-efficacy, locus of control, and academic procrastination as predictors of academic achievement in students diagnosed as gifted and non-gifted. Online Submission, 4(7), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1253353

68.

Koutroubas

Galanakis

(2022). Bandura’s social learning theory and its importance in the organizational psychology context. Psychology, 12(6), 315–322. https://doi.org/10.17265/2159-5542/2022.06.001

69.

Kuznetsova

Liashenko

Zhozhikashvili

Arsalidou

(2024). Giftedness identification and cognitive, physiological and psychological characteristics of gifted children: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1411981. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1411981

70.

Kyaruzi

(2023). Impact of gender on sources of students’ self-efficacy in mathematics in Tanzanian secondary schools. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 11(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2021.1945512

71.

Langberg

J. M.

Epstein

J. N.

Altaye

Molina

B. S.

Arnold

L. E.

Vitiello

(2008). The transition to middle school is associated with changes in the developmental trajectory of ADHD symptomatology in young adolescents with ADHD. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 37(3), 651–663. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374410802148095

72.

Lee

K. M.

Olenchak

F. R.

(2015). Individuals with a gifted/attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder diagnosis: Identification, performance, outcomes, and interventions. Gifted Education International, 31(3), 185–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429414530712

73.

Leikin

Kloss

(2011). Mathematical creativity of 8th and 10th grade students. In Proceedings of the 7th conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1084–1093). European Society for Research in Mathematics Education.

74.

Leikin

Lev

(2013). Mathematical creativity in generally gifted and mathematically excelling adolescents: What makes the difference? ZDM, 45, 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0460-8

75.

Lewin

(2021). Self-efficacy, motivation, and academic success: Learners with ADHD in online universities [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Walden University.

76.

Luman

Van Meel

C. S.

Oosterlaan

Geurts

H. M.

(2012). Reward and punishment sensitivity in children with ADHD: Validating the sensitivity to punishment and sensitivity to reward questionnaire for children (SPSRQ-C). Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 40, 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-011-9547-x

77.

Mahatmya

Assouline

Foley-Nicpon

Ali

S. R.

McGinnis

Teriba

(2023). Patterns of high ability and underrepresented students’ subject-specific psychosocial strengths: A latent profile analysis. High Ability Studies, 34(2), 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2023.2176293

78.

Major

Martinussen

Wiener

(2013). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning in adolescents with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Learning and Individual Differences, 27, 149–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.06.009

79.

Malpass

J. R.

O'Neil

H. F.

Hocevar

Jr (1999). Self-regulation, goal orientation, self-efficacy, worry, and high-stakes math achievement for mathematically gifted high school students. Roeper Review, 21(4), 281–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199909553976

80.

McCoach

D. B.

Siegle

Rubenstein

L. D.

(2020). Pay attention to inattention: Exploring ADHD symptoms in a sample of underachieving gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 64(2), 100–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986219901320

81.

Mezzanotte

(2020). Policy approaches and practices for the inclusion of students with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (NIH publication no. papers no. 238). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/49af95e0-en.pdf?expires=1701116259&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=30EF998C39EB9E1207A726166CBAB86A

82.

Midgley

Kaplan

Middleton

Maehr

M. L.

Urdan

Anderman

L. H.

Anderman

Roeser

(1998). The development and validation of scales assessing students’ achievement goal orientations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23(2), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.0965

83.

Midgley

Maehr

M. L.

Hruda

L. Z.

Anderman

Freeman

K. E.

Urdan

(2000). Manual for the patterns of adaptive learning scales. University of Michigan.

84.

Miller

N. V.

Johnston

C. J.

Pasalich

D. S.

(2014). Parenting and conduct problems: Moderation by child empathy. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 36, 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9366-1

85.

Ministry of Education in Israel. (2019). Unique learning frameworks for gifted students [Circular of the Director General]. https://apps.education.gov.il/mankal/horaa.aspx?siduri=242

86.

Ministry of Education in Israel. (2024). Gifted—Definitions and characteristics [Circular of the Director General]. https://parents.education.gov.il/prhnet/gifted/gifted-characteristics/gifted-characteristics

87.

Ministry of Health. (2024, August 20). ADHD—Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Department of Child Development and Rehabilitation. https://www.gov.il/he/pages/children-adhd

88.

Mohammadi

Khanjani

(2021). The comparison of sensitivity to punishment and reward and accident proneness in ADHD and SCT children. Rooyesh-e-ravanshenasi Journal, 10(5), 185–194.

89.

Murphy

Walker

(2015). Introduction and definitions of giftedness in the early years. In Margrain

Murphy

Dean

(Eds.), Giftedness in the early years: Informing, learning & teaching (pp. 1–13). NZCER Press.

90.

National Institute of Mental Health. (2022). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Transforming the Understanding and Treatment of Mental Illnesses. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/attention-deficit-hyperactivity-disorder-adhd

91.

