assignment 1_2016 for bonieta123

The Role of Optimism, Self-Esteem, Academic Self-Efficacy and Gender in High-Ability Students

Christopher Tan • Liang See Tan

Published online: 27 October 2013

� De La Salle University 2013

Abstract Optimism is a positive psychological trait which

may help individuals to cope with stressful and adverse sit-

uations. This study examined the associations of disposi-

tional optimism, academic self-efficacy, self-esteem, and

gender on high-ability students’ stress perception of aca-

demic expectations. 298 high-ability senior high school

students in Singapore participated in this study by complet-

ing a self-report questionnaire. Results revealed a significant

negative association between optimism and academic stress

perception among students. There were significant variations

among variables, gender, self-esteem, academic self-effi-

cacy and dispositional optimism, in predicting the two

dimensions of academic expectations stress among high-

ability adolescents. Possible explanations for the results were

suggested and implications of the findings were discussed.

Keywords Optimism � Academic self-efficacy � Self-esteem � Academic expectation stress � High-ability adolescents

Introduction

Personal talent is defined as an exceptional ability to select

and attain difficult life goals that fit one’s interests,

abilities, values, and social contexts (Moon 2001). Essen-

tially personal talent is the developed expertise in self-

understanding, decision making, and self-regulation. The

individual with personal talent understands his or her

strengths and weaknesses; makes good decisions; has clear,

high level goals for his or her life and is successful in

achieving those goals even when faced with setbacks along

the way. People with personal talent experience high levels

of life satisfaction and well-being, and they are self-

actualizing.

In order to maximize their potential, self-actualize and

build satisfying lives, gifted and high-ability students need

personal talent. These high-ability individuals have multiple

talents and so may need sophisticated skills in managing

competing priorities and goals, an aspect of personal talent.

According to Moon (2003), personal talent knowledge and

skills can be learned and facilitate many positive life out-

comes. Knowledge derived from psychological research

programs which investigated dispositions such as optimism

(Buchanan and Seligman 1995; Peterson 2000; Scheier and

Carver 1992; Seligman 1995) and self-efficacy (Bandura

1997) can facilitate the development of personal talents.

Such disposition plays an important role in building per-

sonal talents skills needed for well-being outcomes which

eventually will lead to happiness and life satisfaction.

Not only should cognitive and intellectual development

be emphasized for the high-ability students, but due con-

sideration should also be given to the social-emotional

needs of gifted and highly able students (Silverman 1990).

As intensity, sensitivity and overexcitability are primary

characteristics of the highly gifted (Lind 2000; Piechowski

1999; Silverman 1993, 2008), stressors arising from life

events may bring about heightened sensitivity and internal

responsiveness, leading to intensity in emotions, behav-

iours and reactions to the ordinary problems of growing up

C. Tan (&) Ministry of Education; National Institute of Education,

Singapore, Singapore

e-mail: [email protected]

L. S. Tan

Office of Educational Research (OER), National Institute of

Education, Nanyang Technological University, NIE5-B3-16,

1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616, Singapore

e-mail: [email protected]

123

Asia-Pacific Edu Res (2014) 23(3):621–633

DOI 10.1007/s40299-013-0134-5

(Silverman 1983; Whitmore 1980), making the high-ability

students vulnerable to a variety of adjustment difficulties

(Roedell 1984).

There is, however, a paucity of research about the role

of psychological dispositions in high-achieving youth and

gifted learners on academic stressors, with only a few

investigations considering the unique coping responses of

these populations of students (Preuss and Dubow 2004;

Suldo et al. 2008). Studying a subset of these older intel-

lectually gifted high school students in the Singapore

context can provide much-needed information about the

role of psychological dispositions on these learners’ stress

perceptions and the ways they cope with academic stress.

Optimism

Optimism has been well-documented as a construct that

represents a robust, trait-like psychological factor (see Lai

1995; Lipkus et al. 1993; Scheier and Carver 1985; Scheier

et al. 1994). Optimism reflects an individual’s expectation

of a positive outcome in most situations (Scheier and

Carver 1985). Scheier and Carver (1992) further defined a

personality variable known as dispositional optimism: the

global expectation that good things will be plentiful in the

future and bad things, scarce. It refers to the extent to

which individuals expect a good outcome to occur rather

than a bad outcome. Dispositional optimism is a tendency

of an individual to hold generalized positive expectancies

even ‘‘when people confront adversity or difficulty in their

lives’’ (Scheier et al. 2000, p. 191). These generalized

expectancies are applicable to the entire life domain of the

individuals. Thus dispositional optimism is the belief that

one will tend to experience good outcomes in life.

Optimism can be measured by asking individuals to

indicate the extent to which they believe their future out-

comes will be good or bad. For the optimist, there is an

expectancy that good outcomes will occur even when one

is confronted with major obstacles (Scheier and Carver

1985). Optimists are people who tend to hold positive

expectancies for their future, while pessimists are people

who tend to hold more negative expectations for the future.

Optimal development in children and adolescents

requires shaping and maintaining an optimistic style of

interpreting the experiences of success and failure. Emo-

tional health, social competence, and high achievement in

students can be promoted through teaching them how to

think positively about day-to-day events in their lives

(Seligman 1998). Meanings they give to situations that go

well or that do not go well, and how they think about the

causes of positive and negative events in their lives, will go

far in determining how optimistic and positive they are of

their future. Optimism influences how people perceive

events in their lives which in turn affect their subjective

experiences when confronting problems. It also influences

the actions people employ in dealing with these problems.

Both optimists and pessimists differ in how they approach

the problems and challenges, and the manner in which they

handled adversity in lives (Carver and Scheier 2002).

Benefits of Optimism in Academic Setting

There is a huge and growing body of evidence which

demonstrates that expectancies about the future impact

well-being in the present, in physical health, psychological

well-being, stressful situations and events in life such as

college transition and examinations (Andersson 1996). In

terms of physiological benefits of optimism, research has

found that there was less physical symptomology among

undergraduates during the stressful final weeks of a

semester (Scheier and Carver 1985). Moreover, optimistic

first-year law students tended to display better mood and a

more robust immune system than their pessimistic coun-

terparts (Segerstrom et al. 1998).

Optimism has also been identified as a valuable psy-

chological and emotional resource that is associated with

enhanced mental health (Seligman 1998). It has been

linked to desirable outcomes such as good morale,

achievement orientation and improved health (Chemers

et al. 2000; Peterson 2000; Taylor et al. 2000). There is

also empirical evidence to support the argument that

positive emotions associated with optimism actually

broaden intellectual, physical and social resources (Fred-

erikson 1998). This supports the notion that optimism helps

individuals to persist in the face of failure (Seligman 1995).

