identification

19 September 2022

Advances in neuroimaging techniques have significantly enhanced our ability to study differences in cognitive efficiency in children and adolescents. However, these studies have traditionally used intelligence quotient (IQ) as the sole measure of cognitive ability. Talent development experts are increasingly drawing attention to the major limitations of exclusively using this measure to identify the variables associated with giftedness, in terms of the validity of the construct they intend to measure and in respect of the measurement’s reliability and stability. The aim of this study is to analyse whether the construct of intelligence on which recent neuroimaging studies are based, the type of instrument used to quantify giftedness and the corresponding neurobiological results are consistent with the advances made by differential pedagogy in respect of the multidimensional construct of intelligence. To this end, a systematic review both of neuroimaging research that seeks to explain the neural correlates of giftedness in children and adolescents, on the one hand, and of research focussing more prominently on the field of giftedness development, on the other, has been carried out. The findings suggest that brain networks and dynamics associated with creativity and motivation may have a bearing on cognitive performance variability. However, as the majority of neuroimaging studies continue to use IQ as the sole measure of intellectual ability, most of the data produced by these studies cannot be generalised for the purpose of determining what differential pedagogy experts refer to as “giftedness”.

 


 

Please, cite this article as follows: Gómez-León, M. I. (2022). Alta capacidad intelectual desde la neuroimagen y la pedagogía diferencial. ¿Hablamos de lo mismo? | Giftedness from the perspective of neuroimaging and differential pedagogy. Are we talking about the same thing? Revista Española de Pedagogía, 80 (283), 451-473. https://doi.org/10.22550/REP80-3-2022-02