Newark

P. E.

Elsässer

Stieglitz

R. D.

(2016). Self-esteem, self-efficacy, and resources in adults with ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 20(3), 279–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054712459561

92.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2022). Education at a glance 2022: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en

93.

O’Neill

Rajendran

Mahbubani

S. M.

Halperin

J. M.

(2017). Preschool predictors of ADHD symptoms and impairment during childhood and adolescence. Current Psychiatry Reports, 19, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-017-0853-z

94.

Ozcan

Kontas

Unisen

(2021). Sources of mathematics self-efficacy of gifted and non-gifted students in high school. Research in Pedagogy, 11(1), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.5937/IstrPed2101085O

95.

Özcan

Kültür

Y. Z.

(2021). The relationship between sources of mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics test and course achievement in high school seniors. Sage Open, 11(3), Article 1040124. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211040124

96.

Pajares

(1996). Self-efficacy beliefs and mathematical problem-solving of gifted students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(4), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0025

97.

Pajares

Kranzler

(1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general mental ability in mathematical problem-solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20(4), 426–443. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1995.1029

98.

Payen

Chen

M. J.

Carter

T. G.

Kilmer

R. P.

Bennett

J. M.

(2022). Childhood ADHD, going beyond the brain: A meta-analysis on peripheral physiological markers of the heart and the gut. Frontiers in Endocrinology, 13, Article 738065. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2022.738065

99.

Pearson

Haycraft

Johnston

J. P.

Atkin

A. J.

(2017). Sedentary behaviour across the primary-secondary school transition: A systematic review. Preventive Medicine, 94, 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.11.010

100.

Persson

R. S.

(2009). The elusive muse: Understanding musical giftedness. In Shavinina

L. V.

(Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 727–749). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6162-2_36

101.

Phipps

(2023). A mixed-method analysis of self-efficacy for speaking with university EFL learners. The Language Learning Journal, 52(6), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2023.2227866

102.

Porter

S. R.

Whitcomb

M. E.

(2005). Non-response in student surveys: The role of demographics, engagement and personality. Research in Higher Education, 46, 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-1597-2

103.

Reis

S. M.

Renzulli

S. J.

Renzulli

J. S.

(2021). Enrichment and gifted education pedagogy to develop talents, gifts, and creative productivity. Education Sciences, 11(10), Article 615. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100615

104.

Renzulli

J. S.

(2004). Introduction to identification of students for gifted and talented programs. In Renzulli

J. S.

(Ed.), Identification of students for gifted and talented programs (pp. xxiii–xxxiv). Corwin Press and the National Association for Gifted Children.

105.

Renzulli

J. S.

Delcourt

M. A.

(1986). The legacy and logic of research on the identification of gifted persons. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(1), 20–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628603000104

106.

Riga

Malafantis

(2023). Gifted Students within the Greek educational context: Challenges and perspectives in the frame of contemporary inclusive European education. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 4(1), 112–118. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.1.568

107.

Rutigliano

Quarshie

(2021). Policy approaches and initiatives for the inclusion of gifted students in OECD countries (NIH publication no. paper no. 262). OECD. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/c3f9ed87-en.pdf?expires=1701121913&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=209C109E4F630669CD9D491893FDCAE5

108.

Sarıtaş

M. T.

Olpak

(2022). Examining the relationship between gifted students’ self-efficacy perceptions of information technology and their motivation towards e-learning environments. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 3(5), 61–66. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2022.3.5.449

109.

Sarid

Lipka

(2023). The relationship between academic self-efficacy and class engagement of self-reported LD and ADHD in Israeli undergraduate students during COVID-19. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-023-00677-6

110.

Schmidt-Barad

Asheri

Margalit

(2023). Memories and self-efficacy among adults with attention deficit disorder symptoms. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 38(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2021.2017146

111.

Shaunessy

Suldo

S. M.

Hardesty

R. B.

Shaffer

E. J.

(2006). School functioning and psychological well-being of international baccalaureate and general education students a preliminary examination. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(2), 76–89. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2006-683

112.

Shemi

(2022). A review of the literature and policy on current knowledge of processes for identifying gifted students. Israel Press. (In Hebrew). https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=947412449750139&id=100034441792138&set=a.651541149337272

113.

Sherman

Rasmussen

Baydala

(2008). The impact of teacher factors on achievement and behavioural outcomes of children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): A review of the literature. Educational Research, 50(4), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880802499803

114.

Somma

Adler

L. A.

Gialdi

Arteconi

Cotilli

Fossati

(2021). The validity of the world health organization adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder self-report screening scale for diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fifth edition in adolescence. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, 31(9), 631–638. https://doi.org/10.1089/cap.2020.0158

115.

Somma

Borroni

Fossati

(2019). Construct validity and diagnostic accuracy of the Italian translation of the 18-Item World Health Organization Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS-18) Italian translation in a sample of community-dwelling adolescents. Psychiatry Research, 273, 753–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.02.016

116.