In addition, optimism brings about constructive behav-

iours and positive attitudes. Studies have shown that opti-

mistic disposition is a strong predictor of successful

adaptation to stressful encounters and is also related to

positive adjustment (Ben-Zur et al. 2000; Herman-Stahl

and Peterson, 1996). Optimism is inversely related to dis-

positional and state anxiety, and positively related to

expected performance and self-efficacy, for example, in its

positive impact on performance and adjustment in the first

year of college, where optimistic students are most likely to

hold higher expectations partly because they trusted in their

own capabilities and viewed their environment as less

threatening, and they tended to perceive their worlds in

ways that were more likely to result in successful adjust-

ment (Chemers et al. 2001). In particular, dispositional

optimism is found to be positively related to active and

effective coping with stress (Scheier et al. 1986). It is also

linked to flexible adaptive coping styles that include

planning and active, problem-focused coping strategies

(Carver et al. 1989; Scheier and Carver 1992). For

622 C. Tan, L. S. Tan

123

example, optimists are able to diminish problems through

positive reframing or reinterpretation and by seeking

emotional support from peers, parents or teachers (Bill-

ingsley et al. 1993). In their control-process model of

anxiety, Carver and Scheier (1988) suggested that people

with favourable expectancies for outcomes persist with

task demands, while unfavourable expectancies are asso-

ciated with the impulse to disengage from the task.

Optimism and Academic Expectation Stress

Across various events and situations, dispositional opti-

mism is found to be associated with better psychological

adjustment to stress factors, ranging from normal events

like entering college to extremely traumatic events such as

working at the site of an airplane crash (Aspinwall and

Taylor 1992; Dougall et al. 2001). According to Peterson

(2000), individuals who are optimistic experienced less

distress when dealing with difficulty or crises in their lives

than those who are pessimistic. Specifically in school,

optimistic students were found to adjust better and cope

better with school-related stress than students who were

pessimistic (Aspinwall and Taylor 1992). College students

who rated themselves high on optimism reported less

stress, depression, and loneliness. Pessimistic college stu-

dents, on the other hand, were more stressed, depressed and

lonely (Scheier and Carver 1992).

Optimism has been found to be predictive of perceived

stress. Two studies examined the role of optimism in

African-American students’ perception of stress. Baldwin

et al. (2003) and Ben-Zur (2003) found that students’

perception of stress was influenced by their level of opti-

mism. Optimism was found to be negatively correlated to

levels of perceived stress. Moreover, optimism buffered the

effects of stress. Students who were more optimistic about

their future tended to report less perceived stress than did

their pessimistic counterparts. Similarly, Huan et al. (2006)

on 430 secondary school students (13–16 years of age) in

Singapore, dispositional optimism was found to be a sig-

nificant predictor of overall academic stress, academic

stress that arose from self- and other-expectations. More-

over, gender was not a predictor of academic stress,

overall, self or other. This indicated that adolescents who

are optimistic tended to report less academic stress while

pessimistic adolescents reported greater academic stress. In

addition, in their longitudinal study of first-year university

students, Chemers et al. (2001) examined the effects of

optimism on students’ academic stress and found a strong

negative association between optimism and perception of

academic stress. In short, there is enough evidence to show

that dispositional optimism and pessimism are significant

correlates of psychological well-being.

While school issues are generally a concern felt among

adolescents around the world, for Asian societies (e.g.,

Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore), the pressure to per-

form in school is even more acute (Friedman 1991; Isr-

alowitz and Ong 1990; Stark et al. 1989). A number of

studies on Singapore students revealed that the adolescents

face a highly stressful and competitive educational envi-

ronment. In a national survey of Singaporean youth, it was

found that majority of the 1,500 adolescents ranked edu-

cation to be the most stressful aspect of their lives (Ho and

Yip 2003). Academic stress comes from various sources. It

was found that Singapore adolescents experienced stress

arising from both their own expectations to excel in school

as well as those of their parents and teachers (Ang and

Huan 2006). Schoolwork pressure was reflected in the

stress felt by the students (Ho and Yip 2003; Isralowitz and

Ong 1990). ‘‘Being pressured to keep up with schoolwork’’

was ranked a major concern for some 220 Singapore school

students (Isralowitz and Ong 1990). Furthermore, Singap-

orean youths also ranked examination grades to be most

important, but indicated being the least satisfied with it (Ho

and Yip 2003). This finding suggests that while examina-

tion grades are considered to be highly important, these

adolescents felt that they could not attain standards that

were perceived to be satisfactory. In general, studies on

these adolescents indicated a close association between

negative consequences such as excessive stress and the

emphasis on academic excellence (Shek 1995).

Optimism and Self-Esteem

Optimism and self-esteem are both psychological attributes

which have positive impact on well-being of individuals.

Rosenberg’s (1965) definition, most cited in the literature,

described self-esteem as a ‘‘favorable or unfavorable atti-

tude toward the self’’ (p. 15). Self-esteem can be defined as

a generalized positive–negative attitude, thinking and

feeling, toward himself or herself. Self-esteem reflects a

person’s overall self-appraisal of his or her own worth

(Blascovich and Tomaka 1991). Self-esteem encompasses

both beliefs (e.g., ‘‘I am competent/incompetent’’) and

emotions (e.g., triumph/despair, pride/shame), which in

turn reflect self-esteem behaviourally (e.g., in assertive-

ness/timorousness, confidence/caution).

Studies have shown that individuals with low self-

esteem reported more physical health problems. Leitschuh

and Rawlins (1991) found that high self-regard scores and

high self-actualizing scores predicted better physical

health. Pritchard et al. (2007) found that a relationship

between self-esteem and negative moods, with individuals

possessing lower levels of self-esteem reporting more

negative moods. According to Scheier et al. (1994), self-

High-Ability Students 623

123

esteem has an element of the feelings of worth or the self’s

value which tie intrinsically with positive expectancies and

outcomes found in optimism, thus linking self-esteem

conceptually to optimism. Hence having a high self-esteem

and being optimistic may serve as buffers to health and

mental problems, especially in a competitive, challenging,

but often stressful learning environment.

Optimism and Academic Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy, a term associated with the work of Bandura,

refers to an individual’s sense of competence or ability in

general or in particular domains. Self-efficacy refers to

being able to picture what it is he or she wants to achieve at

the level he or she wants to achieve. Bandura (1982, 1986,

1989) differentiated between expectancies of self-efficacy

(one’s belief in one’s ability to perform a specific behav-

iour) and expectancies of outcome (one’s belief that a

specific behaviour will produce a desired outcome). Ban-

dura has characterized expectancies of efficacy, or self-

efficacy, as a stronger predictor of behaviour than outcome

expectancies.

According to Bandura (1997), self-efficacy refers to

people’s convictions about their own capabilities for suc-

cessfully executing a course of action that leads to a desired

outcome. In a similar vein, perceived academic self-effi-

cacy refers to a student’s beliefs about his or her ability to

successfully complete academic tasks such as preparing for

exams and writing term papers (Zimmerman 1995). Strong

associations between resiliency and an individual’s self-

efficacy and self-esteem are well-documented (Baldwin

et al. 1993; Brooks 1994; Rutter 1987; Werner 1997;

Wright and Masten 1997; Wolff 1995). Academic self-

efficacy has been found to be a significant predictor of

academic resilience, and its development involves

restructuring learning to maximize opportunities for suc-

cess, for example, through individualizing tasks where

possible (Schunk and Miller 2002), addressing and

enhancing students’ (negative) beliefs about themselves

and their academic capacities (Bandura 1997), and devel-

oping skills in effective goal setting (Locke and Latham

2002) that are likely to lead to success and which provide a

basis for enhancement of one’s self-efficacy.

