Accuracy, speed, flexibility, and metacognitive knowledge were studied in 19 school-identified gifted and 11 average ability 11-year-old students. The most intet-esting result was a significant three-way interaction among giftedness, speed, and flexibility, with metacognitive knowledge as the criterion. Regardless of speed, rigid (inflexible) gifted children had less metacognitive knowledge than flexible gifted children. Flexible gifted children who solved the problems quickly had more metacognitive knowledge than those who solved them slowly. Among average children, rigid subjects had less metacognitive knowledge, regardless of speed, and flexible average children showed more metacognitive knowledge when they were slower on the problems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Atwood, M.E., & Polson, P.G. (1976) A process model for water jug problems. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 191-216.
2.
Bakan, R. (1955). An analysis of two instruments used to measure rigidity in problem solving. Unpublished master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
3.
Benedetti, D.T., & Douglass, H.O. (1953, April). An exploratory study of rigidity in problem-solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Rocky Mountain Branch of the American Psychological Association, Albuquerque, NM
4.
Brown, A.L. (1977). Metacognitive development and reading In R. J. Spiro, B. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 453-482). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
Bruner, J.S. (1963/1960). The process of education. New York: Vintage. ( Boston: Harvard University Press.)
6.
Davidson, J.E., & Sternberg, R.J. (1984). The role of insight in intellectual giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28, 58-64.
7.
Freehill, M.F. (1982). Gifted children. Their psychology and education . Ventura, CA: Office of the Ventura County Superintendent of Schools for the National/ State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and Talented.
8.
Garofalo, J., & Lester, F.K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education , 16, 163-176.
9.
Horowitz, F. D., & O'Brien, M. (Eds.) (1985). The gifted and talented: Developmental perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
10.
Kantowski. M.G. (1981). Problem solving. In E. Fennema (Ed.), Mathematics education research: Implications for the 80s (pp. 90-99) Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
11.
King, E. M. (Ed.) (1968). Teachers' manual: Canadian Tests of Basic Skills. Don Mills, ON: Nelson.
12.
Krutetskii, V.A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in school children. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
Lajoie, S.P., & Shore, B.M. (1986). Intelligence: The speed and accuracy tradeoff in high aptitude individuals. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 9, 85-104.
14.
Lester, F.K. (1982). Building bridges between psychological and mathematics education research on problem solving. In F. K. Lester & J. Garofalo (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving: Issues in research (pp. 51-85). Philadelphia : Franklin Institute Press.
15.
Levitt, E.E. (1956). The water jug Einstellung test as a measure of rigidityPsychological Bulletin,53, 347-370.
Luchins, A.S. (1942). Mechanization in problem solving. Psychological Monographs, 54(6), whole no. 248.
18.
Luchins, A.S. (1951). On recent usage of the Einstellung effect as a test of rigidity. Journal of Consulting Psychology. 15, 89-94.
19.
Luchins, A.S., & Luchins, E.H. (1959). Rigidity of behavior. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Books.
20.
Martinson, R.A. (1979). The identification of gifted and talented. Reston. VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
21.
Meer, B. (1952) The effect of ego-oriented and task-oriented instructions and personality differences upon problem solving behavior. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
22.
Mortensen, U. (1973). Models for some elementary problem solving processes . In A. Elithorn & D. Jones (Eds.), Artificial and human thinking (pp. 252-263). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23.
Schoenfeld, A.H. (1982a, March). Beyond the purely cognitive: Metacognition and social cognition as driving forces in intellectual performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
24.
Schoenfeld, A.H. (1982b). Some thoughts on problem-solving research and mathematics education. In F. K. Lester & J. Garofalo (Eds ), Mathematical problem solving: Issues in research (pp. 25-37). Philadelphia : Franklin Institute Press.
25.
Shore. B.M., & Dover. A. (1987). Metacognition, intelligence, and giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly. 31, 37-39.
26.
Silver, E.A. (1982). Knowledge organization and mathematical problem solving. In F. K. Lester & J. Garofalo (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving: Issues in research (pp. 15-25). Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Press.
27.
Sternberg, R.J. (1982). A componential approach to intellectual development . In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol 1) (pp. 413-463). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28.
Sternberg, R. J.. & Davidson. J. E. (Eds.) (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Taylor, D.W., & McNemar, O.W. (1955). Problem solving and thinking. Annual Review ofPsychology. 6, 455-482.
30.
Warren. H.C. (1934). Dictionary of psychologyBoston : Houghton Mifflin.
31.
Woodrum, D.T. (1979). A comparison of problem-solving performances for 4th, 5th, and 6th grade children classified as normal, gifted or learning disabled and by focusing level and conceptual tempo. Dissertation Abstracts International. 39(11-A), 6708-6709.