Sonnby

Skordas

Olofsdotter

Vadlin

Nilsson

K. W.

Ramklint

(2015). Validation of the world health organization adult ADHD self-report scale for adolescents. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 69(3), 216–223. https://doi.org/10.3109/08039488.2014.972454

117.

Tourreix

Besançon

Gonthier

(2023). Non-cognitive specificities of intellectually gifted children and adolescents: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Intelligence, 11(7), Article 141. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11070141

118.

Uchida

Driscoll

DiSalvo

Rajalakshmim

Maiello

Spera

Biederman

(2021). Assessing the magnitude of risk for ADHD in offspring of parents with ADHD: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Journal of Attention Disorders, 25(13), 1943–1948. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054720950815

119.

Usher

E. L.

Pajares

(2006). Sources of academic and self-regulatory efficacy beliefs of entering middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(2), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.03.002

120.

Usher

E. L.

Pajares

(2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the literature and future directions. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 751–796. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308321456

121.

Usher

E. L.

Pajares

(2009). Sources of self-efficacy in mathematics: A validation study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.09.002

122.

Uvaas

McKevitt

B. C.

(2013). Improving transitions to high school: A review of current research and practice. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 57(2), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2012.664580

123.

Van de Glind

van den Brink

Koeter

M. W.

Carpentier

P. J.

van Emmerik-van Oortmerssen

Kaye

Skutle

E. T.

Franck

Konstenius

Moggi

Dom

Verspreet

Demetrovics

Kapitány-Fövény

Fatséas

Auriacombe

Schillinger

Seitz

I. A. S. P.

, & Research Group. (2013). Validity of the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) as a screener for adult ADHD in treatment seeking substance use disorder patients. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 132(3), 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.04.010

124.

van Lieshout

Luman

Buitelaar

Rommelse

N. N. J.

Oosterlaan

(2013). Does neurocognitive functioning predict future or persistence of ADHD? A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(4), 539–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.02.003

125.

van Rens

Groot

Haelermans

(2020). (How) does information provided by children affect the transition from primary to secondary school? Child Indicators Research, 13(1), 105–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-019-09646-2

126.

van Rens

Haelermans

Groot

Maassen van den Brink

(2018). Facilitating a successful transition to secondary school: (How) does it work? A systematic literature review. Adolescent Research Review, 3, 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-017-0063-2

127.

VanTassel-Baska

Brown

(2022). An analysis of stakeholder perceptions of gifted programs: A report card on gifted program performance. Gifted Child Today, 45(3), 160–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175221091859

128.

Vold

J. H.

Halmøy

Chalabianloo

Pierron

M. C.

Løberg

E. M.

Johansson

K. A.

Fadnes

L. T.

(2023). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms and their relation to diagnosed ADHD, sociodemographic characteristics, and substance use among patients receiving opioid agonist therapy: A Norwegian cohort study. BMC Psychiatry, 23(1), Article 479. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-023-04980-w

129.

Waddington

(2023). Self-efficacy: English language teaching. ELT Journal, 77, 2237–2240. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccac046

130.

Waite

Buchanan

Leahy

(2022). Assessing ADHD symptoms among young adults in the university with the ASRA v1. 1: Examining associations with social anxiety and self-efficacy. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 69(5), 1631–1644. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2020.1825643

131.

Walker

I. J.

Nordin-Bates

S. M.

Redding

(2011). Characteristics of talented dancers and age group differences: Findings from the UK Centres for advanced training. High Ability Studies, 22(1), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2011.597587

132.

Webb

J. T.

(2005). Misdiagnosis and dual diagnoses of gifted children and adults: ADHD, bipolar, OCD, Asperger’s, depression, and other disorders. Great Potential Press.

133.

Whitaker

A. M.

Bell

T. S.

Houskamp

B. M.

O’Callaghan

E. T.

(2015). A neurodevelopmental approach to understanding memory processes among intellectually gifted youth with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 4(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2013.790821

134.

Yildiz

Özdemir

(2019). Mathematics self-efficacy beliefs and sources of self-efficacy: A descriptive study with two elementary school students. International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(3), 194–206. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.193.14

135.

Young

Adamo

Ásgeirsdóttir

B. B.

Branney

Beckett

Colley

Cubbin

Deeley

Farrag

Gudjonsson

Hill

Hollingdale

Kilic

Lloyd

Mason

Paliokosta

Perecherla

Sedgwick

Skirrow

Woodhouse

(2020). Females with ADHD: An expert consensus statement taking a lifespan approach providing guidance for the identification and treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in girls and women. BMC Psychiatry, 20(1), Article 404. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02707-9

136.

Zahed

Rezaiisharif

Shokri

(2019). The comparison of academic engagement, emotional creativity and academic self-efficacy in gifted male and female students. Journal of Counseling Research, 18(71), 100–120. https://doi.org/10.29252/jcr.18.71.100

137.

Zimmerman

B. J.

Bandura

Martinez-Pons

(1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663–676. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312029003663

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.15 MB