Siddique et al. (2006) reported that optimism was pos-

itively associated with self-efficacy, such that the higher

the level of general optimism endorsed, the higher the level

of self-efficacy for taking examinations among the first-

year law undergraduates. This finding suggests it may be

relevant to investigate similar relationships between dis-

positional optimism and academic self-efficacy amongst

high-ability adolescents, who are striving for peak

performance.

Objectives

Positive psychological traits have some grounds in opti-

mism. Studies have shown that dispositional optimism

associates positively with self-esteem and self-efficacy

(e.g., in El-Anzi 2005; Scheier et al. 1994; Siddique et al.

2006). Optimism is also associated with stress experienced

by individuals. There is a high correlation between opti-

mism and stress tolerance, suggesting that optimism may

be a significant factor in the ability to cope with stress (Bar-

On 2000). However, not only is there a dearth of research

on the relationship between optimism and academic

expectation stress with high school sample, but few studies

have also explored group differences (Ben-Zur 2003;

Chang 1996; Chang and Sanna 2003). Although there was

ample empirical evidence that showed the role of opti-

mistic disposition in predicting successful adjustment to

stressful situations in life (Ben-Zur et al. 2000; Herman-

Stahl and Peterson 1996), few studies have taken self-

esteem and academic self-efficacy as psychological

resources into consideration in predicting academic

expectations stress among high-ability students. The rela-

tionships between dispositional optimism and these psy-

chological traits for high-ability students in Singapore have

not been rigorously addressed in previous study. These

psychological traits may be related, and the degree in

which they are associated in this group of students is of

interest to be examined, so as to investigate if any simi-

larities or differences exist between the high-ability and the

average regular adolescents. This current study aims to

contribute to the existing literature in understanding how

these positive traits associate with psychological outcomes

like perceived academic stress amongst high-ability

adolescents.

The literature also illustrates mixed findings on self-

esteem and optimism in relation to gender. Some

researchers have identified that self-esteem and optimism

are higher in adolescent males (Birndorf et al. 2005; Puskar

et al. 1999; Sung et al. 2006), while others reported no

difference dependent on the level of development when

initially assessed (Heinonen et al. 2005). The literature also

revealed that male students perceived the collaborative

learning context more positively than the female students,

and thus were also more self-efficacious (Opare 2008).

This study strives to better understand the psychological

well-being and development of high-ability students

through a comparison of gender differences in optimism,

self-esteem, academic self-efficacy and academic stress

perception amongst these adolescents. It will be of interest

to compare these psychological variables between genders

for the high-ability adolescents. The findings can enhance

the understanding of the psychological needs of high-

ability adolescents, so as to make timely and effective

624 C. Tan, L. S. Tan

123

adjustment for socio-emotional growth. Having understood

these needs, it will allow administrators and educators to

fine-tune the curriculum to better meet the needs of the

students so as to bring out the best in each individual.

Although literature gave mixed reviews on how stress

affects the gifted and talented students, and that high-

ability learners, as a group, may have lower or no signifi-

cant difference in anxiety level as compared to the average-

ability learners (Neihart 1991), gifted teens rated pressure

to perform as stressful (Metha and McWhirter 1997). The

learning environment of high-ability students is often

competitive. Although they tend to endorse competitive

learning styles, these students may vary, from one to the

other, in how they view competition (Udvari and Schneider

2000), and the demand to perform both academically and

in non-academic activities can in itself be a stressful

experience. Furthermore, an increase in academic expec-

tations may increase school-related stress, contribute to

difficulty with rejection and failure (Kaplan et al. 2005),

and lead to avoidance of academic studies such as the

Advanced Placement courses (Dai 2000). Specifically, in

an Asian context, given the familial and cultural demands

for academic excellence, academic stress arising from

adolescents’ self-expectations and expectations of others

(e.g., parents and teachers) is particularly salient. Aca-

demic achievement is highly valued by Asians because it is

perceived as one of the few avenues for upward mobility

and expanded options, thus the significance that individuals

and families attribute to academic success is intensified

(Gloria and Ho 2003; Sue and Okazaki 1990). Not meeting

one’s own expectations and that of significant others is a

serious matter which could potentially result in loss of face

which in turn leads to loss of confidence and support from

one’s family (Yeh and Huang 1996). Therefore, children

are socialized from young to be hypersensitive to the

judgment of others, especially significant others such as

parents or teachers. Since optimism has a role in academic

setting (Chemers et al. 2000; Peterson 2000; Taylor et al.

2000), and stress related to academic expectations is found

to be salient in the Asian context, current study attempts to

extend the research and understanding of the influence and

role of optimism, together with self-esteem and academic

self-efficacy, in academic stress as experienced by ado-

lescents from the perspective of high-ability learners.

In view of this, three research foci were mapped out in

this study. First, the study aims to examine the associations

of optimism, self-esteem, academic self-efficacy, and aca-

demic stress perception among high-ability adolescents.

Second, the study aims to investigate gender differences in

dispositional optimism, self-esteem, academic self-efficacy

and academic stress perception. Third, this research

explores the contributions of gender and these psychological

variables make in predicting academic stress perception.

The purpose of this study can be crystallized into the

following three research questions:

1. What are the correlations between dispositional opti-

mism, self-esteem, academic self-efficacy and aca-

demic stress perceptions, in high-ability adolescents?

2. Are there any gender differences, in terms of opti-

mism, academic stress, and other positive traits such as

self-esteem and academic self-efficacy, amongst the

high-ability learners in the senior high school?

3. What is the influence of dispositional optimism, self-

esteem, academic self-efficacy and gender, on the

perception of academic stress in high-ability students?

Method

Participants

The participants in this study were 298 Grade 12 students

from a senior high school which caters to the high-ability

students in Singapore. Students are selected for Singa-

pore’s premier high schools through the 1 Direct School

Admission (DSA) programme on the basis of their per-

formance in selection test, which consists of a general

ability test, as well as their performance on a Grade 6 high-

stake national examination, the primary school leaving

examination (PSLE), which all Grade 6 students complete.

The students participating in this study are amongst the

nation’s top 3 % of their cohort based on achievement in

PSLE. Although the PSLE is an achievement test, the

students in this study all have top PSLE scores, and

amongst them are many DSA students.

The sample was made up of mainly students of the

Chinese ethnicity (90 %), with the remaining 10 % of other

ethnic origins. The gender distribution of the sample was

48 % male (n = 143) and 52 % female (n = 155). The

mean age of the participants was 17.8 years. Detailed

breakdown of the gender and ethnicity data is shown in

Table 1.

