At age 13, 393 boys and 170 girls scoring at the top 0.5% in general intelligence completed the Scholastic Assessment Test Mathematics (SAT-M) and Verbal (SAT-V) subtests and the Differential Aptitude Test (DAT) Space Relations (SR) and Mechanical Reasoning (MR) subtests. Longitudinal data were collected through follow-up questionnaires completed at ages 18, 23, and 33. Multivariate statistical methods were employed using the SAT-M, SAT-V, and a DAT (SR + MR) composite to predict a series of developmentally sequenced educational-vocational outcomes: (a) favorite and least favorite high school class, (b) undergraduate degree field, (c) graduate degree field, and (d) occupation at age 33. Spatial ability added incremental validity to SAT-M and SAT-V assessments in predicting educationalvocational outcomes over these successive time frames. It appears that spatial ability assessments can complement contemporary talent search procedures. The amount of lost potential for artistic, scientific, and technical disciplines that results from neglecting this critical dimension of nonverbal ideation is discussed.Theory and practice in gifted education have shifted from an emphasis primarily on general cognitive ability (general intelligence or "g") to an appreciation of the unique information afforded by verbal and quantitative abilities (

Abstract-Reported

U.S. math-science graduate students possessing world-class talent (368 males, 346 females) were assessed on psychological attributes and personal experiences in order to examine how their talents emerged and developed. Comparisons were made, using similar assessments, with mathematically talented students (528 males, 228 females) identified around age 13 and tracked into adulthood by the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY). Well before college, both samples were academically distinguished: however, the graduate students could be identified during adolescence as a subset of mathematically talented youths based on their nonintellectual attributes. Their profiles corresponded to what earlier psychological studies found to characterize distinguished (and exclusively male) scientists: exceptional quantitative reasoning abilities, relatively stronger quantitative than verbal reasoning ability, salient scientific interests and values, and finally, persistence in seeking out opportunities to study scientific topics and develop scientific skills. On these attributes, sex differences were minimal for the graduate students (but notfor the SMPY comparison groups). Developing exceptional scientific expertise apparently requires special educational experiences, but these necessary experiences are similar for the two sexes.

No abstract