Procedures

Permission to conduct the paper–pencil survey during

curriculum hours was granted by the Principal. Although

written consent was not obtained from the students nor

1 Direct School Admission (DSA) is an admission exercise to allow

participating schools to select Grade 6/Primary 6 students for

admission to Grade 7/Secondary 1 based on their achievements and

talents before the PSLE results are released. Majority of the DSA

students admitted to the premiere high school are from the Gifted

Education Programme (GEP). They must clear the General Ability

Test before being admitted directly to the school.

High-Ability Students 625

123

their parents or guardians, it was however made known to

the students and the tutors that participation in the study

was absolutely voluntary and that they could opt out of this

study any time. Thirteen tutors were recruited and briefed

on the nature of the study and administrative protocol.

Curriculum time was negotiated to complete the survey.

Participants were given 50 minutes to complete the survey.

Data for this study were collected over a period of 3 weeks.

Measures

The research instrument used in this study is a self-report

questionnaire which was constructed by combining exist-

ing instruments available in the literature. All the items on

the survey were rated on a 6-point Likert scale, with 1

being strongly disagree and 6 being strongly agree.

Measure of Dispositional Optimism

The revised life orientation test (LOT-R; Scheier et al.

1994) is a revision of the life orientation test (LOT) orig-

inally developed by Scheier and Carver (1985). The LOT-

R was used to measure the level of dispositional optimism

in the participants in this study. It was designed to measure

generalized outcome expectancies, with higher scores

indicating a more optimistic overall outlook on life

(Scheier and Carver 1985). The 10-item LOT-R consists of

three items assessing optimism, which are worded posi-

tively (e.g., ‘‘I’m always optimistic about my future’’), and

three reversed-scored items that measure pessimism, which

are worded negatively (e.g., ‘‘If something can go wrong

for me, it will.’’), as well as four filler items that disguise

the underlying purpose of the test. Positive expectations are

usually combined with (reverse-scored) negative expecta-

tions, and the resulting measure is investigated with respect

to academic stress perception, resilience, and other vari-

ables. The LOT-R used in this study measures optimism

unidimensionally. Scheier et al. (1994) reported an internal

consistency reliability of 0.78 and a 28-month test/retest

reliability of 0.79 for the LOT-R. The alpha coefficient of

the LOT-R was 0.74.

Measure of Self-Esteem

Rosenberg’s 5-item Self-esteem scale (Rosenberg 1965)

was used in the study. The scale generally has high reli-

ability; test–retest correlations are typically in the range of

0.82–0.88, and the Cronbach’s alpha for various samples is

in the range of 0.77–0.88 (Blascovich and Tomaka 1991).

The instrument seeks to reflect the person’s general expe-

rience about his/her abilities and evaluation of his/her

personal characteristics. Sample items in the measure

include: ‘‘On the whole, I am satisfied with myself’’, and ‘‘I

feel I am a person of worth, at least on an equal standing

with others’’. The scale has an alpha coefficient of 0.89.

Measure of Academic Self-Efficacy

The measure was adapted and modified from the 5-item

Academic Self-Efficacy scale in the Manual for the pat-

terns of adaptive learning scales (PALS) (Midgley et al.

2000). The PALS has a basis in goal orientation theory and

was developed to examine the relation between the learn-

ing environment and students’ motivation, affect, and

behaviour. The academic self-efficacy scale assessed stu-

dents’ beliefs that they could master the material and skills

taught in school if they were given enough time and

exerted enough effort. A 7-item scale was used in this

study, which included five items in the original scale, with

two additional new items: ‘‘I am confident in getting

excellent grades for Chemistry assessments or tests’’ and

‘‘When I am introduced to a new Chemistry topic, I am

usually sure I will be able to learn it well’’. As all the

samples in this study offer Chemistry as one of the main

science subject, it was incorporated into the items in this

scale. Some other examples of the items in the scale

include: ‘‘I am certain I can learn Chemistry well in class

this year’’, and ‘‘Even if the work in Chemistry class is

hard, I can learn it.’’. The original instrument has a reli-

ability of 0.78. The alpha coefficient of the adapted mea-

sure was 0.90.

Measure of Academic Stress Perception

Academic expectations stress inventory (AESI) developed

by Ang and Huan (2006) was administered to measure the

level of academic stress arising from self- and other-

expectations (e.g., parents and teachers). The inventory

consists of two subscales: Self or Personal (4 items) and

Others (5 items). The Self (Personal) subscale assesses

adolescents’ academic stress that arises from their self-

expectations (e.g., ‘‘I feel stressed when I do not live up to

Table 1 Gender and ethnicity percentage of sample

Percentage (%)

Gender

Male 48.0

Female 52.0

Ethnicity

Chinese 90.3

Malay 2.7

Indian 4.7

Eurasian 0.7

Others 1.7

626 C. Tan, L. S. Tan

123

my own standards’’) while the Others subscale measures

the adolescents’ academic stress arising from expectations

placed on them by parents and teachers (e.g., ‘‘I feel I have

disappointed my parents when I do poorly in school’’). In

this study, the Overall or Total academic stress scale,

which is the total scores for both the Others and Self

subscales, was also measured. The AESI total scores

yielded a value of 0.86 while the other two subscale scores

yielded alpha values of 0.83 (self) and 0.84 (others).

Results

Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations

Table 2 presents descriptive statistics showing the mean,

standard deviations, observed range, reliabilities and

intercorrelations of the measures. The means for all the

measures ranged from 3.78 to 4.68, with standard deviation

ranging from 0.93 to 1.13. Cronbach’s alpha (a) ranging from 0.74 to 0.90, indicated good reliability of the scales.

Consistent with the literature, the associations among

optimism, self-esteem and academic self-efficacy were

positive. Optimism and self-esteem had negative associa-

tions with academic expectations stress. The correlation

between dispositional optimism and academic expectations

stress (self) was r = -0.20, p \ 0.001; the correlation between self-esteem and academic expectations stress

(self) and academic expectations stress (others) was r =

-0.17, p \ 0.001 and r = -0.14, p \ 0.001, respectively. Although academic self-efficacy had positive associations

with academic expectations stress, the coefficients were not

significant.

Gender Differences

Table 3 shows gender differences in dispositional opti-

mism, self-esteem, efficacy, and academic expectations

stress by using T tests. The sample in this study showed

that there is no gender difference in optimism. However,

males were found to be significantly higher than the

females in self-esteem, t(296) = 3.34, p \ 0.01, and aca- demic self-efficacy, t(296) = 3.88, p \ 0.001. The mean scores in the measures of self-esteem and academic self-

efficacy among male students were higher than that of

female students. Females, however, experienced signifi-

cantly higher academic expectation stress than males, from

expectations by self, t(296) = -2.85, p \ 0.01, by others, t(296) = -2.51, p \ 0.05, as well as in overall total, t(296) = -3.02, p \ 0.01. The results revealed that there

Table 2 Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations between the measures/variables

Measure/variable n Mean SD Observed

range

Cronbach’s

Alpha (a) Measure/variable

1 2 3 4a 4b 4c

1 Optimism 298 3.78 0.98 1–5 0.743 1 – – – – –

2 Self-esteem 298 4.26 0.93 1–5 0.888 0.48** 1 – – – –

3 Academic self-efficacy 298 4.06 1.05 1–5 0.901 0.27** 0.52** 1 – – –

4a Academic expectations stress (others) 298 4.18 1.13 1–5 0.844 -0.083 -0.17** 0.051 1 – –

4b Academic expectations stress (self) 298 4.68 1.03 1–5 0.828 -0.20** -0.14** 0.031 0.53** 1 –

4c Academic expectations stress (total) 298 4.39 0.96 1–5 0.860 -0.15** -0.18** 0.049 0.92** 0.82** 1

* p \ 0.05; ** p \ 0.01

Table 3 Means (M), Standard deviation (SD) and t ratio between high-ability male and female students

Measure/variable Male Female t df 95 % Confidence interval of the difference Cohen’s

M SD M SD Lower Upper d

1 Optimism 3.76 0.99 3.80 0.96 0.35 296 -0.262 0.184 -0.040

2 Self-esteem 4.44 0.90 4.09 0.92 3.34** 296 0.145 0.561 0.388

3 Academic self-efficacy 4.30 1.05 3.84 1.00 3.88*** 296 0.227 0.695 0.451

4a AESI (others) 4.01 1.19 4.33 1.04 -2.51* 296 -0.581 -0.0692 -0.292

4b AESI (self) 4.50 1.05 4.84 0.99 -2.85** 296 -0.571 -0.104 -0.331

4c AESI (total) 4.22 0.98 4.55 0.91 -3.02** 296 -0.545 -0.115 -0.351

AESI is the abbreviated form of academic expectation stress inventory; the scores of academic expectation stress (total) are the sum of the scores

of academic expectation stress (others) and academic expectation stress (self)

* p \ 0.05; ** p \ 0.01; *** p \ 0.001

High-Ability Students 627

123

were gender differences in perceived academic stress, and

that the female students experienced greater stress arising

from expectations from self, others and in total as com-

pared to the male students.

Predictors of Academic Expectation Stress:

Dispositional Optimism, Academic Self-Efficacy, Self-

Esteem and Gender

This section aims to examine the relative importance of

academic self-efficacy, self-esteem, dispositional opti-

mism, as well as gender, on the overall prediction model,

self- and others-academic stress experienced as shown in

Table 4.

The results of the simultaneous regression analysis

revealed that the independent variables of gender, aca-

demic self-efficacy, self-esteem and dispositional optimism

accounted for 7.3 % of the variance for academic stress

(others), F(4,293) = 5.809, p \ 0.000. The variables found to be significant predictors of academic stress that arose

from other-expectations include gender, t(293) = -2.53,

p \ 0.012, b = 0.148; academic self-efficacy, t(293) = 3.203, p \ 0.002, b = 0.213; and self-esteem, t(293) = -3.19, p \ 0.002, b = -0.233. Dispositional optimism was not predictive of academic stress that arises

from other-expectations, t(293) = -0.497, p = 0.62,

b = -0.032. As for academic expectations stress (self), except for

self-esteem, gender, academic self-efficacy and optimism

were significant in their predictive values on the academic

stress that arose from self-expectations, F(4,293) = 7.42,

p \ 0.000 and accounted for 9.2 % of the variance. The variables found to be significant predictors of academic

stress that arose from self-expectations include gender,

t(293) = 3.251, p \ 0.001, b = 0.188; academic self-effi- cacy, t(293) = 2.746, p \ 0.006, b = 0.181; and opti- mism, t(293) = -3.192, p \ 0.002, b = -0.205. Self- esteem was not predictive of academic stress that arises

from self-expectations, t(293) = -1.414, p = 0.158,

b = -0.102. Optimism, rather than self-esteem, was found to be predictor, along with gender, academic self-efficacy

in academic stress arises from self-expectations. This

finding suggested that perhaps dispositional optimism in

high-ability students is an intrinsic attribute, and exerts

greater influence on self-expectations of academic stress

than academic stress that arises from the expectations of

others. Although self-esteem and optimism were moder-

ately correlated, it is noteworthy that the variables behaved

differently in the predictive model for academic expecta-

tions stress (self).

When taking academic expectations stress in total,

gender of participants, dispositional optimism, academic

self-efficacy and self-esteem accounted for 9.7 % of the

variance. The independent variables significantly predicted

the dependent variable academic expectations stress (total),

F(4, 293) = 7.863, p \ 0.000. The variables found to be significant predictors of academic stress that arose from

both self-expectations and others-expectations include

gender, b = 0.187, t(293) = 3.235, p \ 0.001; academic self-efficacy, t(293) = 3.46, p \ 0.001, b = 0.228; and,

Table 4 Multiple regression prediction of academic expectation stress perceived by high-ability students

Predictor B SE B b t R2

AESI (others) – – – – 0.073

Optimism -0.037 0.075 -0.032 -0.497 –

Self-esteem -0.283 0.089 -0.233 -3.19** –

Academic self-efficacy 0.229 0.072 0.213 3.20** –

Gender 0.332 0.131 -0.148 2.35** –

AESI (self) – – – – 0.092

Optimism -0.217 0.068 -0.205 -3.19** –

Self-esteem -0.114 0.081 -0.102 -1.41 –

Academic self-efficacy 0.178 0.065 0.181 2.75** –

Gender 0.388 0.119 0.188 3.25*** –

AESI (total) – – – – 0.097

Optimism -0.114 0.063 -0.117 -1.82 –

Self-esteem -0.211 0.074 -0.204 -2.83** –

Academic self-efficacy 0.207 0.060 0.228 3.46*** –

Gender 0.356 0.110 0.187 3.24*** –

AESI is the abbreviated form of academic expectation stress inventory; the scores of academic expectation stress (total) are the sum of the scores

of academic expectation stress (others) and academic expectation stress (self)

** p \ 0.01; *** p \ 0.001

628 C. Tan, L. S. Tan

123

self-esteem b = -0.204, t(293) = -2.832, p \ 0.005. Optimism was not predictive of academic stress that arises

from a total of others- and self-expectations, t(293) =

-1.822, p = 0.069, b = -0.117. The overall regression model did not support the predictive relation between

dispositional optimism and academic expectation stress

(total).

Discussions

The Associations Between Dispositional Optimism,

Self-Esteem, Academic Self-Efficacy and Academic

Expectations Stress

The correlation analyses revealed that dispositional opti-

mism and self-esteem had negative associations with aca-

demic expectations stress, which indicate the higher the

level of dispositional optimism and self-esteem, the lower

the level of perceived academic stress among high-ability

adolescents. The findings supported the role of optimism as

a buffer for different life stressors, including academic

matters, and this is consistent with past studies (Baldwin

et al. 2003; Carver et al. 1993, Chang 1996; Lin and Pet-

erson 1990). Optimistic students experience lower levels of

psychological stress and loneliness. This may bring about a

subsequent higher level of psychological well-being.

Indeed, individuals with optimistic outlook manage stress

effectively when encountering difficult situations (Scheier

and Carver, 1985; Scheier et al. 1986, 1989). Optimism

increases a person’s ability to endure situations and to

solve problems, and this can have a positive impact on

stress perceptions. The optimistic students are inclined to

have a hopeful outlook on the future, so the trait of opti-

mism may act positively to decrease the level of academic

expectation stress. They are confident in their ability to

handle academic challenges and overcome adversities.

Similar phenomenon from other studies have shown that

individuals who viewed their future in a positive light

tended to report less perceived academic stress than their

pessimistic counterparts (e.g., in Aspinwall and Taylor

1992; Ben-Zur 2003; Chemers et al. 2001; Huan et al.

2006; Scheier and Carver 1992).

There were negative associations between self-esteem

and academic expectations stress found in this study.

Lower level of self-esteem is associated with high levels of

academic expectations stress. Since self-esteem is an

overall self-appraisal of self-worth (Blascovich and To-

maka 1991) and negative moods (Pritchard et al. 2007), the

negative association between self-esteem and academic

expectations stress in this study is inevitable.

Unlike optimism and self-esteem, academic self-efficacy

demonstrated weak positive associations with academic

expectations stress. Although the correlations were not

statically significant, subsequent regression analyses

revealed that academic self-efficacy predicts perceived

academic expectations stress aroused from self and others

consistently. The association between optimism and aca-

demic self-efficacy is consistent with extant literature. In

addition, academic self-efficacy is also found to be a pre-

dictor of academic expectations stress in the current study.

Gender Differences

High-ability male showed higher level of self-esteem and

academic self-efficacy than female whilst female has

higher level of academic expectations stress aroused from

both self and others. This finding points to the appreciably

higher stress level experienced by the girls than the boys.

This is in agreement with earlier findings of Jones’ (1993)

and Kwan’s (1993) studies, with girls tending to experience

more stress than boys. Current findings may suggest a

possible similar trend in that the older high-ability ado-

lescent girls experienced higher academic stress perception

than the boys. One possible reason for the higher academic

stress level experienced by high-ability girls may be due to

the fact that they believe being successful means having to

excel in studies and be extraordinary in other areas of their

lives: social, extracurricular, and even appearance. Having

internalized the gender stereotypical view, that academic

excellence was less important to them than to the boys, the

gifted girls might even inadvertently put ceilings on their

own achievements (Kwan 1993). Indeed, adjusting to pre-

university competitive academic setting amongst high-

ability students can be a challenging experience. In a large

community of high-ability learners, the competitive envi-

ronment increases the stress level as experienced by the

girls.

Predictors of Academic Expectations Stress

Although there was ample empirical evidence that showed

the role of optimistic disposition in predicting successful

adjustment to stressful situations in life (Ben-Zur et al.

2000; Herman-Stahl and Peterson 1996), few studies have

considered self-esteem and academic self-efficacy as psy-

chological resources in the same predicting model. When

taking into account optimism, self-esteem and academic

self-efficacy on academic expectations stress in generating

the prediction equations, optimism was accounted for

perceived academic stress aroused from self rather than

from others. Higher level of dispositional optimism

accounted for lower level of academic stress while low

level of self-esteem was accounted for higher perceived

academic stress aroused from others. Moreover, self-

High-Ability Students 629

123

esteem did not account for academic stress aroused from

self.

Gender was found to be one of the significant predictors

on academic expectations stress consistently across self,

others and total in this study. However, testings on inter-

actions in multiple regressions between gender and dispo-

sitional optimism; gender and academic self-efficacy;

gender and self-esteem did not yield significant R 2

change

between high-ability adolescent male and female (the

results of which are not reported in this article). This is

consistent with Huan et al.’s (2006) study that adolescent

boys and girls did not differ significantly in their academic

stress level and also did not show significant interaction

between gender and optimism on academic expectations

stress among average adolescents. Taking all these findings

together, it is clear that gender plays a pivotal role in

perceiving academic expectations stress among high-abil-

ity adolescents.

Limitations of the Study and Future Directions

There are a number of limitations to the current study.

Firstly, as stated in the ‘‘Procedures’’ section, written

consent was not obtained from the students nor their par-

ents or guardians. Furthermore, self-report study usually

faces the risk of participants not being totally truthful and

accurate in their responses, due to fatigue and the tendency

to provide socially desirable responses. Although the

sample size was large enough to provide both very con-

servative N:k ratios and considerable power for all analy-

ses, the respondents were limited to science students.

Further research could replicate these results with larger

sample and comparison group to examine the role of

optimism in academic performances.

As an individual’s characteristic explanatory style—

how one explains the causes of bad events (Buchanan and

Seligman 1995), further investigation may explore the

explanatory style, optimism and its relationship with aca-

demic achievement and perception of academic stress.

While many studies revealed the positive influences of

optimism, there are still some questions which remain

unanswered. For example, what is the precise mechanism

by which optimism influences perceived stress? What are

the potential pathways by which optimism may influence

optimal performance of high-ability students? The role of

coping strategies (approach versus avoidance) used by

optimistic and pessimistic students may be examined to

help explain the differences in their perception of academic

stress.

High-ability students face keen competition in schools

and society where meritocracy is emphasized. The ado-

lescents have high expectations both of themselves and

from others to perform and succeed. Inevitably, they

encounter many stressful situations in school. A continuous

effort in focusing on stressful real-life situations which

confront the high-ability learners (such as passing the

preliminary examination at the final year, taking part in

Olympiad competitions, or sitting in high stake interviews)

are possible future directions for further research. Findings

from such studies may shed some light to the role of

optimism in stressful events or situations, so that possible

intervention programmes specific to the situations can be

implemented and guidance given to help them manage and

perform to their potential.

Conclusion

Dispositional optimism is related to psychological vari-

ables such as self-esteem, academic self-efficacy. The

present study revealed the predictive role of dispositional

optimism, self-esteem, academic self-efficacy and gender

in academic expectation stress. Based on the literature in

adolescent coping, optimistic student is likely to focus less

on the distress emotions or physical symptoms arising from

the stressor and employ greater effort to remove the stress.

Subsequently, such steps could help reduce the level of

perceived academic stress in the optimistic student. In

contrast, the pessimistic student is more likely to empha-

size the negative aspects of the academic stress experi-

enced and be disengaged from the task associated with the

stress. Focus is placed directly on the stressful feelings,

which could possibly explain the greater level of academic

stress perceived by the pessimist.

Hence, any intervention programmes in school aimed at

raising the students’ optimism may improve the overall

academic experience of these high-ability learners. A

cognitive-behavioural programme focused on decreasing

negative thoughts and increasing positive cognitions during

the two years in senior high school could lead to increased

self-efficacy, resilience, optimism and lower academic

stress arises from self-expectations, which may in turn

increase academic performance. Perhaps what is important

is to remain positive about the future of research in this

area and to be optimistic that research will continue to

reveal the paths by which positive thinking work to peo-

ple’s benefits.

References

Andersson, G. (1996). The benefits of optimism: A meta-analysis

review of the life orientation test. Personality and Individual

Differences, 21, 719–725.

Ang, R. B., & Huan, V. S. (2006). Academic expectations stress

inventory: Development, factor analysis, reliability, and validity.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 522–539.

630 C. Tan, L. S. Tan

123

Aspinwall, L. G., & Taylor, S. E. (1992). Modeling cognitive

adaptation: A longitudinal investigation of the impact of

individual differences and coping on college adjustment and

performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63,

989–1003.

Baldwin, A. L., Baldwin, C. P., Kasser, T., Zax, M., Sameroff, A., &

Seifer, R. (1993). Contextual risk and resiliency during late

adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 741–761.

Baldwin, D. R., Chambliss, L. N., & Towler, K. (2003). Optimism

and stress: An African-American college student perspective.

College Student Journal, 37, 276–285.

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency.

American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. New

York: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1989). Self-regulation of motivation and action through

internal standards and goal systems. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Goal

concepts in personality and social psychology (pp. 19–85).

Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York:

Freeman.

Bar-On, R. (2000). Emotional and social intelligence: Insights from

the emotional quotient inventory. In R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker

(Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence theory: Devel-

opment, assessment and application at home, school, and in the

workplace (pp. 363–388). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ben-Zur, H. (2003). Happy adolescents: The link between subjective

well-being, internal resources, and parental factors. Journal of

Youth and Adolescence, 32(2), 67–79.

Ben-Zur, H., Rappaport, B., Ammar, R., & Uretzky, G. (2000).

Coping strategies, life style changes, and pessimism after open-

heart surgery. Health and Social Work, 25, 201–209.

Billingsley, K. D., Waehler, C. A., & Hardin, S. L. (1993). Stability of

optimism and choice of coping strategy. Perceptual and Motor

Skills, 76, 91–97.

Birndorf, S., Ryan, S., Auinger, P., & Aten, M. (2005). High self-

esteem among adolescents: Longitudinal trends sex differences

and protective factors. Journal of Adolescent Health, 37(3),

194–201.

Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. (1991). Measures of self-esteem. In J.

P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures

of personality and social psychological attitudes (Vol. I). San

Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Brooks, R. B. (1994). Children at risk: Fostering resilience and hope.

American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 64, 545–553.

Buchanan, G. M., & Seligman, M. E. P. (Eds.). (1995). Explanatory

style. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Carver, C. S., Pozo, C., Harris, S. D., Noriega, V., Scheier, M. F.,

Robinsons, D. S., et al. (1993). How coping mediates the effect

of optimism on distress: A study of women with early stage

breast cancer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65,

375–390.

Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1988). A control-process perspective

on anxiety. Anxiety Research, 1, 17–22.

Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2002). Optimism. In C. R. Snyder &

S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp.

231–243). New York: Oxford University Press.

Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing

coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267–283.

Chang, E. C. (1996). Cultural differences in optimism, pessimism,

and coping: Predictors of subsequent adjustment in Asian

American and Caucasian American college students. Journal

of Counseling Psychology, 43, 113–123.

Chang, E. C., & Sanna, L. J. (2003). Optimism, accumulated life

stress, and psychological and physical adjustment: Is it always

adaptive to expect the best? Journal of Social and Clinical

Psychology, 22, 97–115.

Chemers, M. M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-

efficacy and first-year college student performance and adjust-

ment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 55–64.

Chemers, M. M., Watson, C. B., & Mays, S. T. (2000). Dispositional

affect and leadership effectiveness: A comparison of self-esteem,

optimism, and efficacy. Personality and Social Psychological

Bulletin, 26, 267–277.

Dai, D. Y. (2000). To be or not to be (challenged), that is the question:

Task and ego orientations among high-ability, high-achieving

adolescents. Journal of Experimental Education, 68, 311–330.

Dougall, A. L., Hyman, K. B., Hayward, M. C., McFeeley, S., &

Baum, A. (2001). Optimism and traumatic stress: The impor-

tance of social support and coping. Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 31, 233–245.

El-Anzi, F. O. (2005). Academic achievement and its relationship

with anxiety, selfesteem, optimism, and pessimism in Kuwaiti

students. Social Behavior and Personality, 33(1), 95–104.

Frederikson, B. (1998). What good are positive emotions. Review of

General Psychology, 2, 300–319.

Friedman, I. A. (1991). Areas of concern and sources of advice for

Israeli adolescents. Adolescence, 26, 967–976.

Gloria, A. M., & Ho, T. A. (2003). Environmental, social, and

psychological experiences of Asian-American undergraduates:

Examining issues of academic persistence. Journal of Counsel-

ing and Development, 81, 93–106.

Heinonen, K., Raikkonen, K., & Keltikangas-Jarvinen, L. (2005).

Self-esteem in early and late adolescence predicts dispositional

optimism- pessimism in adulthood: A 21-year longitudinal

study. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 511–521.

Herman-Stahl, M., & Peterson, A. C. (1996). The protective role of

coping and social resources for depressive symptoms among

young adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25,

733–753.

Ho, K. C., & Yip, J. (2003). YOUTH.sg: The state of youth in

Singapore. Singapore: National Youth Council.

Huan, V. S., Lay, S. Y., Ang, R. P., & Wan, H. C. (2006). The

influence of dispositional optimism and gender on adolescents’

perception of academic stress. Adolescence, 41(163), 533–546.

Isralowitz, R. E., & Ong, T. H. (1990). Singapore youth: The impact

of social status on perceptions of adolescent problems. Adoles-

cence, 25, 357–362.

Jones, R. W. (1993). Gender-specific differences in the perceived

antecedents of academic stress. Psychological Reports, 72(1),

739–743.

Kaplan, D. S., Liu, R. X., & Kaplan, H. B. (2005). School related

stress in early adolescence and academic performance three

years later: The conditional influence of self expectations. School

Psychology in Education, 8, 3–17.

Kwan, P. C. F. (1993). Singaporean gifted adolescents under scrutiny:

The gender factor. International Review of Education, 39(3),

161–182.

Lai, J. C. L. (1995). The moderating effect of optimism on the relation

between hassles and somatic complaints. Psychological Reports,

76, 883–894.

Leitschuh, G. A., & Rawlins, M. E. (1991). Personal orientation

inventory correlated with physical health. Psychological

Reports, 69, 687–690.

Lin, E. H., & Peterson, C. (1990). Pessimistic explanatory style and

response to illness. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 28,

243–248.

Lind, S. (2000). Overexcitability and the highly gifted child. The

Communicator, California Association for the Gifted, 31(4).

Lipkus, I. M., Martz, J. M., Panter, A. T., Drigotas, S. M., &

Feaganes, J. R. (1993). Do optimists distort their predictions for

High-Ability Students 631

123

future positive and negative events? Personality and Individual

Differences, 15, 577–589.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building practically useful

theory of goal setting and task motivation. American Psychol-

ogist, 57, 705–717.

Metha, A., & McWhirter, E. H. (1997). Suicidal ideation, depression,

and stressful life events among gifted adolescents. Journal for

the Education of the Gifted, 20, 284–304.

Midgley, C., Maehr, M. L., Hruda, L. Z., Anderman, E., Anderman,

L., Freeman, K. E., et al. (2000). Manual for the patterns of

adaptive learning scales (PALS). Ann Arbor, MI: University of

Michigan Press.

Moon, S. M. (2001). Personal talent: What is it and how can we study

it? Paper presented at the Fifth Biennial Wallace National

Research Symposium on Talent Development, Iowa City, IA.

Moon, S. M. (2003). Personal talent. High Ability Studies, 14(1),

5–21.

Neihart, M. (1991). Anxiety and depression in high ability and

average ability adolescents: A view of global functioning.

Roeper Review, 20(1), 18–21.

Opare, J. (2008). Gender differences in academic self-efficacy beliefs

and perception of the internal dynamics of the collaborative

learning context. Gender & Behaviour, 6(1), 1617–1631.

Peterson, C. (2000). The future of optimism. American Psychologist,

55, 44–55.

Piechowski, M. M. (1999). Overexcitabilities. In M. A. Runco & S.

R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 2,

pp. 325–334). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Preuss, L. J., & Dubow, E. F. (2004). A comparison between

intellectually gifted and typical children in their coping

responses to a school and a peer stressor. Roeper Review, 26,

105–111.

Pritchard, M. E., Wilson, G. S., & Yamnitz, B. (2007). What predicts

adjustment among college students? A longitudinal panel study.

Journal of American College Health, 56(1), 15–21.

Puskar, K. R., Sereika, S. M., Lamb, J., Tusaie-Mumford, K., &

McGuinness, T. (1999). Optimism and its relationship to

depression coping anger and life events in rural adolescents.

Issues of Mental Health Nursing, 20, 115–130.

Roedell, W. (1984). Vulnerabilities of highly gifted children. Roeper

Review, 6(3), 127–130.

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mecha-

nisms. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57, 316–331.

Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health:

Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectan-

cies. Health Psychology, 4, 219–247.

Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1992). Effects of optimism on

psychological and physical well-being: Theoretical overview and

empirical update. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 16, 201–228.

Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (1994). Distinguish-

ing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery,

and self-esteem): A re-evaluation of the life orientation test.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1063–1078.

Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (2000). Optimism,

pessimism, and psychological well-being. In E. C. Chang (Ed.),

Optimism and pessimism: Implications for theory, research and

practice (pp. 189–216). Washington, DC: American Psycholog-

ical Association.

Scheier, M. F., Matthews, K. A., Owens, J. F., Magovern, G. J.,

Lefebvre, R. C., Abbott, R. A., et al. (1989). Dispositional

optimism and recovery from coronary artery bypass surgery: The

beneficial effects on physical and psychological well-being.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1024–1040.

Scheier, M. F., Weintraub, J. K., & Carver, C. S. (1986). Coping with

stress: Divergent strategies of optimists and pessimists. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1257–1264.

Schunk, D. H., & Miller, S. D. (2002). Self-efficacy and adolescents’ motivation. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic motiva-

tion of adolescents. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Segerstrom, S. C., Taylor, S. E., Kemeny, M. E., & Fahey, J. L.

(1998). Optimism is associated with mood, coping, and immune

system change in response to stress. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 74, 1646–1655.

Seligman, M. E. P. (1995). The optimistic child. New York: Houghton

Mifflin.

Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Learned optimism: How to change your

mind and your life. New York: Pocket Books.

Shek, D. T. L. (1995). Adolescent mental health in different Chinese

societies. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and

Health, 8, 117–155.

Siddique, H. I., LaSalle-Ricci, V. H., Glass, C. R., Arnkoff, D. B., &

Diaz, R. J. (2006). Worry, optimism, and expectations as

predictors of anxiety and performance in the first year of law

school. Cognitive Therapy & Research, 30, 667–676.

Silverman, L. K. (1983). Issues in affective development of the gifted.

In J. VanTassel- Baska (Ed.), A practical guide to counselling

the gifted in a school setting. Reston, VA: Council for

Exceptional Children.

Silverman, L. K. (1990). Social and emotional education of the gifted:

The discoveries of Leta Hollingworth. Roeper Review, 12(3),

171–179.

Silverman, L. K. (1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver:

Love Publishing.

Silverman, L. K. (2008). The theory of positive disintegration in the

field of gifted education. In S. Mendaglio (Ed.), Dabrowski’s

theory of positive disintegration (pp. 157–173). Scottsdale: Great

Potential Press Inc.

Stark, L. J., Spirito, A., Williams, C. A., & Guevremont, D. C. (1989).

Common problems and coping strategies 1: Findings with

normal adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 17,

203–212.

Sue, S., & Okazaki, S. (1990). Asian-American educational achieve-

ments: A phenomenon in search of an explanation. American

Psychologist, 45(8), 913–920.

Suldo, S. M., Shaunessy, E., Michalowski, J., & Shaffer, E. J. (2008).

Coping strategies of high school students in an International

Baccalaureate program. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 1–18.

Sung, K. M., Puskar, K. R., & Sereika, S. (2006). Psychosocial factors

and coping strategies of adolescents in a rural Pennsylvania high

school. Public Health Nursing, 23(6), 523–530.

Taylor, S. E., Kemeny, M. E., Bower, J. E., Gruenewald, T. L., &

Reed, G. M. (2000). Psychological resources, positive illusions,

and health. American Psychologist, 55, 99–109.

Udvari, S. J., & Schneider, B. H. (2000). Competition and the

adjustment of gifted children: A matter of motivation. Roeper

Reivew, 22, 212–216.

Werner, E. E. (1997). Vulnerable but invincible: High risk children

from birth to adulthood. Acta Paediatica Supplement, 422,

103–105.

Whitmore, J. R. (1980). Giftedness, conflict, and underachievement.

Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Wolff, S. (1995). The concept of resilience. Australian and New

Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 29, 565–574.

Wright, M. O., & Masten, A. S. (1997). Vulnerability and resilience

in young children. In J. D. Noshpita (Series Ed.) & S. Greenspan,

S. Weider, & J. Osofsky (Vol Eds.), Handbook of child and

adolescent psychiatry: Vol. 1 Infants and preschoolers: Devel-

opment and syndromes (pp. 202–224). New York: Wiley.

632 C. Tan, L. S. Tan

123

Yeh, C. J., & Huang, K. (1996). The collectivistic nature of ethnic

identity development among Asian-American college students.

Adolescence, 31, 645–662.

Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational development.

In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp.

202–231). New York: Cambridge University Press.

High-Ability Students 633

123

Copyright of Asia-Pacific Education Researcher (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.) is the property of Springer Science & Business Media B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.